Tag Archives: funding

British universities have long had travel policies designed to control what staff travelling for research or on university business overseas are allowed to spend for travel, accommodation and maintenance.  In the past many of these were sensible and realistic, based on a good understanding of the real costs of conducting research-practice overseas.  The vast majority of academics acted responsibly, and few deliberately sought to exploit the system for personal gain.

However, in recent years these policies have become unnecessarily burdensome, driven in part by a claimed desire to show that universities are delivering on HMRC requirements.  In many instances these policies lead to

• universities being charged substantially more for staff travel than is necessary,
• research grants do not cover the full travel and maintenance costs associated with research,
• staff usually have to pay considerable amounts out of their own pocket to undertake the research they are meant to be doing, and
• there is a further breakdown of trust between university administrators and academic staff.

The net effect of this is little short of scandalous, especially when the time spent by staff in making bookings and accounting for this expenditure can also be overwhelming.

The enforced use of suppliers

Most universities now insist that staff use suppliers such as Key Travel or DGI Travel to book travel.  In part this is so that universities can claim that the rates charged are “reasonable”.  This also outsources administrative staff time in checking staff expenditure.  However, in my experience

• I can always find flights and accommodation more cheaply if I book them myself.  Often, I can find rates between 25% and 33% better value, but have been explicitly told by senior management that I must use the more expensive central supplier
• These suppliers mainly use digital systems so that they do not have to employ many staff to book transport and accommodation and respond to queries.  The quality of the individual service they offer when there are problems or crises (as with the cancellation of flights to and through the Arabian/Persian Gulf) is therefore very problematic, with long waiting times and an inefficient/inaccurate/rude service.
• The design of these digital systems is also often very poor, meaning that it takes academic staff a considerable time actually to find and book their requirements.  Among the problems often encountered are:
  • Systems that only work on one or two common browsers (never my personal favourites!)
  • Frequent crashes leading to lost bookings
  • Difficulties in identifying optimal routes or accommodation choices
  • Results frequently showing there are no hotels available in a particular location
  • Frequently need to restart an application process to get it to work
  • Lack of clarity in documentation/receipts over whether the booking are refundable or not

In short, using such suppliers takes longer and costs more for staff involved in overseas research-practice.  This is deeply frustrating when I am always trying to get the best value so that my limited research grants can be eked out for as long as possible.

Strict following of government regulation

Many university administrators seem petrified of being flexibly and instead rigidly follow their own interpretations of government regulations, even when these permit some flexibility.  I have checked four university travel policies, and they all vary, with some being much more permissive than others.  The good ones show at least some understanding of the difficulties of undertaking research in complex contexts in other parts of the world, where cash (or even barter) are the common means of exchange and receipts unknown.

• Most university administrators seek to follow the HMRC’s guidance on employment income (and updates),  but even then choose to ignore parts of it. This states clearly that “Employers are not obliged to use the published rates. It is always open to an employer to pay or reimburse their employees’ actual, vouched expenses, or to negotiate a bespoke scale rate amount under the terms of an approval notice which they believe more accurately reflects their employees’ spending patterns”.
• Moreover, this government guidance is primarily intended for staff expenses in businesses and industry, which are in practice very different from those expenses involved in research-practice.  Universities need to negotiate a clearer and simpler scheme with government that better fits the requirement of academic enquiry.  Research funding is something very different from the possible taxable income that HMRC is focused on (see also HMRC EIM21765)

Interestingly, some funders of research actually have far more liberal and generous conditions associated with their grants than do the universities that administer them!

Inappropriate rates for travel and accommodation

One of the most problematic issues concerns that rates at which academic are allowed to claim expenses, especially for hotels and food.  Many follow the HMRC guidance on expense rates for employees travelling outside the UK, but this was published in 2020 and is hopelessly out of date.

• Even if the rates are considered to have been appropriate in 2020 (which I do not), the subsequent inflation and currency exchange variations make such guidance completely inappropriate.  For example, the amount permitted for dinner in Accra, Ghana, is only Cedis 80.5 which is equivalent to £5!  Hotel rates are equally problematic especially when staying in conference hotels in major cities (in Pakistan, this list does not even include rates for the capital Islamabad).
• Much more realistic and regularly updated figures are available from the UN figures for daily subsistence rates provided by the International Civil Service Commission, which can be at least a third more or sometimes almost double the UK provided rates.  Yet, some (perhaps many) UK institutions do not accept the use of these rates and insist on the HMRC figures.
• Linking to the above, at least one supplier requires staff booking through its “services” to agree that they abide by the 2020 HMRC guidance!
• Trying to abide by these rates means that most academics will be personally out of pocket when doing overseas research, which is most challenging for those early in their career who do not have the larger salaries of more senior academics.
• It can also be noted that trying to keep costs as low as possible to fit within university requirements can give rise to serious risks, since cheaper hotels are often in more hazardous locations, and more “affordable” (i.e. very cheap) places to eat do not always have the highest quality of food hygiene.

Research staff time

Another very significant burden for academic staff is the amount of time they have to spend in booking and accounting for their research expenses, especially when frequent small payments for public transport, food or services in the field have to be accounted for.

• The complexity and lack of user friendliness in booking through the required suppliers is both burdensome and frustrating.  Regardless of the increased financial cost this requires, I estimate that when I book flights or hotels myself I can do so in less than a third of the time it requires me to do so through the university’s official supplier.
• Many universities use the Agresso system (part of Unit4), which might be good for university administrators but is a cumbersome nightmare for most academics.  As with much software, it seems to be designed more for the central “controllers” and administrators, rather than it does the end-user!  I know many people who take a whole day just accounting for their expenses for an intense week of field research-practice in parts of Africa or Asia.

In brief, this all means that staff not only have less time available for their research and teaching, but also become very frustrated and alienated from the administrative bureaucrats who are meant to be there to serve them (although I should point out that there are indeed some excellent people at junior levels in university administration who do their best to help their academic colleagues!). I confess that I rarely include any of the small receipts in claims I make simply because the time spent in processing them is not worth the effort.

Gifts, hospitality and air miles

The offering of small gifts and providing hospitality, especially when alcohol is involved, is undoubtedly controversial.  However, I am frequently ashamed when people across the world offer me generous hospitality, and I am not permitted to reciprocate if I strictly follow our university regulations.  Of course I do try to reciprocate, but it is out of my own pocket. 

• I believe strongly that when our partners overseas contribute to the success of our research practice then it is absolutely right and proper to thank them in ways appropriate to their culture.  The UK has become internationally renowned for its stinginess (combined with arrogance), and this has done immense harm to our reputation.  Anything we can do as individuals to restore and build international friendship and co-operation has to be a good thing.
• In many university regulations, individuals are not permitted to benefit from Air-miles or similar awards.  However, these enable recipients to have benefits ay no extra cost including additional baggage, priority check-ins, priority flight changes, and lounge access which are all incredibly helpful when conducting overseas research-practice.  Not only do they help staff travel in a less-stressed way and therefore perform their tasks better on arrival (such as when giving key note speeches), but they can also reduce the risks (such as theft and violence) associated with travel to and in certain countries.
• Alcohol forms an important part of culture and life in many cultures, despite the efforts of the anti-alcohol lobby to prevent its consumption.   If a guest  wishes to drink, alcohol, surely this should be permitted, providing of course it is in moderation.  Moreover, much of my research is on wine and to undertake this successful it is essential to taste it, but university regulations prohibit any expenditure on alcohol.  Moreover in some parts of the world local beer is cheaper (and safer) than soft drinks, and yet one is prohibited from purchasing it.

In conclusion, I have tried to argue here that it is high time that university administrators in the UK cease being so sanctimonious, and come up with policies that show that they actually understand the complexities and challenges facing those undertaking rigorous academic research overseas.  This may well require us all to work collaboratively to change government policy, but unless we do so the costs of undertaking it (both financially and in terms of time spent in administration) will remain much higher than they need to be, and the quality of UK research will decline yet further.  Good new policies and practices could save considerable sums of money for universities. I used to be strongly against per diems, largely because of their abuse, but adopting such a system using the widely recognised international civil service model would greatly facilitate the administration of overseas research funding and would save the inordinate amount of time and effort that research-practitioners and administrators currently devote to this.  It will also help to build trust between them, which is so often lacking.  Most academics will still choose the best value for money options and often claim less than the permitted per diems quite simply because they want to make their grants go further!