Being first in the pack has its drawbacks. When someone gets caught with a hand in the cookie jar, everyone always turns to the person at the top. These days, Harvard is feeling that pressure more than ever.

Just last Friday, University officials received a call from the U.S. General Accounting Office notifying them that federal investigators will begin a new probe here next month.

But this story doesn't start in Cambridge.

This fall, government investigators found that Stanford University had overbilled taxpayers on federal grant overhead costs--to the tune of at least $184,000. Another investigator speculated last week that other agencies may have found an estimated $20 million more in inappropriate billing.

Stanford charges one of the nation's highest overhead rates: for every dollar in grant money awarded, the university requires the government to pay 74 cents for research-related "indirect" costs.

But while the West Coast school charges one of the highest rates in higher education, Harvard boasts the highest figure.

Looking at Harvard Medical School, where administrators charge 88 cents on the dollar for indirect costs, investigators say they want to see if the University's records show overbillings--like those found at Stanford.

For now, Harvard administrators are playing it cool. Back in Palo Alto, however, the ongoing federal inquiry has left Stanford a row of red faces. According to that investigation, U.S. taxpayers have helped buy flowers and cabinets for the home of Stanford President Donald Kennedy '52 and cover the depreciation on a 72-foot yacht (complete with jacuzzi), among other perks.

Early Friday morning, the GAO's Boston regional office telephoned Elizabeth C. Huidekoper, Harvard's director of the office of budgets and sponsored research. Huidekoper learned that the GAO would be coming to investigate, according to Kenneth J. Croke, an assistant manager for the federal office.

The Crimson had reported the impending investigation late last month, but top Harvard administrators--among them, Vice President and General Counsel Daniel Steiner '54 and Vice President for Finance Robert H. Scott--said at the time that they had not been told of any upcoming inquiry.

Huidekoper and Steiner would not comment Friday on the investigation, and Harvard spokes-person Peter Costa could not be reached for comment.

Apparently, though, Harvard administrators may have already been aware that an investigation was forthcoming.

"Most everybody seems to know," the GAO's Croke said Friday. "[Huidekoper] was aware of it. It wasn't a surprise."

The House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, within the Committee on Energy and Commerce, is set to begin March 1. As of Friday, neither the subcommittee nor the General Accounting Office had found any evidence of wrongdoing at Harvard, according to members of the investigative team who spoke on condition of anonymity.

On the surface, this investigation may seem like just another routine check for the University. Yet the impending probe could have damaging consequences if Harvard's indirect cost accounting looks anything like the records now surfacing at Stanford.