Because of late and inaccurate grant reports, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) last month began to withdraw Harvard's authority to handle alterations to certain classes of grants, according to a memo recently sent to some faculty members.

But Allen Proctor, vice president for finance, said yesterday that the NIH withdrew its threat three days ago after he negotiated a plan to improve Harvard's performance.

"Expanded authority" over certain grants, which all other United States institutions hold, allows Harvard to rebudget items, pay for pre-award costs and other items such as travel at the University level, without having to receive permission from the sponsor in each instance.

"It would be a significant loss," said Diana Jaeger, an employee in the Grants Policy Office at NIH. "There are no other institutions where the NIH has withdrawn expanded authority."

In the November 15 memo to faculty, Ann Berman, acting associate dean for finance, and Richard Leahy, associate dean for research, wrote that the NIH "have begun to withdraw Harvard's eligibility to receive NIH awards with special granting authorities."

Now, however, the withdrawal seems to have halted.

"NIH is happy," Proctor said. "We have set very tough management goals and things went very well."

The NIH began monitoring 33 institutions with poor records two years ago, Jaeger said. For six months, the NIH checked whether the Financial Status Reports (FSRs) that the institutions submitted were accurate and on time.

Harvard's monitoring period was extended again when its performance did not improve, according to Jaeger.

"This has been going on for, almost two years," Jaeger said. "It is a long time. The intent was to provide an opportunity for those institutions with poor records to improve."

Only four of the 33 institutions including Harvard, have not improved their records, Jaeger said.

"This is the first time NIH has used this as a mechanism to try to work with the institution to have them comply," Jaeger said.

Slow Response

It is unclear why it took Harvard more than 18 months to respond to the NIH.

The Faculty of Arts and Science (FAS) "was not made aware that NIH had repeatedly warned Harvard about the problem over the last 18 months," Berman and Leahy's memo said.