The document, a June 2008 update from the Council on Governmental Relations (COGR), provides an analysis of “troublesome clauses” in federal research awards to universities, focusing on clauses that restrict publication, limit participation of foreign nationals, or otherwise constrain dissemination and access to research results. The analysis draws on survey data from 20 leading research institutions and tracks the evolution of such problematic contract terms from an earlier 2003–2004 study through a more recent survey conducted under the Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP). The findings highlight a persistent and growing issue, particularly with respect to Department of Defense (DOD) clauses, notably DFARS 7000, which imposes publication and personnel restrictions. The frequency of both publication and foreign national restrictions remains high, and there is a notable expansion of restrictive clauses into grants and cooperative agreements, not just contracts.
Despite recommendations from university associations and science policy bodies for greater adherence to federal policy (NSDD-189) affirming the openness of fundamental research, little progress has been made in reducing such restrictions, and agencies have not revised policies accordingly. The report attributes the increase in reported clauses partly to heightened university vigilance and improved reporting, but also to a trend of agencies and prime contractors imposing more detailed and protective language. Recommendations urge federal agencies, particularly the DOD, to establish clearer, uniform policies consistent with research openness, minimize unnecessary restrictions in awards, and include appropriate clause language in contracts. The document also stresses the importance of ongoing data collection, policy advocacy, and the establishment of collaborative high-level working groups to address these continuing challenges in the partnership between government, universities, and industry.
