However, I think it's a good idea to push forward alternative models of doing (and funding) research. Frankly, most of the existing institutions we thought about partnering closely with were somewhat bloated, and it would have made the whole study significantly more expensive and slower.
Some of that "bloat" is due to compliance and ethics: has YC engaged an IRB yet? SV tech companies (Facebook, OkCupid) have shown very questionable judgement with respect to ethical considerations.
Companies often want a much lower overhead rate. I get why. But if things like the copy machine, our phone system, keeping the lights on, etc. aren't baked into overhead, then they need to be baked in somewhere. You'll just end up with agreements where you pay for itemized lists of expenses, and haggling over those instead of the indirect rate.
Universities are also often very flexible as to the indirect rate - we have several subsidized rates for specific groups or particular types of projects, etc. You just need a better reason for the lower rate than "I don't want to pay that much".
Like I said, I'll be interested to see if this works. But in my experience, companies that are newly "dabbling" in research are often shocked by how expensive research actually is. Calling something bloat because Sam doesn't want to spend the money doesn't automatically make it bloat.
> thought about partnering closely with were somewhat bloated
> made the whole study significantly more expensive and slower
Not to be obtuse, but these reasons sound an awful lot like the excuses Theranos gave when questioned why they didn't do things more correctly.
I mean, it sounds like ycombinator wants to help propel this idea forward, but you're attempting to minimize your cost and also rush it, instead of doing things right.
> it would have made the whole study significantly more expensive and slower
And so be it. This is a major paradigm shifting idea, and you're not going to be able to take short-cuts and come out with respectable results that hold up to scrutiny.