Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

ORS Quarterly Grants Managers Meeting 05/15/14. Three Year Trend: 5/14.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "ORS Quarterly Grants Managers Meeting 05/15/14. Three Year Trend: 5/14."— Presentation transcript:

1 ORS Quarterly Grants Managers Meeting 05/15/14

2 Three Year Trend: 5/14

3 Agenda Rebudgeting Scenarios Review GLs and Heather Quadlin NSF Updates Formatting Matters The Two-months Rule Keith Hurka-Owen SPS on the Web: Rollout Susan Lasley Various Updates OSASponsored Projects FDPSubrecipient Monitoring

4 Agenda Rebudgeting Scenarios Review GLs and Heather Quadlin

5 Rebudgting Scenarios This G/L account is used for two primary purposes: To reduce the amount of the award by the amount the sponsor will not be awarding. To increase the amount of the budget by the amount awarded when no budget has been submitted.

6 Rebudgting Scenarios The sponsor cuts our $100,000 budget by $5,000. Our PI has been told that the $5,000 will come in on a future modification. OSP has a budget for the original $100,000. What happens in SAP?

7 Rebudgting Scenarios Current Practice Restricted Amount Administrative Effort Fringe Benefits Lab &Research Total Budget 5,000 60,000 20,000 $95,000

8 Rebudgting Scenarios Departmental Options Option 1: Dont do anything. ORS processes the modification and sends it to OSP. OSP removes the restricted amount from Budget total is $100,000. The Award Comes in

9 Rebudgting Scenarios Departmental Options Option 2: Rebudget the restricted amount to another category. FromTo 5,000 60,000 20,000 $95,000 55,000 20,000 $95,000

10 Rebudgting Scenarios Departmental Options Option 2a: Rebudget the restricted amount to another category. The Department submits a budget for $5,000 to ORS. ORS processes the modification and sends it to OSP. OSP keys the budget as it normally would. Budget total is now $100,000. The Award Comes in

11 Rebudgting Scenarios Departmental Options Option 2b: Rebudget the restricted amount to another category. ORS processes the modification without a budget and sends it to OSP. OSP adds the $5,000 to pending plan from the department. The Department uses the rebudgeting tool to redistribute the funds. The Award Comes in

12 Rebudgting Scenarios Current Practice Restricted Amount Administrative Effort Fringe Benefits Lab &Research Total Budget 5,000 55,000 20,000 $100,000

13 NSF Updates Formatting Matters. The Two-months Rule.

14 NSF Updates ORS Proposal Review (Required) Cover page or application form Proposal abstract (draft) Budget (final) Budget justification (final) PI and co-PI signatures on page 3 (Assurances) of the DPAF printed from SPS Forms required by the sponsor, including certifications and representations Subcontract endorsements, subrecipient checklist, budget and justification, and statements of work, FCOI, and certifications and representations if applicable Request for Cost Sharing Form, if applicable Conflict of interest disclosures, if applicable

15 NSF Updates ORS Proposal Review (Required) FY2000 ORS located in the North Building (previously housed in the Allen Building). ORS entered all proposal data in SPS. Targeted NIH and NSF form sets. NSF moves to FastLane. Last minute reviews. Never, or rarely if ever saw the whole proposal. The department or PI had to put all of the pieces together, run the copies and get it in the mail.

16 NSF Updates Fastlane Rollout FY2001 (Fall) Fundamentally changed the game. Submitters had to convert files into pdfs. Early Career Deadline (2002)one day. Now spread out over 3 days. Proposal routes to ORS for final review and approval. (We hit the button). Suddenly ORS has to become much more interested in the other pieces of the proposals. Proliferation of systems puts more pressure on all of us to get things submitted correctly.

17 NSF Updates Formatting Matters. Second set of eyes never hurts. ORS will try to scan for issues in the entire proposal, but only if we have enough time. When pressed for time, then we will review what were required to review and rely on the PI and the Department for the rest.

18 NSF Updates Formatting Matters. Rejection Reasons. Broader Impacts not discussed in adequate depth. Proper format for prior results not followed omitted some of the required data points. use of et al instead of listing all co-authors in references cited. Biosketches: Exceeding 2 page limit. 6 synergistic activities instead of 5. Documents included in Appendices when not required by the FOA.

19 NSF Updates The Two-months Rule.

20 NSF Updates The Two-months Rule. NSF limits faculty compensation to 2/9ths. Senior Personnel Anyone who will be responsible for the scientific or technical direction of the project. Any individual considered by the performing institution to be a member of its faculty or who holds an appointment as a faculty member at another institution, and who will participate in the project being supported. Anyone who is considered a faculty member.

21 NSF Updates The Two-months Rule. Scenario One Faculty member X is a PI on two NSF grants. Grant A has a budget year from January to December Grant B has a budget year from October to September. 2 months charged to grant A: July and August months charged to grant B: May and June

22 NSF Updates The Two-months Rule. Dukes fiscal year dominates. The PI can receive not more than 2 months during Dukes fiscal year: JulyJune.

23 NSF Updates The Two-months Rule. Scenario Two: PI on an NSF grant wants to include a newly hired assistant professor on her grant. The recently hired faculty member was not named on the awarded budget. Does the salary limitation apply?

24 SPS on the Web: Rollout

25 RAD has no experience with web application usage demands like we expect with SPS Web. Performance could degrade if the number of users is increased too rapidly. RAD has done its best to beef up servers in anticipation of an increase number users. RAD will closely monitor the system to ensure that it handles the new demands. Gradual rollout will allow for time to make adjustments should issues arise.

26 SPS on the Web: Rollout ORS will coordinate with Departments to develop a rollout list. Phased rollout will begin in early July. Goal: all Departments brought on-line by October. Legacy SPS user access will disappear for a majority of people. Central offices will retain Legacy SPS access.

27 Various Updates OSASponsored Projects FDPSubrecipient Monitoring

28 Various Updates OSASponsored Projects ORS, ORA, OSP and Procurement are developing a new OSA for sponsored projects. Driver: Close Out Must include an invoice by date to meet new close out requirements. 60 days after expiration of the grant Duke may no longer be able to draw down funds. Reminder: Please use the current sponsored projects form to hire consultants. Reminder: Please use with G/L codes 6220 (professional services--individual) or 6916 (contract work--company) as appropriate.

29 Various Updates FDPSubrecipient Monitoring Unified Guidance: OMB Circular A-81 AKA:

30 Various Updates FDPSubrecipient Monitoring UG!

31 Various Updates FDPSubrecipient Monitoring Subaward Committee Working Groups Subrecipient Monitoring. Purchasing/Procurement. Admin/clerical salaries.

32 Q and A


Download ppt "ORS Quarterly Grants Managers Meeting 05/15/14. Three Year Trend: 5/14."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google