1. Kuali Coeus Implementation Steering Committee Meeting June 10, 2011 1

2. Agenda Introductions Background KC Implementation plan Current Status The role of the Steering Committee KC Demo Questions 2

3. “Research Administration” (RA) The necessary and enabling “non-scientific” activities required to conduct research Successfully compete for, negotiate, and manage research projects Provide compliance and support functions to ensure integrity and safety of research Inform management decision making and planning Deliver required government and regulatory agency reporting

4. Cornell’s Need for a RA System Administrative burden on faculty at all-time high impeding ability to spend time on research –Processes performed manually or with disparate systems –Limited self-service – requires inefficient interactions with staff –Processing and information not designed to support researchers Lack of meaningful and integrated data, and of intelligent workflow poses significant barrier to meeting compliance requirements –Higher education under growing scrutiny –Number, complexity of regulatory requirements continues to grow –Cornell must ensure the integrity of its research and protect the reputation of its faculty, students, and other researchers –Lack of information necessary to support researchers in meeting regulatory requirements –Gap in meaningful data for faculty and management –No modern workflow or process management tools

5. Best Available Solution Kuali Coeus Built to meet needs of higher education Cornell a founding development partner, Mellon Foundation Grant - $2.5M; now 10 university contributors Based on proven MIT Coeus system currently used by 48 research institutions Leverages Kuali Financial System (KFS) infrastructure Built to interface with KFS which provides post-award financial management functionality Sustainable business model using best of Coeus and KFS models

6. KC Provides Single system and interface, automated workflow infrastructure –Reduce administrative burden for faculty and staff; improve processing and approval timelines Functionality to support life cycle of research projects Ability to monitor and manage regulatory compliance –Meet current and emerging regulations and federally mandated electronic processes Greatly improved management information –Data delivered accurately and in a timely manner to support business decisions

7. Project Goals Deliver an integrated research administration system that meets researcher and institutional needs Work collaboratively with faculty to deliver a tool that works for them Develop processes that increase efficiency and reduce administrative burden Ensure an efficient and economical implementation

8. Project Scope Functionality Data Warehouse, Reporting Custom and standard reporting for campus and central users Interface to KFS to facilitate financial reporting Proposal DevelopmentIRB (Human participants) Budget DevelopmentConflict of Interest Award ManagementIACUC (Animal use) Sub-awardsBiosafety NegotiationsExport controls

9. KC @ Cornell: Planned Implementation Total budget estimated at this time: $11.96M –Capital budget $10.46M, Reallocated department staff $1.5M Five modules over six years –Generally follow KC development product releases –Phased Rollout of modules as they (and CU) are ready –Proposal and Budget Development scheduled for 2011 Readiness Assessment & Discovery- Q1 through August 2011 Pilot Go-live – Target Q4 2011 201120122013201420152016 Proposal and Budget Development IRB (Human Subjects) Awards, Negotiations, Sub-Awards Conflict of Interest IACUC (Animal Use) Bio-Safety Export Controls 9

10. KC @ Cornell KC Development KC Implementation KC @ Cornell Vanilla “out of the box” product Meets critical needs common to all institutions Development based on maximizing cost-benefit for all- consensus, compromise Backed by the Foundation infrastructure Core product documentation Make KC & Cornell work together Understand the Product Functionality User interfaces Terminology Assess Campus needs Functionality Workflow Reporting Training and Documentation Develop solutions to meet campus needs Better Research Administration @ Cornell Interconnected Consistent Streamlined User friendly features Enable compliance with policies/regulations Reporting to enable decision making 10

11. Project Team 11 Steering Committee Project Sponsors Robert Buhrman Ted Dodds Cathy Long Project Director Amita Verma Project Manager Christopher Lyons Functional Team Technical Team Faculty Advisory Council Andy Bass (Chair)

12. Proposal and Budget development-before and after FunctionCurrentWith Kuali Coeus Proposal development-Off line collaboration -Manual version management -no standard template -Each proposal is a new document -Online collaboration -Version control -Can copy proposals or portions of -Latest template available Budget development-Offline process -Rates offline -No standard template -Multiple versions can be created -On-line Collaboration -Institutional rates pre-populated and updated -Standard templates: same for all sponsors -Account codes populated by budget item type Form 10-Paper -Manual routing -No separate form -Proposal driven compliance routing Submission to OSP-Manual, no standard process -OSP manually assigns number -OSP enters data into EZRA and submits to sponsor -PI/Department creates proposal and submits -OSP# generated at proposal creation -Error checks and validation prior to submission OSP review and processing-OSP Review offline -All correspondence offline -Lack of Standardization of review -OSP review documented in KC -All review workflow in KC Proposal Submission-OSP submits to grants.gov and other sponsors -Interface to Grants.gov for submission from KC -Submission to other sponsors unchanged Compliance/Awards- Manual data entry, compliance lookup(Down the road)- link to awards and KFS, compliance cross reference 12

13. 13 Institutional Proposal and Awards -before and after FunctionCurrentWith Kuali Coeus Institutional Proposal- -Manual entry of proposal -Proposal Log -. -Auto Feed from Proposal Module Award-.-.-.-.-.-. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. Award Budget-.-.-.-. -.-.-.-. Time and Money-.-.-.-.-.-. -.-.-.-.-.-. Subawards-.-.-.-.-.-. -(Module available 4 th qtr 2011) -. Negotiations-Treated as project and attached to Proposals -Special module to handle all negotiations with link to Award. (Module available 4 th qtr 2011) -. COI/IRB/-. 13

14. KC Implementation at Cornell Key Participants and Stakeholders –Faculty and other researchers –Associate Deans for Research –College and department research administrators –Directors and staff of OSP, ORIA, Research IT –Compliance committees (IRB, IACUC, IBC, FCOI) –Other Enterprise System executives (HR PS, Finance KFS, etc.) –Sponsored Funds Accounting –College and department IT –Other 14

15. KC Implementation Project- Principles Campus Engagement: –Engage Campus stakeholders from the beginning –Engage faculty early, seek advice and guidance –Listen, document, validate –Develop solutions collaboratively –Communicate: right message to the right people at the right time Product: –Configure product to meet reasonable campus needs –Enable and promote consistency in processes and reporting –No (or minimal) Customization of the core product –Integrate with KFS where needed –Develop and deliver timely, effective training and documentation 15

16. KC Implementation -Risks –Availability of technical resources –Ability to integrate to other enterprise systems when in flux –Ability to acquire campus resources in light of multiple enterprise projects –Ability to effectively and efficiently engage faculty –Ability to effectively configure KC for the Cornell campus –Implementing a successful post implementation dept/central staff support model –Part of KC success tied to KFS effectiveness of data/mgmt information delivery 16

17. First KC Implementation: Proposal and Budget Development A complete system solution for the collaborative development, automated review and limited online submission for proposal and budgets. 17 Develop the proposal Develop the budget Route for Internal review Route for OSP review Submit to sponsor Web application Role based permissions and access Ability to track progress and status Links to external and internal resources

18. Project Status and immediate plans Assessing campus and product “Readiness” –Does KC have the essential functionality to meet Cornell needs ? –What is the overall solution- system, processes, workflow management, reporting? –What are the key processes on campus that KC must support, and which processes will need to change? –What is the minimum functionality needed for a pilot? –What is the project plan for the rest of the implementation? Key activities –Engage campus stakeholders from most colleges engaged in sponsored research- processes, pain points, reporting needs, etc. –Benchmark with other KC implementing schools to learn from experiences- successes and difficulties –Learn the intricacies of system 18

19. Steering Committee (SC) Provide guidance to the team in making the key decisions on the major issues and key project decisions that will impact the campus community, such as- -The overall objectives for the project -Project roll out strategy and timeline -Making the critical go-live decisions -Effective outreach, communications and training strategies -Decisions involving large expenditures Partner with the project leadership in negotiating effective solutions to issues that have a potential to impede progress of the project Serve as an ambassador for the KC project to the University administration and research communities Meet approximately once a month, unless there is a critical project need 19

20. Kuali Coeus Tour 20

21. Menu 21

22. Proposal 22

23. Proposal Personnel 23

24. Narratives (Science) 24

25. Budget 25

26. Special Review 26

27. Workflow: Approval (Form 10) 27