1. Modular Applications and Awards

2. FY 1999 - Modular Grants n Modular Research Grants –Goal of initiative is to redefine the Research Project Grant as an assistance mechanism and to simplify the process. –Disengage from complex negotiations of budgets

3. Modular Grants n Initiative designed to focus the efforts of investigators, institutional officials, and NIH staff on the science NIH supports. n Clarifies use of Just-in-Time procedures and incorporates SNAP to reduce administrative burden and accommodate the investigator’s need for flexibility. n Proposal pilot tested during the past 4 years in over 34 separate solicitations (29 RFAs and 5 PAs).

4. Modular Grants n Initiative would apply to all competing research project grant mechanisms (R01, R03, R15, R21, R41, & R43) and RFAs up to no more than $250,000 requested direct costs in any year.

5. Features at a Glance n Applies to research grant applications requesting up to $250,000 direct costs per year. n Request total direct costs in modules of $25,000, reflecting appropriate support for the project. There will be no future year escalations. n A typical modular grant application will request the same number of modules in each year. n Provide budget narrative regarding Key Personnel by position, role, and level of effort. n Include a total cost estimate for any Consortium/Contractual arrangements.

6. Features at a Glance n Additional narrative budget justification will be required in the application only if there is a variation in the number of modules requested. n Describe specific aims of research projects ongoing or completed during the last three years as part of the Biographical Sketch. The Biographical Sketch will be limited to three pages. n SRG Recommended adjustments of the budget in modules. n Request Other Support information “just-in-time” to determine overlap for likely award candidates.

7. Features at a Glance n Request (prior to award) additional budget justification “just-in-time” only in exceptional circumstances. n Award at SRG recommended or IC cost management plan level, taking other support into account. n Make non-categorical, total direct cost awards. n Eliminate the 25% rebudgeting requirement. n Permit all types of administrative supplemental awards. n Checklist to be submitted with the application.

8. Modular Grants n First year of implementation will be a period for comment. n Formal two-year assessment of the process will follow the first year of implementation. n E-mail to grantsinfo@nih.gov

9. Discussion and Decision-making n Input from NIH staff and advisory groups –(RPC, POPOF, GMAC, EPMC, PROG, Advisory Councils) n Input from investigators and institutions –individual investigators and institutions –professional associations (FDP, FASEB, AAMC, COGR, NCURA, SRA) n Other Federal staff –HHS, OIG, OMB

10. The Current Paradigm of Itemized Costs n The current process overemphasizes the apparent precision of itemized costs to a degree that is neither warranted nor feasible (in small to modest-size research assistance awards).

11. The Current Paradigm of Itemized Costs n Requires ever increasing attention to cost analysis and refereeing allowability of costs, e.g., fringe benefits, secretaries, graduate students, etc. n Suggests a procurement relationship n Gives deceptive impression of the precision of costs and calculations n Creates inconsistent pre-and postaward administration. (Itemized costs, categorical awards, rebudgeting, total cost noncompeting awards, etc.)

12. “Case for Action” n Support Science not Administrative Effort n Estimate Resources not Itemize Costs n Emphasize Assistance Mechanism not Inconsistent Patchwork of Administrative Features n Achieve Stewardship through Management of Projects, Institutions, and Programs

13. Objectives n To offer investigators a mechanism of project support that facilitates science and simplifies administration. n To offer NIH staff the opportunity to focus professional expertise where it’s most required.

14. Modular Research Grants New Paradigm - Total Direct Costs n Reinforce grant-in-aid philosophy of supporting research n Facilitates attention to science, rather than itemized cost n Support reasonable total direct costs of a research project n Provide project support based on scientific scope and total direct costs n Offer a competitive research grant mechanism that is the corollary to the postaward Expanded Authorities

15. Implications Applicant Perspective (investigator and institution) n Reaffirms the Principles of Assistance n Improves the Assistance Relationship n Eliminates Itemization and Cost Detail by Categories n Eliminates Cost Analysis

16. Implications Applicant Perspective (investigator and institution) n Provides institutional incentives to optimize allocation and use of funds n Eliminates postaward categorical rebudgeting requirements

17. Implications NIH Perspective n Emphasizes Programmatic Features of Mechanisms n Increases Focus on Portfolio Management n Decreases Emphasis on Administrative Features of Mechanisms n Saves Administrative Effort

18. Implications NIH Perspective n Focuses on total direct cost requirements of the approved aims and scope of project n Reduces inappropriate attention to budget detail

19. Implications NIH Perspective n Provides oversight based on total costs n Eliminates preaward cost analysis n Eliminates postaward categorical budget oversight

20. Modular Research Grant Summary - Application and Postaward Features n Total Direct Cost Applications and Awards n Expanded Authorities n SNAP Noncompeting Award Process n Final Financial Status Report Only n Outcomes Based on Scientific Progress n Institutional Compliance with Administrative and Cost Principles n Project Monitoring Based on Total Costs and Scientific Scope

21. Modular Research Grants Summary - Compliance and Oversight n Cost Principles and “CAS” apply n Costs must be allowable, allocable, reasonable, and consistently treated n Total costs monitored based on scope, scientific aims, rate of expenditure n Institution monitored on basis of administrative and financial systems