PI Handbook

PI Handbook blog site provides  information and resources for University of Nevada faculty and staff preparing or managing all types of sponsored projects. Users may subscribe to the PI Handbook RSS feed to receive new content, tips, tools and up-to-the-minute information regarding sponsored projects.

This checklist is being offered by the Office of Sponsored Projects as a tool to assist PIs when preparing applications under the R01 funding mechanism for NIH and other PHS Agencies. It is not intended to be exhaustive, but it does highlight important information found on the SF 424 R&R Application Guide. 

When responding to a specific RFA or PA which have specific application instructions, those instructions take precedence over conflicting instructions in the SF424 Application Guide. If there are any conflicts between this checklist and sponsor provided instructions or the application guide, sponsor-provided instruction and guides should be followed.

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which leads National Institutes of Health (NIH) efforts to provide proposal-writing resources, has posted four funded R21 proposals and accompanying summary statements online. These recent successful examples reflect the reduced NIH page limit. Each includes a one-page specific aims section, a 12-page research strategy, budget information, and biosketches of key personnel. While the proposals have an allergy/infectious disease research focus, they give researchers in all fields a view into excellent proposal development.

Samples: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/researchfunding/grant/pages/appsamples.aspx

Part of successful grantsmanship is to develop rapport with program officers in the areas where you typically submit proposals.  If you missed it, you might want to read the following article that appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Education

http://chronicle.com/article/What-to-Say-and-Not-Say-to/131282/

NSF has posted Important Notice 132, Implementation of Revised National Science Board-approved (NSB) Merit Review Criteria to the NSF website.    This Notice provides information regarding the Foundation’s implementation of the National Science Board (NSB) Report entitled, National Science Foundation’s Merit Review Criteria: Review and Revision.

NIH has updated its frequently asked questions Web page on the financial conflict of interest regulation, which goes into effect at the end of August. The 10 new and three updated FAQs, posted March 21, address a variety of topics, including blind trusts, payments on behalf of investigators made to institutions and the differences between significant financial interests as defined in the new regulation versus the 1995 rule. Of interest to those grappling with how to implement the travel expenses disclosure requirements, which are not subject to a payment threshold, is a new question with a three-part answer. The item indicates that institutions “have the discretion to determine which details of the sponsored or reimbursed travel, for example, source of funding, destination, duration of travel, etc., drive further institutional review.” Policies could dictate, for example, that anticipated participation in annual meetings and medical society gatherings “may not require further institutional review to determine if the travel constitutes a FCOI,” the FAQ states.
Link: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/coi/coi_faqs.htm#3383

From Report on Research Compliance 3/22/12

The National Science Board (NSB) recently released recommendations for altering the NSF’s Merit Review.  Among the recommendations:

•  NSB Core Principles for defining merit review criteria
• All NSF Funded projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, knowledge and science.
• NSF projects, in the aggregate should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. PIs may accomplish their projects’ broader Impacts through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to the research, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project.
• NSF should base its meaningful assessment and evaluation of funded projects on appropriate metrics, “keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects.
•  Potential Revisions to the merit review process
•  When evaluating merit, NSF reviewers will consider whether the proposed research project:
•  Advances knowledge and understanding within its own field or across the different fields ;
• Benefits society or advances desired societal outcomes;
• Suggests and explores creative, original or potentially transformative concepts;
• Has a well-reasoned, well-organized plan for carrying out the proposed activities, based on sound rationale; and
• Incorporates in its plan a mechanism to assess success NSB continues to support review of items of:
•  How well-qualified is the PI, team or institution to conduct the proposed activities
• Are there adequate resources available to the PI, either at the home institution or through collaborations, to carry out the proposed activities?
•   NSF Possible Implementation plan for the above recommendations:           
• Treat both merit review criteria (broader impacts and intellectual merit) as important;
• Include a separate section in the project description describing the proposed activities’ broader impacts;
• Require a description of the PIs accomplishments relating to both of the merit review criteria in separate sections contained in the “Results of Prior Support” (renewal projects); and
• Require and enforce a description of how the project addresses both criteria in all public award abstracts.
• New annual and final project report templates that include space to address progress specific to all projects activities, including broader impacts activities that are not directly related to the research;

On March 1, 2012 NSF posted FAQs regarding the accellerated spending memo (M-11-34) that OMB released on September 15th, 2011.

Key impacts:

• Waiver requests for all grants, except for CAREER awards, need to be submitted by March 2^nd(today).
• This includes awards whose expiration date is beyond 9/30/13. If a waiver request is not submitted for such an award, “NSF will amend your award to modify the expiration so that your project cannot continue past September 30, 2013.”
• Waiver requests for cooperative agreements need to be submitted by March 9^th
• For CAREER awards, all of which were issued with expiration dates in 2014, “NSF is working to develop a strategy for a programmatic waiver request to cover all CAREER PIs.” Waiver requests for CAREER awards do not need to be submitted at this time, but recipients are reminded that there is no guarantee that OMB will approve the waiver request.

(Courtesy of FDPMAIN-L@LSW.NAS.EDU)

Notice Number: NOT-OD-11-109

Release Date: August 22, 2011

Issued by
National Institutes of Health (NIH), Office of Extramural Research

Purpose

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is issuing a final rule in the Federal Register (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-08-25/pdf/2011-21633.pdf) that amends the Public Health Service (PHS) regulations on Responsibility of Applicants for Promoting Objectivity in Research for which PHS Funding is Sought (42 C.F.R. Part 50, Subpart F) and Responsible Prospective Contractors (45 C.F.R. Part 94).  The final rule specifies compliance dates in the “Dates” section, as discussed further below. 

Background    
           
Since the promulgation of these regulations in 1995, the growing complexity of biomedical and behavioral research; the increased interaction among Government, research Institutions, and the private sector in attaining common public health goals while meeting public expectations for research integrity; as well as increased public scrutiny, all have raised questions as to whether a more rigorous approach to Investigator disclosure, institutional management of financial conflicts, and federal oversight is required.   The HHS decided to explore the need for revisions to the 1995 regulations by publishing an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on May 8, 2009 (74 FR 21610). 
           
After analyzing public comments, HHS published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (75 FR 28688, hereafter referred to as “NPRM”) on May 21, 2010, proposing changes to the 1995 regulations to strengthen accountability and transparency.  The proposed changes focused on Investigators’ disclosure requirements of significant financial interests (SFIs), Institutions’ reporting and management of identified financial conflicts of interest (FCOI), and public disclosure of information regarding Investigator FCOI.           

On July 21, 2010, HHS published a Notice (75 FR 42362) extending the 60 day comment period for the NPRM by another 30 days and seeking comment on whether HHS should clarify its authority to enforce compliance with the regulations by Institutions and Investigators, and whether HHS should clarify how the regulations apply in circumstances in which an Investigator or a PHS-funded research project transfers from one Institution to another.

After considering all public comments, and consistent with the proposals articulated in the NPRM, HHS developed the final rule, which includes the following major changes to the 1995 regulations: 

Compliance Dates:

An Institution applying for or receiving PHS funding from a grant, cooperative agreement, or contract that is covered by the final rule must be in full compliance with all of the revised regulatory requirements:

• No later than 365 calendar days after the date of publication in the Federal Register, i.e. August 24, 2011; and
• Immediately upon making its institutional Financial Conflict of Interest (FCOI) policy publicly accessible as described in the final rule.

In the interim, Institutions should continue to comply with the 1995 regulations and report Investigator FCOIs to the Public Health Service (PHS) Awarding Component as required in the 1995 regulations.

NIH grant and cooperative agreement award recipients should continue to submit FCOI reports using the electronic Research Administration (eRA) Commons FCOI Module.  Once the institution is required to be in full compliance with the regulatory requirements, the additional reporting requirements must be met.  Therefore, if the eRA Commons FCOI Module is not updated by the time this occurs, the FCOI report should include an attachment that addresses the minimum elements of the FCOI report as provided in 42 CFR 50.605(b)(3).

Effective with grant awards with an initial Issue Date on/after December 23, 2011, the salary limitation is limited to Executive Level II of the Federal Pay Scale, $179,700.
NIH competing grant awards with categorical budgets reflecting salary levels at or above the new limit that have an initial Issue Date on/after December 23, 2011 will reflect adjustments to the current and all future years so that no funds are awarded or committed for salaries over the limitation.

See Announcement

PIs will especiall be interested in the “Making the Move to Research.gov” section.

January 2012 marks a new step forward in the National Science Foundation’s modernization of FastLane and transition to Research.gov. Financial administrators on projects funded by NSF must now access financial services through Reseach.gov and revised policy requires that institutions prepare and submit Federal Financial Reports (FFR) using the website’s FFR service.

Accessing Financial Functions on Research.gov

All financial users with the following access permissions – Cash Request User, Grantee EFT User, FFR Preparer and FFR Certifier – must use Research.gov to access NSF financial services. This means that you will log into Research.gov using your FastLane credentials to request cash transfers; modify and certify banking information for Electronic Funds Transfers (EFTs); and view your organization’s NSF financial reporting activity, cash requests and EFT updates. All financial users who try to access financial services through FastLane will be transferred directly to Research.gov to login.

Using the Research.gov FFR Service

Revised NSF policy requires that grantees prepare and submit quarterly Federal Financial Reports (FFRs) through Research.gov beginning with reports that are due on February 1, 2012. For further information, review Article 9 of the NSF Agency Specific Requirements to the Research Terms & Conditions posted at www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/rtc/nsf_212.pdf.

The process of preparing and submitting FFRs in Research.gov is similar to FastLane and has been available on Research.gov since November 2008. You can access the FFR service from the home page, after logging into Research.gov.

Making the Move to Research.gov

2013  will bring more change to Research.gov, including the introduction of a new award payment service and a new service for submission of annual, final, and interim progress reports. The financial services change may not impact you today, but now is the  time to start or continue your own transition to Research.gov.

What can you do? Try the following steps and make Research.gov a part of your daily work:

• Login using your FastLane credentials
• Bookmark Research.gov
• Use Research.gov as your “portal” to Financial Services
• Stay tuned for future changes

Research.gov Help Desk

For assistance, please contact the Research.gov Help Desk, 7 AM – 9 PM Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday (except for federal holidays).  You can contact the Research.gov Help Desk by emailing rgov@nsf.gov  or by calling 1.800.381.1532.

NIH and the National Science Foundation have each recently issued notices warning recipients of Recovery Act funding that previously automatic no-cost extensions will not be granted and that projects need to end by Sept. 30, 2013, unless the agency has given prior approval. This is necessary because the Office of Management and Budget has said projects funded with Recovery Act money should be completed by this date, or agencies will have to take steps to “reclaim funds that remain unspent.”

In its Dec. 13 notice, NIH noted that for projects that already have end dates beyond Sept. 30, 2013, “NIH staff administering these grants will also reach out to recipients to discuss possible strategies for accelerating progress and expenditures. Revised award terms will vary depending on the award terms provided in the current notice of award.”

In a nearly identical notice also issued on Dec. 13, NSF outlined the requirements for expenditures by Sept. 30, 2013, but also indicated that it may seek a waiver from OMB’s mandates. For any awards “anticipated to continue past September 30, 2013, NSF grantees must contact the program officer identified in the award notice in writing that an extension of the expiration date is vital for the completion of the project,” NSF said. “All requests must be received on or before June 1, 2012, regardless of the current project expiration date. Prior written approval to extend beyond September 30, 2013 will only be considered” based on OMB criteria and “only if NSF receives a waiver from OMB,” NSF said.

Other government agencies are expected to issue similar notices to grantees who received Recovery Act funding.
Link to NIH notice:
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-12-014.html

Link to NSF notice: http://nsf.gov/recovery/acceleration.pdf

Link to OMB memorandum: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2011/m11-34.pdf

NSF’s  entire suite of Award Terms and Conditions (see full listing below) has been revised to implement two new requirements, which are either mandated by regulation or legislation.  Each set of terms and conditions is accompanied by a comprehensive summary of the changes made to that document.

The revised Terms and Conditions will apply to all new NSF awards and funding amendments to existing NSF awards issued on or after February 1, 2012.  In addition to clarifications and other changes made to the conditions, significant changes include:

• Travel*, has been updated to incorporate revised circumstances under which use of a foreign-flag air carrier is permissible.  The Article provides information on recent modifications to the “Open Skies” Agreement with the European Union, and includes a link to the General Services Administration website for additional information.

• Academic Technology Transfer and Commercialization of University Research**, is a new Article which requires higher education institutions that have NSF research support and at least $25,000,000 in total Federal research grants in the most recently completed Federal fiscal year to submit to NSF the URL that contains information on their transfer of technology and commercialization of research results efforts.  This change has been mandated by the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act.

Revisions have been made to the following documents:

• NSF Agency Specific Requirements (ASR) to the Research Terms and Conditions (RTC);
• Grant General Conditions (GC-1);
• Cooperative Agreement Financial & Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC);
• Cooperative Agreement Supplemental Financial & Administrative Terms and Conditions for Managers of Large Facilities
• Cooperative Agreement Supplemental Financial & Administrative Terms and Conditions for Managers of Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCS)
• International Research Terms and Conditions
• Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Phase I Grant General Conditions; 
• Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Phase II Grant General Conditions; and
• Administration of NSF Conference or Group Travel Grant Special Conditions (FL 26).

* This article does not apply to the SBIR/STTR Phase I grant conditions.

** This article only applies to the ASR and CA-FATC grant conditions.

These Award Terms and Conditions have been posted to the NSF website and are available electronically at: http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF.   

If you have any questions on these changes, please contact the DIAS/Policy Office on (703) 292-8243 or by email to policy@nsf.gov.

The National Council of University Research Administrators (NCURA) has a You Tube Channel that provides tips and information on topics of interest to those involved administrating research. A short video presentation on a selected topic is uploaded each Tuesday.  This week’s topic: Differences Between Subrecipients and Vendors.  Check out the channel at: http://www.youtube.com/user/NCURA1959

A new All About Grants Podcast produced by the NIH Office of Extramural Research (OER) features Dr. Pat Brown, Director, OLAW, who explains what must be included in your grant application if you use vertebrate animals in your research. Listen to Writing Your Vertebrate Animal Section (MP3) or read the transcript (HTML).

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-11-077.html

Notice Number: NOT-OD-11-077

This Notice provides clarification to the guidance about the NIH Fiscal Operations Plan for FY 2011 and implementation of the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-10) that was announced in NOT-OD-11-068.

NIH recently made significant cutbacks in staffing for eRA Commons.

This could lead to slower response to inquiries for general assistance and user support; longer downtimes and scheduled system outages; delays in system upgrades and improvements; and possible lags in fixing problems.

The following are suggestions to help avoid potential problems:

• Consult the eRA Commons Frequently Asked Questions.
• Submit your application a week prior to the deadline.
• Send in annual reports as soon as possible.
• Review eRA news and information posted online regularly.
• Subscribe to eRA listservs at http://era.nih.gov/about_era/get_connected.cfm
• Allow several days for eRA to respond to emails and anticipate longer hold times for phone calls to the helpline.

NIAID funding news article:  http://funding.niaid.nih.gov/researchfunding/newsletter/2011/pages/0427.aspx#a04

NIH is changing the policy concerning appeals of thei initial peer review process. This notice provides further information.

The Office of Extramural Research (OER) presents conversations with NIH staff members in their podcast “All About Grants”.  They provide  “insights on grant topics from those who live and breathe the information”.  Topic catagories include preparing successful grant applications, understanding how a grant application is reviewed, keeping up with what’s hot, being an NIH investigator and suggested topics. Subscriptions to the podcast are available through RSS or in iTunes.