RAMAround!July 27, 2016

Closing Fixed Price ProjectsPam Harrington

.

The sweep process is the mechanism used to remove remaining balances from ended fixed-price projects so that the 53 account can be closed and colleges/departments/PIs can use the funds.

Fixed price project (typically contracts) – project proposed with a fixed budget amount regardless of how much it actually costs to complete the work• Example: $10,000 fixed price award

• If the project is completed and total cost is $10,200, CSU has to cover the excess $200

• If the project is completed with total cost of $9,800, CSU is entitled to keep the $200

• It is incumbent upon the PI to estimate the project cost as precisely as possible to both:

• Adequately cover actual project costs• Reduce, to the extent reasonably possible, excess remaining balances

• Project ends and all deliverables met• Sponsor has made payment in full• Recognize revenue at point of completion• Funds, if any, remaining in the account become unrestricted institutional

funds• But, 53 accounts are in the restricted subfund• Moving balances to 16 sweep account allows funds to be properly

reclassified as unrestricted and facilitate spending

• At year end, OSP compiles a report of all ended FP projects that meet the cut-off – end dates >60 days prior•Direct dollars transfer to College sweep account

• Colleges determine how to distribute funds• Indirect dollars transfer to OVPR sweep account

• OVPR reinvests in research activities•Remaining balances of $100 or less go into the

Sponsored Programs 53 clearing account• Allows SP to do a courtesy close of overspent

accounts with small (usually pennies) excess balances

• Exceptions to the sweep process• Sponsor has not paid the full amount of the agreement, or• Scope of work not completed

And• No cost extension has been submitted to the sponsor

Research Acceleration OFFICE

at Colorado State UniversityRamAround

July 2016

Meg Suter

Meghan.Suter@colostate.edu

The MotivationThe NeedThe ExecutionThe Next stepsAgenda

The Motivation: RAO Alignment to Strategic Research GoalsMission: To support and facilitate the development of strategic and major inter/multi/transdisciplinary research at Colorado State UniversityObjectives:

• Support creation of new multi/inter/transdisciplinary (“x-disciplinary”) research teams; Strengthen existing research teams

• Align research teams with strategic/significant funding opportunities

• Increase number of competitive proposals submitted to significant/strategic funding opportunities

• Increase CSU’s overall research success and standing

Aligned with CSU’s goals:

• Growing/diversifying research funding across the university, by increasing “x-disciplinary” research

• Increasing the number of competitive proposals submitted in response to large funding opportunities

The Need: Increasing Competitiveness and Impact

CSU’s Current Research Landscape:2010-2015 New Proposals• 11,948 total submissions

• Budgets >$1M: <10% of all submissions

10,861

693

304

59

31

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000

$0-1M

$1-2M

$2-5M

$5-10M

$10M+

New Proposal Submissions2010 - 2015

The Need: Increasing Competitiveness and Impact

CSU’s Current Research Landscape:2010-2015 New Proposals >$950k• 24.3% hit rate overall

•439 to HHS (12.5% hit rate); NIH 2015 overall: 20.7%•214 to NSF (19.2% hit rate); CO NSF 2015 overall: 26%•95 to DOD (46.3% hit rate)•64 to DOE (20.3% hit rate)•53 to USDA (47.2% hit rate)•22 to Industry (50.0% hit rate)•22 to Foundations (40.9% hit rate)

The Need: Increasing Competitiveness and Impact

CSU’s Current Research Landscape:2011-2015: Proposals from CVMBS, COE, CNS

• Submitted:•6339 Total Proposals Submitted•66% Single Investigator

• Awarded:•3005 Total Proposals Awarded•68.9% Single Investigator

The Need: Increasing Competitiveness and Impact

Research Development at Similar InstitutionsInstitution RDO?

Iowa State No

Kansas State No (but centralized Pre-Award)

Michigan State Yes (“Research Facilitation and Dissemination”)

NC State Yes

OK State Yes (“University Center for Proposal Development”)

OR State Yes

Purdue Yes (“RD Services”)

Texas A&M Yes (“RD Services”

UC Davis Yes (“Office of Interdisciplinary Research Support”)

U of IL Yes (“Office of Proposal Development”)

U of TN Yes (“Research Development Team”)

VirginiaTech Yes (“Research Development Team”)

WA State Univ. No

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office

Complex Proposal Development

Program (CPDP)

Limited Submission

Program (LSP)

Strategic Research Initiatives

Team & Interdisciplinary

Science Programs

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office

Complex Proposal Development

Program (CPDP)

Limited Submission

Program (LSP)

Strategic Research Initiatives

Team & Interdisciplinary

Science Programs

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office

• Coordination of Strategic Research Community Events

• Facilitated working groups in response to strategic funding opportunities or anticipated opportunity areas

• Home to centralized research communications, processes, and resources•Broader Impacts Resources•Templates, Boilerplate•Funding Search Information, Internal Seed Grant Listings, Limited Submission Infor and Portal, Educational Offerings and Materials

• Early Investigator Programs•Funding Opportunity Identification, Grantsmanship Resources, Info Sessions, Specialized Review, Proposal Mentorship

Strategic Research Initiatives

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office

• Coordination of Strategic Research Community Events

• Food, Energy, Water/NSF INFEWS• Beer Working Group

• Early Investigator Programs•NSF CAREER

Strategic Research InitiativesActivities to Date

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office

• CIP & PRECIP Program Coordination• RFP development, proposal submission

management, coordination of internal review process

• Team facilitation, program management, oversight & review

• Coordination of educational programming, contracting with external consultants

• Program metrics and analytics

Team & Interdisciplinary Science Programs

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office • CIP & PRECIP Program Coordination

• 2015/2016 Catalyst for Innovative Partnerships• 7 teams, >$1.3M Invested• 160+ faculty, all 8 colleges• Quarterly meetings with OVPR and other offices

• 2016 Pre-Catalyst for Innovative Partnerships• 13 teams, ~$65k invested• ~100 faculty, all 8 colleges• Monthly workshops

• 2017/2018 or 2018/2019 CIP Cohort Planning

Team & Interdisciplinary Science ProgramsActivities to Date

CIP Cumulative MetricsMetric TOTAL

Q3-Q6Proposals Submitted (#) 146Proposals Submitted ($) $143.9M

Awards Received (#) 38Awards Received ($) $10.6M

Internal Team Members (#) 161External Team Members (#) 47

Publications (#) 93Citations (#) 16

Presentations (#) 127Invention Disclosures (#) 10Patent Applications (#) 4

Patents Issued (#) 2Licenses Generated (#) 0

CIP Q5 and Q6 MetricsMetric TOTAL

(Q5 and Q6) CIP Enhanced* CIP Enabled*

Proposals Submitted (#) 39 7 7Proposals Submitted ($) $38.2M $10.3M $4.4M

Awards Received (#) 7 0 3Awards Received ($) $1,941,158 $0 $307K

New Internal Team Members (#) 10New External Team Members (#) 2

Publications (#) 34Presentations (#) 43

Invention Disclosures (#) 3Patent Applications (#) 2

* CIP Enhanced vs. CIP Enabled data only available for Q6

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office

• Manage revisions to LSP policies and procedures•Earlier announcements & deadlines•Facilitated and improved review process•Use of LSP process for improved strategic alignment

• Maintenance of LSP opportunities database•Early opportunity identification and vetting• SPIN, other software(?), mining of agencies & other institutions•Increased transparency of procedures and outcomes

• Communication of LSP opportunities (research portal)

• Coordination of LSP Review Panels• LSP Program Info Sessions & Red Teaming for

targeted/strategic opportunities

Limited Submission Program

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office

• Manage revisions to LSP policies and procedures•Working with OVPR/OSP/HARP to develop pilot programs with modified LSP timelines:•Priority programs (based on past history)•Longer timelines•Assistance to selected applicants

•Coordination of LSP Review Panels

Limited Submission ProgramActivities to Date

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office

• Pre-Proposal Support for Emerging Research Teams and Topics• Opportunity landscaping, identification, and assessment; team formation and community building; and strategic research program development (e.g., Food Systems, India Center, American West Program)

• Proposal Planning and Preparation Support• Proposal preparation timelines, compliance matrices,

proposal preparation project management, coordination with co-PIs and subs, text development (DMPs, MPs, boilerplate)

• Proposal Fiscal Preparation Support• Coordination of External Support (consultants, graphics)• Proposal Drafting, Editing, and Review (internal,

external, pink & red)• Coordination of Post Award Research Project

Management Resources

Complex Proposal Development Program

Complex Proposal (“Big Bet”):

• Budget >$1M direct/year

• Multiple internal departments/colleges

• Multiple external partners/subcontractors

• Diverse partner/subcontractor types

• Significant institutional commitment

• Other special circumstances

• Typically high risk, high reward

http://www.poker-sign-up-bonus.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/8.pokerstars-bonus.jpg

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office

The Execution: Structure of the RAO Office • Pre-Proposal Support for Emerging

Research Teams and Topics•Food Systems, India Center, American West Program

• Proposal Planning and Preparation Support• Proposal Fiscal Preparation Support• Proposal Drafting, Editing, and Review

Support

25 proposals (pre and full)~$80M in total proposed funding~1.8 proposals/month

Complex Proposal Development ProgramActivities to Date

The Next Steps: Building Consensus and Community What else is needed?

How can we better work together?

Other ideas, questions, concerns?

Meghan.suter@colostate.edu970.491.3998

RICRO Update and OSP Wizard

• Brad Woods

Ramaround-L

• Dana Schwartz (CVMBS)• Open: https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ramaround-l• Enter your information in the Subscribing to Ramaround-L section

E-systems and OSPKR Negotiations FileHold

General Discussion/Questions

Roundtable Discussion

Business Processes Related to Kuali Research

KR Business Process Recommendation: All proposals will be logged into Kuali Research

• By placing all proposals in the system, a PI’s full level of sponsored research activities can be tracked for promotion and tenure

• A distinction can be made between Pre-proposals, or any pre-application that requires some sort of formalized budget, and Letters of Intent (LOI), where no budget is required. The team suggests that Pre-proposals be tracked but Letter of Intent be optional.

KR Business Process Recommendation: Routing and Approvals

• At a minimum, PIs and Co-Is be required to personally fill out the Person Certification at the time they approve the proposal

• This does not mean they have to touch the proposal in any other way• It will reinforce that the PI is ultimately responsible for the project• The certification can be done at any stage of proposal development• An email notification will take the PI/CO-I to the exact place in the system

where the certification questions are

KR Business Process Recommendation: Routing and Approvals

• Approval routing will follow the same basic and parallel path• Proposal is submitted into routing by the PI or preaward support staff• PI and Co-Is approve that the proposal is ready to submit and certify if they

have not already done so• For departments that choose to have a pre-approver, this person approves

after the PI and before department and college approvals• Proposal is routed to each department head/delegate for approval• Proposal is routed to each dean/delegate for approval• Proposal is routed to Extension when applicable• Proposal is routed to OSP to complete submission process

KR Business Process Recommendation: Building Budgets

• Full budgets will be developed in the system • IDC and fringe rates are loaded into the system and updated en masse,

leading to more consistency in budgeting (and less review time)• Multiple budgets may be developed for scenario planning• Calculation of cost-share on salaries and non-personnel items is available for

review• Ability to track unrecovered IDC can be enabled• exception: for those few sponsors with a requirement to use a specific

spreadsheet that does automatic calculations, an uploaded copy of the sponsor spreadsheet will be acceptable, though this will require an extra step of entering the amounts into the summary budget version.

KR Business Process Recommendation: Attachments

• The following attachments will be required if they are pertinent to the project, regardless of how the actual proposal is submitted:

• Budget if done on an approved agency/sponsor budget form• Budget justification• SOW or summary attachment, or brief summary entered as an abstract.• Forms or other documents required by the sponsor • Subrecipient information:• Commitment letter signed by an institutional official• Statement of Work (SOW)• Budget and budget justification• CSU internal financial commitment forms/info (such as cost-sharing or additional space

request)

KR Business Process Discussion: Abstracts• Textual abstracts can be required, but:

• Abstracts are not currently required. Even though often requested, abstracts or Statements of Work are often not provided.

• Advantages of Textual Abstracts (as opposed to uploaded abstracts)• Ability to search abstract for key words• Ability to have thumbnail sketch of many different projects• Ability to pull information into Digital Measures