Department Administrator Session #17

1. Department Administrator Session #17 June 24, 2015

2. Agenda • RFS Staffing and RFS Projects • Reminders/Discussions • My Grants Tracker Training • Grad Student and Doctoral Student stipend guidelines • Citizenship and Immigration Canada Fee • Case Studies • Next Session

3. RFS Staffing and RFS Projects • New • Saniya Kalani-Kanji • Since our Dept. Admin Session, Saniya has accepted our full time role, replacing SaphronMoule. • Allan Marsh • Allan continues to provide support for the Tri-Agency awards and the Business & Industry and Other Government awards. • GhajanParameswaran • Ghajan will be with us, as a co-op student, until the end of August. • Departed • SaphronMoule • Away Indefinitely • Karen Lee

4. Research Financial Services • MAJOR RESEARCH CONTRACTS • Application budget • Award Finalization • Account set up • Budget input to FRS • Compliance review • In-kind review • Financial Reports • Supporting documentation • Disbursement of funds • Audits • Faculty and Dept Administrator training • TRI-COUNCIL • Budget assistance • Budget input to FRS • Account set up • Compliance review • Financial reports • Disbursement of funds • Transfer letters • Faculty and Dept Administrator training • OTHER GOV’T AND INDUSTRY • Budget assistance • Budget input to FRS • Account set up • Compliance review • Invoicing • Deposit of cheques • Collection of aged receivables • Financial reports • Supporting documentation • Faculty and Dept Administrator training • INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS • Application budget • Award Finalization • Account set up • Budget input to FRS • Compliance review • In-kind review • Financial Reports • Supporting documentation • Disbursement of funds • Faculty and Dept Administrator training

5. RFS Staffing and RFS Projects • Over Expenditure Reports • Reports that will flag an account as overspent in comparison to project budget to date values • RFS to meet with College Administrators and ADR’s over summer months • Given the current timing and workload, this will be delayed until the fall. • Automate Indirect Costs • Calculate value of indirect costs (based on direct costs incurred) and automatically charge indirect costs to grants • Initial work has begun. Hopefully the ‘go live’ date will be sometime prior to December 2015.

6. RFS Staffing and RFS Projects • Tri-Agency Monitoring Review • Roles & Responsibilities Document • Memo to be sent to ADR’s during summer/fall 2015 • Audit Review for Pcard, Internal Stores, Internal Charges • RFS reviewing software to select transaction samples • Delegation of Authority Form • New Form to be created (based on Usask form) • Looking for a couple of Dept. Admins to join working group • New Database for Dept. Admins • Implement by end of 2015

7. RFS Staffing and RFS Projects • Account Clean Up • Close old accounts • Faculty no longer at UofG • Accounts with ‘NO’ transactions in last 12 months • Accounts past end date • Correct Header Information • Award Amount • End Date • Restrictions • You will see some follow up emails as we clean up the accounts • Expect to see some emails from Ghajan as early as this week (week of July 20th). We have broken the project into phases but our intention is to keep the number of emails to a minimum while closing as many accounts as possible. • We currently have approximately 3300 open research accounts with 1100 of those being GPR accounts. I think our range of active research awards should be around 2000-2500 and the number of GPR accounts should coincide with the 400-600 active researchers that we have at UofG. • We have approximately 1000+ accounts to be closed. • If you are aware of accounts within your department that should be closed, please let us know and we will be happy to close them.

8. RFS Staffing and RFS Projects • RFS Task List • Central Task list to capture due dates for: • Invoices • Financial Statements • Accounts Receivable & Invoicing System • Invoicing system that will no longer use 3 part form • Ability to track aged receivables

9. Reminders/Discussions • My Grants Tracker Training • If your Department would like a training session please follow up with Eric Hinse • It is best to arrange the session in a computer lab so faculty can login and follow along on screen

10. Reminders/Discussions • Graduate Student and Doctoral Student Stipends • Does your department/college follow established guidelines in regards to limits?

11. Discussions/Reminders Citizenship and Immigration Canada employer fee of $230 • Employers are now required to submit the job offer and other relevant information for the recruitment of a foreign national to Citizenship and Immigration Canada and pay an employer fee of $230. ELIGIBILITY STATUS OF THE EMPLOYER FEE: • If the foreign national is recruited to work exclusively on research for which Tri-Agency grant funds are provided the full cost of the employer fee of $230 will be eligible for reimbursement from the grant holder’s grant funds as an eligible recruitment cost per the Tri-Agency Financial Administration Guide. • If the foreign national is recruited for a variety of purposes one of which includes working on research for which Tri-Agency grant funds are provided the administering institution may apportion the cost of the employer fee to the grant holder’s grant funds based on the anticipated percentage of time the foreign national will spend working on the funded research of the grant holder. • If the foreign national is recruited for purposes unrelated to Tri-Agency funded research the employer fee is not eligible for reimbursement from grant holders’ grant funds.

12. Reminders/Discussions – Stipend Limits Physics Department • Minimum stipend for both MSc and PhD is as follows: • GTA $11,389.14 • GRA $12,000.00 • TOTAL $23,389.14 College of Biological Sciences • Domestic M.Sc. $21,000 minimum which includes GRA $15,306 and GTA $5,694.57Domestic Ph.D. $25,000 minimum which includes GRA $19,306 and GTA $5,694.57A new minimum International student stipend is being discussed at the College level. 

13. Reminders/Discussions – Stipend Limits Animal and Poultry Sciences Department • The minimum Ph.D. stipend will be $21,500 per year (for a max. of nine full-time semesters), effective September 2016, and increasing each year thereafter by 2% (to track inflation).The minimum M.Sc. (thesis) stipend will be $18,000 per year (for a max. of six full-time semesters), effective September 2016, and increasing each year thereafter by 2%.Minor scholarships ($5000 or under a year) and TA-ships will not be counted as part of the stipend: in other words, students winning these can add them onto their baseline minimum stipends (thus equivalent values will not be subtracted from the GRA).Major scholarships (>$5000 a year) in contrast can be counted as part of the stipend: in other words, students winning these may have equivalent values subtracted from their GRA, at their advisor’s discretion (so students applying for major awards, like OGS or NSERC, should first negotiate with their advisor so that both parties are clear what will happen to the GRA if the student is successful).Self-funded, domestic thesis students will no longer be accepted (as of Sept. 2016), unless they are either enrolled part-time (to give them time to work to fund themselves), or can prove financial support (e.g. a parental RESP). However, domestic students wishing to self-fund a full-time MSc may appeal to the Grad. Coordinator and Chair. for special consideration. 

14. Reminders/Discussions • NEW TOPIC – Can Retired Faculty hold a General Purpose Research (GPR) Account • NO … if the faculty member is retired, they NO longer have access to a GPR account. • GPR accounts are for current faculty, individuals with current ‘adjunct status’ or current ‘professor emeritus status’ • If you have accounts in your department that are connected to retired faculty and they DO NOT have adjunct or professor emeritus status then please do the following: • for GPR accounts, arrange for the balance of the GPR account to be transferred back to the department and advise RFS so we can close the account. • For non-GPR accounts, please flag the accounts to RFS and we will follow up wit you regarding next steps.

15. Reminders/Discussions • NEW TOPIC – What is the process for donations that come through AA&D and are ultimately used for Research? • If a donation is being made to the University and it is intended to be used for research, • AA&D will receive the money and send a tax receipt to the donor. • AA&D will then do some outreach to the researcher/administrative staff (may not be both) for some coding so they can transfer the funds • AA&D will do a journal entry to transfer funds • The rules for a GPR account still apply; If the donation is greater than $5K • A new account will need to be set up • An OR5 Form should be completed and sent to Office of Research Services (ORS) • A budget should be provided to ORS • A copy of the gift agreement (or relevant documentation) should be provided to ORS • I will follow up with AA&D and at a minimum, ask that they include communication with the Department Administrator regarding the transfer of funds and ensuring that values greater than $5K are not being buried in an account.

16. Case Study #1 Dr. Clarkson is a Tier I CRC at University of Guelph. The CRC award amount is $200,000 per year for 7 years and the grant period is: 01-Jul-2013 to 30-Jun-2020. The annual budget of the CRC grant is as follow: Dr. Clarkson’s annual salary is $130,000 as of 30-Jun-2014. His salary increase to $140,000 effective July 01, 2014 but because the UGFA agreement was not reached until November 01, 2014, the increase in salary ($4,882 incl. benefits) plus the lump sum payment of $5,000 (incl. benefits) was paid retroactively on November 20, 2014 payroll. The current balances in Dr. Clarkson’s CRC grants are: • 460998 $3,967 deficit • 460999 $89,000 deficit • How does the retroactive pay on November 20, 2014 affect Dr. Clarkson’s CRC grant account (#460998) and the department/college account? Is there any other issue/s you see in this case? What action would you take?

17. Case Study #1 (Answer key) Salary and Benefit cost split between CRC grant and Dept. account (Distribution Change) • When salary and/or the benefit rate increase, budget office changes the distribution percentage (decreasing CRC percentage) so that the amount being charged to CRC grant (in this case $120,000) remains constant. • However, currently we do not have a system in place so that the distribution can be changed on the same day as the salary and/or benefit increase. Therefore, salary/benefit increases are charged using old distribution percentage for some days before the correct percentages are entered in Budget System.

18. Case Study #1 (Answer key) Calculation of deficit in CRC Salary & Admin account Actual: Base salary increase and lump sum payment were charged using old distribution (74.17% to CRC and 25.83% to department) Correct: Base salary increase and lump sum payment should have been charged using new distribution (68.87% to CRC and 31.13% to department)

19. CFI Infrastructure Scenarios Background • Researcher A has received confirmation from CFI and MRI that their project has been approved. The infrastructure to be purchased are 2 pieces of equipment: 1. an electron microscope and 2. a spectrometer. • The award finalization process has been completed and CFI has sent the initial funding. The researcher is now ready to proceed with the purchase of the infrastructure. Given the following scenarios what instructions would you give to the researcher.

20. Scenario 1 • Both items have been purchased and there has been substantial savings in terms of cash and in kind.

21. Scenario 1 (answer) • In cases where there has been savings in the purchase of the infrastructure the researcher would be able to use the savings to purchase additional infrastructure for the project. • Contact Research Financial Services (RFS), either Linda Hoffman or Lee Bennard, and request a copy of a “Change Request Form” • The researcher will be required to explain why there has been savings, what the researcher would like to purchase, a copy of the quote(s) for the item(s) to be purchased, its function and how this item(s) will benefit the research. • The additional purchases are not to be made until approval given.

22. Scenario 2 • One of the items, the electron microscope, has had a large increase in the total cost of the item. Researcher A has told you that he/she does not want to increase the University of Guelph cash contribution as the researcher is funding that through his/her GPA account. In order to do this the researcher has stated the spectrometer will not be purchased.

23. Scenario 2 (answer) • The option not to purchase a piece of infrastructure in order to maintain the total cost of the project is not acceptable to CFI. • At application stage the researcher specified the infrastructure that would be needed in order to perform the research. This was peer reviewed at CFI and the approval for the project was given based on the project idea and infrastructure justified to complete the project. • For CFI this would be considered a “negative impact” and CFI would be concerned the research would not be completed as originally described at application. Although it has not happened CFI could require that the funding be returned to them and the project be cancelled.

24. Scenario 3 • Due to the time lag from application to the actual purchase of the infrastructure the items to be purchased have had significant changes in functionality. The total cost of the items has remained consistent.

25. Scenario 3 (answer) A change in functionality to the infrastructure is normally not an issue with CFI. In most cases improvements to scientific equipment allow the infrastructure that is being purchased to be able to do more things, at a quicker pace and attain better research results. The area of concern is if the functionality of the item being purchased has somehow decreased. This would then require the researcher to provide CFI with details as to how the researcher plans to amend the research in order to compensate for the loss of functionality of the particular infrastructure. Purchase of infrastructure of a lesser model (less capabilities) is considered to have a “negative impact” on the research. Reducing the cost of an item and/or acquiring savings in this manner is forbidden.

26. Scenario 4 • Due to the time lag from application to the actual purchase of the infrastructure the vendors specified at the application stage are no longer in business or not the best choice. The infrastructure that is to be purchased needs to be acquired from different vendors who have similar but not exactly the same infrastructure.

27. Scenario 4 (answer) • Change in vendors does not require approval from CFI. CFI’s position is that as long as the infrastructure being purchased follows the purchasing policy of the institution and that the items being purchased have been approved by CFI changes in vendors are acceptable.

28. CFI Case Study Follow Up • Research Financial Services will ensure that the presentations and email communication with faculty stress the point that although a piece of equipment has been approved on a CFI budget, it is still subject to all of the University procurement practices … 3 quotes for purchases greater than $10K is still required.

29. Case Study #3 • A researcher has just given you a Prize/Gift Certificate log that he has obtained from a friend at another institution. He has listed some out of pocket expenses he has incurred over the last few months and would like you to prepare his expense claim for reimbursement. • The researcher has indicated that he would like to charge the expenses to his NSERC Discovery grant. • Please review the document and flag any issues/concerns that you may have.

30. Case Study #3 – Discussion Points • Per TAFAG, ‘gifts’ are an ineligible expenditure • Box of chocolates and Bottle of Wine are ineligible • Why are we giving $550 cash • Understand reason for giving cash • CRA implications • Per TAFAG, ‘alcohol’ is an ineligible expenditure • LCBO gift cards are ineligible

31. Case Study #3 – Discussion Points • Per TAFAG, research participants can receive a nominal amount • Why are you giving $100 gift cards x 5 • $500 to one individual has CRA implications • If the gift cards are in place of cash because the individual is using them to cover meal costs while working on research project then this is acceptable but require receipts of each meal to know what the gift cards were spent on

32. Next Session • Suggested Topics • Tri-Agency object codes subject to review by RFS • Tri-Agency object codes deemed ineligible • … please provide more!!! • Suggested Case studies • Please provide more!!! • Next Session Date • Sometime in October