1 / 18

Research Support Council

Research Support Council. May, 2001. Welcome and Opening Remarks. Introduction of new faces Debra Paxton, Regulatory Compliance Contracts and Grants new faces Identification of the client Your contribution to institutional mission Identify and facilitate client’s needs

kbardwell
Download Presentation

Research Support Council

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Research Support Council May, 2001

  2. Welcome and Opening Remarks • Introduction of new faces • Debra Paxton, Regulatory Compliance • Contracts and Grants new faces • Identification of the client • Your contribution to institutional mission • Identify and facilitate client’s needs • Where are we headed?

  3. Where are we headed? • Consolidate information • Web site • Intranet development • Training • Pre and non-fiscal post award • Cost Estimating • Regulatory Compliance • Mapping the process • Subcontracting/Contracting

  4. Where are we headed? • Training, continued • Post-award • CAS Compliance • Transaction management • Digitize • Reduce Burden • OP working towards this goal • Identify procedures that are cumbersome or unnecessary

  5. Where are we headed? • Procedure Evaluation • Elimination of abstract and IPF review • Consider elimination of standard assurances (Drug Free) • PCL • A guide, not a requirement • Use to communicate non-standard processing • Fringe Benefits (CnG and SPARCS efforts) • MOA delegation threshold

  6. Fringe Benefit Update

  7. Fringe Benefit Flexibility • Use standard rates if possible • If utilization of standard rates results in significant over or under budgeting, then apply more precise method...

  8. Precise Fringe Calculation

  9. Graduate Students Do Not Change

  10. MOA Update • $25,000 delegated threshold • 15% F&A applied to TDC base • No deviation from standard MOA format • Effective date of 15% overhead is May 4th. • Anything signed prior to may 4th carries 9.5%. • Anything signed on or after may 4th carries 15%. • Irrespective of budget, budget should not go to agency anyway.

  11. State Agency F&A Negotiations • Statutory Limitation (not) • In lieu, written guidance from agency head • If no guidance • Find out if there is guidance • Find out contact information • Work with/through Matt Ronning

  12. State Agency F&A Negotiations • Objectives in this process • Go for Full • If no, try off campus rate • If no, • 15% floor • TDC base • Memoranda > 8 years should be re-visited. • Memoranda from one agency not good for another

  13. F&A and other Procedure Establishment - Internal • Refer to the SPARCS web site

  14. Procedures, also Procedures that are necessary for public viewing.

  15. Roles and Responsibilities • Let’s talk signatures • Departmental/Center (unless,,,,) • Proposal is meritorious and meets objectives of department. • Department feels the proposal will meet the objectives of the college • Department can control and manage the project compliant with CAS and other Regulatory matters from a transaction basis • Space, time and other department-level commitments are reasonable and accomodated

  16. Signatures • College • Cost Estimate compliant with institutional guidance and sponsor requirements • Departmental commitments reviewed, college commitments approved • Departmental assertions of control and “manageability” are reasonable • Collegiate mission accommodated or expansion acceptable • Space, time, etc. considered and congruent with performance objectives of those involved… (may be handled at departmental level)

  17. Signatures • SPARCS • Institutional process of review followed and a prudent, independent observer would consider submission compliant • Terms and conditions associated with submission reviewed and negotiated. • Commitments at institutional level have been coordinated/approved - space, new programs, etc. • Commitment of the institution to this program will likely lead to a successful negotiation of an agreement...

More Related