1 / 28

Leslie J. Wright

This presentation highlights the review conducted by the FHWA National Review Team on the SPR Subpart B Research Program. It includes key observations, recommendations, and actions taken by TFHRC. The Supercircular highlights are also discussed.

ostrowski
Download Presentation

Leslie J. Wright

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. SPR Subpart B Research Program:Program ReviewConducted By: FHWA National Review TeamDate: Monday, July 27Time: 1:15 – 2:30 pmRAC 2015 Meeting Portland, OR Leslie J. Wright Office of Research, Development, and Technology (RD&T)Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center (TFHRC)McLean, VA

  2. Presentation Highlights • SP&R Sub-part B Review • Review Objectives • Review Team Key Observations • Review Team Recommendations • TFHRC Actions • Supercircular Highlights

  3. Program Review Basics? • Why: Determine how we can better assist Divisions in providing program management and oversight • Six States selected for site visits • Target Audience: Corporate R&T, FHWA Division RC and State DOT research staff • Conducted July/August 2014

  4. Program Review Objectives • To determine • How Divisions conduct their periodic reviews • What is necessary for successful stewardship and oversight • What are the gaps • Best practices and lessons learned • To determine • How research program integration (e.g. EDC and SHRP2) occurs • How to harmonize the FHWA R&T Agenda and the State DOT's research program.

  5. Key Observations • No Division or State had complete awareness of what constituted full compliance with the regulations • Variety of reasons for this lack of awareness • years of experience • competing collateral duties • lack of definitive guidance • viewing Research as a low-threat risk based on dollar value alone

  6. Key Observations continued… • Two State DOTs were able to describe successes in terms of implementation and quantifiable benefits of research conducted • They placed strong emphasis on implementation throughout the research cycle • from problem identification through incorporation of results into State DOT plans, specifications, and processes. • Four State DOTs still have difficulty in linking completion of research projects and market readiness

  7. Key Observations continued… • 1 State DOT fully implemented a STIC • Integrated its research program, SHRP2 and EDC into one single program. • 1 State DOT is in the early stages of integration.

  8. Key Observations continued… • FHWA R&T Agenda Marketing efforts not yet succeeded. Need a better • Understanding of linkage between Agenda and their State’s transportation research needs. • Understanding of how they can contribute to strengthening this linkage.

  9. Review Team Recommendations/TFHRC Actions • (1) Develop tools to assist Division RC with stewardship and oversight • Actions: • Research 101 Course • Regulatory Checklist • FHWA Research Coordinators SharePoint Site • Comprehensive FHWA Research Coordinators Contacts List • Knowledge sharing webinars for FHWA Division RCs • Guidance: Use of FHWA State Planning and Research Funds for Reimbursement of Education and Tuition Expenses

  10. Review Team Recommendations/TFHRC Actions • (2) Recommendation: Provide guidance to encourage the use of a STIC and to assist States with program integration • Actions: • Conduct a webinar that highlights states with a fully implemented STIC and integrated research program, SHRP2, and EDC • Develop Introduction to SPR Research Coordinator’s Package for new SPR Research Coordinators • Research 101 a requirement for all Division R&T Coordinators

  11. Review Team Recommendations/TFHRC Actions • (3) Increase transparency of FHWA’s national research efforts (R&T Agenda) • Actions: • FHWA R&T Agenda workgroup to improve documentation of research projects • R&T Leadership Team to review FHWA office R&T agenda objectives and update as needed • Conduct analysis of division “top 3 Challenges” and report to R&T leadership • Continuous enhancement of the Agenda website • one-FHWA R&T program theme

  12. Thank You! Leslie Wright International/Domestic Partnerships Program Manager leslie.wright@dot.gov 202-493-3460

  13. 2 CFR 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards Supercircular Highlights

  14. 2 CFR Part 200 “Supercircular” Particulars Streamlines the language from eight OMB circulars to one consolidated set of guidance. The following have been combined in this document: • A-21Cost Principles for Educational Institutions • A-87Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments • A-89Federal Domestic Assistance Program Information • A-102Awards and Cooperative Agreements with State and Local Governments • A-110Uniform Administrative Requirements for Awards and Other Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and other Non-Profit Organizations • A-122Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations • A-133Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-Profit Organizations • A-50Audit Follow-Up, (as related to Single Audits)

  15. 2 CFR Part 200 “Supercircular” Particulars continued… • Focuses Federal Resources on Improving Performance and Outcomes • Ensures Integrity of Federal Funds with Stakeholders • Effective December 26, 2014 • Cancels 49 CFR Parts 18 and 19 • Application and Policy Implementation 2 CFR 200- Introduction

  16. Applicability of the “Supercircular” • New Awards authorized on or after Dec 26, 2014 • Project Modifications made on or after Dec 26, 2014 • Example 1: Project ABC1234 is a new project submitted by the State for authorization on Dec 26, 2014 and approved by the FHWA on Dec 27 – Supercircular Applies • Example 2: Project DEF5678 is an existing project authorized on Jul 11, 2012 and the project is not closed – Supercircular Doesn’t Apply • Example 3: On Dec 26, 2014 or later a modification to project DEF5678 is submitted for authorization to make a significant change to the scope of the project – Modify terms, Supercircular Applies

  17. Applicability of the “Supercircular” • Audit Requirements – apply to audits of non-Federal entity fiscal years beginning on or after Dec 26, 2014 • Example 1: State or Sub-recipient fiscal year beginning Jul 1, 2014 and ending Jun 30, 2015 – Supercircular audit requirements do not apply • Example 2: State or Sub-recipient fiscal year beginning Jan 1, 2015 and ending Dec 30, 2015 – Supercircular audit requirements apply • Example 3: State or Sub-recipient fiscal year beginning Jul 1, 2015 and ending Jun 30, 2016 - Supercircular audit requirements apply

  18. 2 CFR 200 Subparts and Appendices • Acronyms and Definitions • General Provisions • Pre-Award Requirements and Contents of Federal Awards • Post-Award Requirements • Cost Principles • Audit Requirements • Appendix VII – States and Local Government and Indian Tribe Indirect Cost Proposals 2 CFR 200- Subparts A-F, VII

  19. Highlights • Subpart A – Acronyms and Definitions §200.0-.99 • Period of Performance • Project Start and End Date • mandates a project agreement start and end date • FMIS • FMIS 4 does not have an end date data field but FMIS 5 will include this data field. • FMIS 4: end date included in State Remarks field Subpart A §200.0-200.99

  20. Highlights • Subpart B- General Provisions §200.100-.113 • Purpose and Application of the Uniform Guidance • Implementation and Effective Date - 12/26/2014 • Accountability Through New Requirements • Conflict of Interest (23 CFR 1.33) • Mandatory Disclosures of Fraud, Bribery, or Gratuity Violations Subpart B §200.100-200.113

  21. Highlights • Subpart C- Pre-Award Requirements §200.200-.211 • This section seeks to increase competition for Federal funds, • Improve transparency • Make more information available to interested parties. Subpart C §200.200-200.211

  22. Highlights • Subpart D- Post Award Requirements §200.300-.345 • Administrative Requirements: Once federal award has been made to non-Federal entity • Performance Measurement §200.301 • Greater Focus on Internal Controls §200.303 • Payments §200.305 • Cost Sharing or Matching §200.306 • Period of Performance §200.309 • Greater Responsibilities for Sub-recipient Monitoring §200.331 • Project Closeout §200.343 thru §200.345 Subpart D §200.300-200.345

  23. Highlights • Subpart E- Cost Principles §200.400-.475 • Generally Consistent with OMB A-87 or 2 CFR 225 • Indirect Costs related changes • Negotiated Rates: one-time extension of up to 4 years • Use ICAP – If the state or local government receives more than $35 million in Federal funds • Use de minimus rate of 10% - If a non-Federal entity receives $35 million or less in total Federal awards (could be applied to sub-recipients such as LPAs) • Narrative Cost Allocation Methods - Use of Appendix VII • FHWA testing financial management improvement initiatives Subpart E §200.400-200.475

  24. Highlights • Subpart F-Audit Requirements §200.500-.521 • Generally Consistent with OMB A-133 • Applicable to audits of non-Federal entity fiscal years beginning on or after Dec 26, 2014 • Increased Threshold for Single Audits • Increased from $500,000 to $750,000 • Updated Single Audit Compliance Supplement Subpart F §200.500-200.521

  25. Implementation • Division and Program Offices having conversations with State DOT counterparts regarding • Coordination • Communication (Internal and External) • Training Development and Updates • Regulations, Policy, and Guidance Updates 2 CFR 200- Implementation

  26. Resources • 2CFR200 URL • http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title02/2cfr200_main_02.tpl • Council on Financial Assistance Reform (COFAR) • https://cfo.gov/cofar/ • Crosswalks to/from previous guidance and the new Supercircular • Q&A document • FHWA Policy and Guidance Center • http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pgc/ • 2 CFR 200 Implementation Guidance 2 CFR 200- Resources

  27. Follow-up Questions or Assistance:2 CFR 200 • First Stop: • FHWA Division Office 2 CFR 200- Contacts

  28. Thank You! Leslie Wright International/Domestic Partnerships Program Manager leslie.wright@dot.gov 202-493-3460

More Related