The Office of Management and Budget has posted the interim joint final rule implementing the Uniform Guidance in the December 19, 2014 Federal Register.
The Federal Register notice, Federal Awarding Agency Regulatory Implementation of Office of Management and Budget’s Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, is effective for new awards and for selected funding increments issued on or after December 26, 2014. The notice includes introductory comments, a listing of the technical corrections/amendments, and a posting of each agency’s implementation plan. The Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200) will be updated to reflect the technical corrections/amendments.
The Council on Financial Assistance Reform (COFAR) has updated their site with information on the notice, including a Uniform Guidance Crosswalk for Federal Agency Exceptions and Additions.
See the Sponsored Projects Office OMB Uniform Guidance page for more information.
December 9, 2014 Research Advocate: New UC Berkeley Campus Guide to OMB Uniform Guidance
January 2, 2014 Research Advocate: OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
December 19, 2014
December 17, 2014
NSF Revises Grants.gov Application Guide
The National Science Foundation has published a revised version of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide, effective for applications submitted or due to NSF on or after December 26, 2014.
NSF has updated the Guide to align with changes to the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that implements the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200). NSF includes a summary of the significant changes and clarifications on pages two and three of the revised Guide.
NSF has updated the Guide to align with changes to the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that implements the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200). NSF includes a summary of the significant changes and clarifications on pages two and three of the revised Guide.
NIH Simplifies Policy for Late Applications
The National Institutes of Health has simplified the NIH policy for late application submission. Effective for applications submitted for due dates on or after January 25, 2015, there is a two-week window of consideration after the application due date, during which time NIH might consider accepting a late application.
NIH provides more details in the December 17 NIH Guide Notice, Simplifying the NIH Policy for Late Application Submission (NOT-OD-15-039). The guidance includes examples of reasons why late applications might be or will not be accepted.
NIH provides more details in the December 17 NIH Guide Notice, Simplifying the NIH Policy for Late Application Submission (NOT-OD-15-039). The guidance includes examples of reasons why late applications might be or will not be accepted.
December 09, 2014
New UC Berkeley Campus Guide to OMB Uniform Guidance
The White House Office of Management and Budget issued guidance effective as of December 26, 2014 designed to streamline and simplify the policy framework for grants and other types of agreements issued by the federal government. This new “Uniform Guidance” combines and replaces eight federal circulars and will govern all of UC Berkeley’s future federal contract and grant activities.
The UC Berkeley Campus Guide to OMB Uniform Guidance highlights selected items of the Uniform Guidance that will impact all federal proposals submitted by and new awards made to the University on or after December 26, 2014. Please pay particular attention to new information on allowable costs and activities that now require prior federal agency approval.
Federal proposals being submitted now are subject to these new regulations. Awards issued after December 26, 2014 also will be subject to these new requirements. Federal agencies also have the option of applying the Uniform Guidance to existing awards when issuing funding increments on or after December 26, 2014. However, the federal sponsor chooses not to apply the Uniform Guidance at that time, the existing award will continue to be administered under the original federal award’s terms and conditions.
Revisions and updates to this guide and to the OMB Uniform Guidance page will be made after more specific information on how the Uniform Guidance will be implemented by each of the federal agencies is published. We anticipate receiving this information on or after December 26, 2014.
January 2, 2014 Research Advocate: OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
The UC Berkeley Campus Guide to OMB Uniform Guidance highlights selected items of the Uniform Guidance that will impact all federal proposals submitted by and new awards made to the University on or after December 26, 2014. Please pay particular attention to new information on allowable costs and activities that now require prior federal agency approval.
Federal proposals being submitted now are subject to these new regulations. Awards issued after December 26, 2014 also will be subject to these new requirements. Federal agencies also have the option of applying the Uniform Guidance to existing awards when issuing funding increments on or after December 26, 2014. However, the federal sponsor chooses not to apply the Uniform Guidance at that time, the existing award will continue to be administered under the original federal award’s terms and conditions.
Revisions and updates to this guide and to the OMB Uniform Guidance page will be made after more specific information on how the Uniform Guidance will be implemented by each of the federal agencies is published. We anticipate receiving this information on or after December 26, 2014.
January 2, 2014 Research Advocate: OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
December 05, 2014
NIH Pushes Back Requirement Date for New Biosketch Format
The National Institutes of Health has published Update: New Biographical Sketch Format Required for NIH and AHRQ Grant Applications Submitted for Due Dates on or After May 25, 2015 (NOT-OD-15-032). The new notice supercedes NOT-OD-15-024 that required the new biosketch format for January 25, 2015 applications.
NIH and AHRQ have changed the requirement date from January 25 to May 25, 2015, to provide some latitude for applicants who have already been compiling biosketches for large grant applications with deadlines in early in 2015.
NIH and AHRQ encourage applicants to use the new biosketch format for all grant and cooperative agreement applications submitted before May 25, and will require use of the new format for applications submitted for due dates on or after May 25, 2015.
November 26, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH and AHRQ Requiring New Biographical Sketch Format
NIH and AHRQ have changed the requirement date from January 25 to May 25, 2015, to provide some latitude for applicants who have already been compiling biosketches for large grant applications with deadlines in early in 2015.
NIH and AHRQ encourage applicants to use the new biosketch format for all grant and cooperative agreement applications submitted before May 25, and will require use of the new format for applications submitted for due dates on or after May 25, 2015.
November 26, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH and AHRQ Requiring New Biographical Sketch Format
December 04, 2014
NIH Changes Guidance on Marking Changes in Resubmission Applications
The National Institutes of Health issued NIH Modification to Guidance on Marking Changes in Resubmission Applications (NOT-OD-15-030). The change is effective immediately.
The December 4, 2014 NIH Guide Notice NOT-OD-15-030 states:
“NIH has removed the requirement to identify ‘substantial scientific changes’ in the text of a Resubmission application by ‘bracketing, indenting, or change of typography’.
Effective immediately, it is sufficient to outline the changes made to the Resubmission application in the Introduction attachment. The Introduction must include a summary of substantial additions, deletions, and changes to the application. It must also include a response to weaknesses raised in the Summary Statement. The page limit for the Introduction may not exceed one page unless indicated otherwise in the Table of Page Limits.”
The December 4, 2014 NIH Guide Notice NOT-OD-15-030 states:
“NIH has removed the requirement to identify ‘substantial scientific changes’ in the text of a Resubmission application by ‘bracketing, indenting, or change of typography’.
Effective immediately, it is sufficient to outline the changes made to the Resubmission application in the Introduction attachment. The Introduction must include a summary of substantial additions, deletions, and changes to the application. It must also include a response to weaknesses raised in the Summary Statement. The page limit for the Introduction may not exceed one page unless indicated otherwise in the Table of Page Limits.”
November 26, 2014
NIH and AHRQ Requiring New Biographical Sketch Format
The National Institutes of Health and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality will require use of a new biosketch format in applications for research grants submitted for due dates on or after January 25, 2015. Until then, applicants can choose to use either the old or new biosketch format.
The November 26, 2014 NIH Guide Notice NOT-OD-15-024 states:
“The revised forms and instructions are now available on the SF 424 (R&R) Forms and Applications page. The new format extends the page limit from four to five pages, and allows researchers to describe up to five of their most significant contributions to science, along with the historical background that framed their research. Investigators can outline the central findings of prior work and the influence of those findings on the investigator’s field. Investigators involved in Team Science are provided the opportunity to describe their specific role(s) in the work. Each description can be accompanied by a listing of up to four relevant peer-reviewed publications or other non-publication research products, including audio or video products; patents; data and research materials; databases; educational aids or curricula; instruments or equipment; models; protocols; and software or netware that are relevant to the described contribution. In addition to the descriptions of specific contributions and documentation, researchers will be allowed to include a link to a full list of their published work as found in a publicly available digital database such as MyBibliography or SciENcv.”
For more information see New Biographical Sketch Format Required for NIH and AHRQ Grant Applications Submitted for Due Dates on or After January 25, 2015 (NOT-OD-15-024) and the NIH Office of Extramural Research blog post, Implementing the Modified NIH Biosketch Format.
The November 26, 2014 NIH Guide Notice NOT-OD-15-024 states:
“The revised forms and instructions are now available on the SF 424 (R&R) Forms and Applications page. The new format extends the page limit from four to five pages, and allows researchers to describe up to five of their most significant contributions to science, along with the historical background that framed their research. Investigators can outline the central findings of prior work and the influence of those findings on the investigator’s field. Investigators involved in Team Science are provided the opportunity to describe their specific role(s) in the work. Each description can be accompanied by a listing of up to four relevant peer-reviewed publications or other non-publication research products, including audio or video products; patents; data and research materials; databases; educational aids or curricula; instruments or equipment; models; protocols; and software or netware that are relevant to the described contribution. In addition to the descriptions of specific contributions and documentation, researchers will be allowed to include a link to a full list of their published work as found in a publicly available digital database such as MyBibliography or SciENcv.”
For more information see New Biographical Sketch Format Required for NIH and AHRQ Grant Applications Submitted for Due Dates on or After January 25, 2015 (NOT-OD-15-024) and the NIH Office of Extramural Research blog post, Implementing the Modified NIH Biosketch Format.
November 20, 2014
NSF Issues Revised PAPPG
The National Science Foundation Policy Office in the Division of Institution and Award Support has announced that the revised version of the Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG), (NSF 15-1) has been issued. The revision includes a summary of Significant Changes and Clarifications to the PAPPG.
The NSF announcement states the following:
The PAPPG has been revised to implement 2 CFR § 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). The Uniform Guidance incorporates language from eight existing Office of Management and Budget (OMB) circulars into one consolidated set of guidance in the Code of Federal Regulations. The PAPPG also has been revised to incorporate other significant changes and clarifications unrelated to the Uniform Guidance implementation.
The PAPPG is comprised of documents relating to the Foundation's proposal and award process and consists of the:
(a) Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) for guidance on the preparation and submission of proposals to NSF; and
(b) Award & Administration Guide (AAG) to guide, manage, and monitor the award and administration of grants and cooperative agreements made by the Foundation.
As mandated by OMB, the new PAPPG will be effective December 26, 2014. In addition to the significant changes to implement the Uniform Guidance, other important revisions include:
While this version of the PAPPG becomes effective on December 26, 2014, in the interim, the guidelines contained in the current PAPPG (NSF 14-1) continue to apply. We will ensure that the current version of the PAPPG remains on the NSF website, with a notation to proposers that specifies when the new PAPPG (including a link to the new Guide) will become effective.
The NSF announcement states the following:
The PAPPG has been revised to implement 2 CFR § 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). The Uniform Guidance incorporates language from eight existing Office of Management and Budget (OMB) circulars into one consolidated set of guidance in the Code of Federal Regulations. The PAPPG also has been revised to incorporate other significant changes and clarifications unrelated to the Uniform Guidance implementation.
The PAPPG is comprised of documents relating to the Foundation's proposal and award process and consists of the:
(a) Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) for guidance on the preparation and submission of proposals to NSF; and
(b) Award & Administration Guide (AAG) to guide, manage, and monitor the award and administration of grants and cooperative agreements made by the Foundation.
As mandated by OMB, the new PAPPG will be effective December 26, 2014. In addition to the significant changes to implement the Uniform Guidance, other important revisions include:
- Acknowledgement of the implementation of NSF’s new financial system (iTRAK);
- Addition of an NSF electronic capabilities modernization status matrix to assist the community as NSF transitions our electronic capabilities to Research.gov;
- Additional compliance checking regarding the type of proposal mechanism used;
- Expansion of the budget justification section to reflect that each subaward must include a separate budget justification of no more than three pages;
- New coverage on the Ideas Lab funding mechanism;
- Description of new prior approval requirements; and
- Numerous clarifications throughout the document.
While this version of the PAPPG becomes effective on December 26, 2014, in the interim, the guidelines contained in the current PAPPG (NSF 14-1) continue to apply. We will ensure that the current version of the PAPPG remains on the NSF website, with a notation to proposers that specifies when the new PAPPG (including a link to the new Guide) will become effective.
October 29, 2014
RAC Offices to Close During the Annual Campus Winter Break
The Office for Animal Care and Use, the Conflict of Interest Committee Office, the Office for the Protection of Human Subjects, the Sponsored Projects Office, and the Research Administration and Compliance Office will be closed during the campus energy curtailment beginning at 12 noon on Friday, December 19, 2014 until Monday, January 5, 2015. Offices will reopen on Monday, January 5, 2015. (Please note that this schedule has been revised since originally posted.)
SPO Proposal Submission
SPO will process proposals due in December 2014 and January 2015 according to the VCR’s five-day proposal submission policy with the following exceptions:
*Note: Proposals submitted to SPO with a draft technical section on or before the five business day deadline will be considered “on time” if the proposal is complete in all other respects.
Principal Investigators also are encouraged to inform their SPO Contract and Grant Officer (CGO) if they will be submitting a proposal with a due date just prior to, during, or just after the curtailment period. This will give SPO and the PI an opportunity to discuss the best way to handle the proposal to make sure it is submitted in a timely manner.
COI Disclosure Submission
In order to be on the agenda for any meeting, complete disclosure packets must be received no later than 10 working days prior to the date of the meeting.
Please note that all protocols and protocol revisions must be submitted via email to acuc@berkeley.edu by 5 pm on the deadline date. If you wish to make changes to an approved protocol, you must first contact the Office for Animal Care and Use (OACU) to obtain a copy of the current approved version of your protocol. Failure to do so may result in your protocol being returned to you.
Important: if your study is “greater than minimal risk” needing full board review and the approval will expire before January 23, 2015, you must submit your renewal application in time for review at a December 2014 CPHS meeting.
SPO Proposal Submission
SPO will process proposals due in December 2014 and January 2015 according to the VCR’s five-day proposal submission policy with the following exceptions:
| Deadlines | Due to SPO* |
|---|---|
| From Monday, December 22, 2014 through (and including) Friday, January 2, 2015 | 8 am on Monday, December 15, 2014 |
| Monday, January 5, 2015 | 8 am on Tuesday, December 16, 2014 |
| Tuesday, January 6, 2015 | 8 am on Wednesday, December 17, 2014 |
| Wednesday and Thursday, January 7 and 8, 2015 | noon on Thursday, December 18, 2014 |
| Friday, January 9, 2015 | 8 am on Monday, January 5, 2015 |
*Note: Proposals submitted to SPO with a draft technical section on or before the five business day deadline will be considered “on time” if the proposal is complete in all other respects.
Principal Investigators also are encouraged to inform their SPO Contract and Grant Officer (CGO) if they will be submitting a proposal with a due date just prior to, during, or just after the curtailment period. This will give SPO and the PI an opportunity to discuss the best way to handle the proposal to make sure it is submitted in a timely manner.
COI Disclosure Submission
In order to be on the agenda for any meeting, complete disclosure packets must be received no later than 10 working days prior to the date of the meeting.
- The deadline for submission for the December 11, 2014 meeting is November 25, 2014.
Please note that all protocols and protocol revisions must be submitted via email to acuc@berkeley.edu by 5 pm on the deadline date. If you wish to make changes to an approved protocol, you must first contact the Office for Animal Care and Use (OACU) to obtain a copy of the current approved version of your protocol. Failure to do so may result in your protocol being returned to you.
- The deadline for full committee review of protocol submissions for the January 21, 2015 meeting is Monday, November 17, 2014.
- Likewise, the deadline for protocol submission for the February 11, 2015 meeting is noon on Friday, December 19, 2014.
Important: if your study is “greater than minimal risk” needing full board review and the approval will expire before January 23, 2015, you must submit your renewal application in time for review at a December 2014 CPHS meeting.
- There is no CPHS-1 meeting in December 2014.
- The deadline for protocol submission for the December 12, 2014 CPHS-2 meeting is Monday, November 10, 2014.
- There is no CPHS-1 meeting in January 2015.
- The deadline for protocol submission for the January 23, 2015 CPHS-2 meeting is Monday, December 15, 2014.
- The deadline for protocol submission for the February 6, 2015 CPHS-1 meeting is Monday, January 5, 2015.
October 27, 2014
NIH Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) Guidance
As of October 17, 2014, the National Institutes of Health began requiring grantees to submit all type 5 progress reports (non-competing continuation applications) using the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) module in eRA Commons. See NIH Guide Notice NOT-OD-15-014.
Note: For SNAP awards, UC Berkeley PIs may submit the RPPR report directly to NIH if they have been delegated submission authority by SPO.
Individual Development Plans (IDPs)
All NIH progress reports (RPPRs) submitted after October 1, 2014 must include in Section D - List of Participants - a brief description of how and whether individual development plans (IDPs) are used to identify and promote the career goals of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers associated with the award. Actual IDPs should not be included. (For more information, see NIH Guide Notice NOT-OD-14-113.)
The following statement is provided to assist Berkeley PIs respond to Section D of the RPPR:
“Berkeley graduate students and postdocs are encouraged to utilize IDPs to set academic and career goals and facilitate conversations with their mentor(s). Similarly, Berkeley faculty mentors are encouraged to promote the use of IDPs among their trainees. Over the next few months, Berkeley will establish a working group to move towards implementing more targeted information and training sessions to help facilitate the use of IDPs.”
General suggestions and resources for IDPs can be found on the SPO NIH Proposals and Awards at Berkeley page under Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR).
October 16, 2014 Research Advocate: Reminder: NIH Requires RPPR for All Type 5 Progress Reports
September 24, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH Progress Reports Submitted after October 1, 2014: Section on Individual Development Plans
August 7, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH to Require Individual Development Plan Description in Progress Reports
Note: For SNAP awards, UC Berkeley PIs may submit the RPPR report directly to NIH if they have been delegated submission authority by SPO.
Individual Development Plans (IDPs)
All NIH progress reports (RPPRs) submitted after October 1, 2014 must include in Section D - List of Participants - a brief description of how and whether individual development plans (IDPs) are used to identify and promote the career goals of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers associated with the award. Actual IDPs should not be included. (For more information, see NIH Guide Notice NOT-OD-14-113.)
The following statement is provided to assist Berkeley PIs respond to Section D of the RPPR:
“Berkeley graduate students and postdocs are encouraged to utilize IDPs to set academic and career goals and facilitate conversations with their mentor(s). Similarly, Berkeley faculty mentors are encouraged to promote the use of IDPs among their trainees. Over the next few months, Berkeley will establish a working group to move towards implementing more targeted information and training sessions to help facilitate the use of IDPs.”
General suggestions and resources for IDPs can be found on the SPO NIH Proposals and Awards at Berkeley page under Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR).
October 16, 2014 Research Advocate: Reminder: NIH Requires RPPR for All Type 5 Progress Reports
September 24, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH Progress Reports Submitted after October 1, 2014: Section on Individual Development Plans
August 7, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH to Require Individual Development Plan Description in Progress Reports
October 16, 2014
NIH Notice for PIs Responding to the West Africa Ebola Outbreak
The National Institutes of Health has published a Notice of Special Accommodations for Submission and Reporting Requirements for Program Directors/Principal Investigators Responding to the West Africa Ebola Outbreak (NOT-OD-15-010).
This notice states:
“In appreciation of the humanitarian assistance being provided by Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PDs/PIs) who travel to West Africa to participate in the Ebola outbreak response and other Ebola-related public health emergencies, NIH is making an accommodation to provide additional time for application submission and grant related reporting for these investigators.”
This accommodation will be extended to individuals who meet all of these conditions:
Also NIH understands that some progress report delays due to Ebola response activities are unavoidable. Therefore, if researchers are unable to complete progress reports before the scheduled due date, they should promptly contact the Sponsored Projects Office to initiate discussion with the NIH contacts listed on the Notice of Award.
This notice states:
“In appreciation of the humanitarian assistance being provided by Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PDs/PIs) who travel to West Africa to participate in the Ebola outbreak response and other Ebola-related public health emergencies, NIH is making an accommodation to provide additional time for application submission and grant related reporting for these investigators.”
This accommodation will be extended to individuals who meet all of these conditions:
- Served in West Africa as part of the response to the Ebola outbreak at the time of the application due date
- Serve as PD/PI (or Multiple PD/PI) on the late application
- Include a cover letter with their application that documents specifically that the delay was caused by the PD/PI being engaged in Ebola-related response activities in West Africa at the time the application was due.
Also NIH understands that some progress report delays due to Ebola response activities are unavoidable. Therefore, if researchers are unable to complete progress reports before the scheduled due date, they should promptly contact the Sponsored Projects Office to initiate discussion with the NIH contacts listed on the Notice of Award.
NSF Accepting RAPID Proposals on Ebola Virus
The National Science Foundation has issued a Dear Colleague Letter on the Ebola Virus.
The letter states that “In light of the recent emergence of the lethal Ebola virus in the US, the National Science Foundation (NSF) is accepting proposals to conduct non-medical, non-clinical care research that can be used immediately to better understand how to model and understand the spread of Ebola, educate about prophylactic behaviors, and encourage the development of products, processes, and learning that can address this global challenge.”
NSF invites researchers to use the Rapid Response Research (RAPID) funding mechanism.
The letter states that “In light of the recent emergence of the lethal Ebola virus in the US, the National Science Foundation (NSF) is accepting proposals to conduct non-medical, non-clinical care research that can be used immediately to better understand how to model and understand the spread of Ebola, educate about prophylactic behaviors, and encourage the development of products, processes, and learning that can address this global challenge.”
NSF invites researchers to use the Rapid Response Research (RAPID) funding mechanism.
Reminder: NIH Requires RPPR for All Type 5 Progress Reports
As of October 17, 2014, the National Institutes of Health is requiring grantees to submit all type 5 progress reports using the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) module in eRA Commons.
Annual progress reports submitted in any format other than the RPPR will not be processed by the NIH and will require resubmission through the RPPR.
For more information, see the NIH RPPR web page and the NIH Guide Notice Reminder: NIH Requires the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) for All Type 5 Progress Reports (NOT-OD-15-014).
Annual progress reports submitted in any format other than the RPPR will not be processed by the NIH and will require resubmission through the RPPR.
For more information, see the NIH RPPR web page and the NIH Guide Notice Reminder: NIH Requires the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) for All Type 5 Progress Reports (NOT-OD-15-014).
October 02, 2014
NIH Offering Webinars for New Applicants
The National Institutes of Health is offering a series of webinars in November for new NIH grant applicants, mentors, and others. The NIH Guide notice, Webinars on What You Need to Know About NIH Application Submission and Review (NOT-OD-15-002), provides details.
The NIH Center for Scientific Review will host four Meet the Experts in NIH Peer Review: Webinars for Applicants to give useful insights into the submission and peer review processes. Each of the webinars will focus on a different type of application:
The NIH Center for Scientific Review will host four Meet the Experts in NIH Peer Review: Webinars for Applicants to give useful insights into the submission and peer review processes. Each of the webinars will focus on a different type of application:
- Academic Research Enhancement Awards (R15): November 4, 2014
- Fellowship Awards: November 5, 2014
- Small Business Grants (SBIR/STTR): November 7, 2014
- Research Project Grants (R01): November 10, 2014
October 01, 2014
DHHS and NIH: Continuing Resolution Notice
Campus researchers with Department of Health and Human Services funding, including National Institutes of Health funding, should be aware of the following notice from NIH on the Continuing Resolution, published October 1, 2014.
NIH Operates Under a Continuing Resolution (NOT-OD-15-001)
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including NIH, operates under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (H.J.Res. 124) signed by President Obama on September 19, 2014. This Act (CR) continues government operations through December 11, 2014 at 99.9 percent of the FY 2014 enacted level.
Continuing the procedures identified under NOT-OD-14-055 and consistent with NIH practices during the CRs of FY 2006 – 2014, the NIH will issue non-competing research grant awards at a level below that indicated on the most recent Notice of Award (generally up to 90% of the previously committed level). Upward adjustments to awarded levels will be considered after FY 2015 appropriations are enacted, but NIH expects institutions to monitor their expenditures carefully during this period. All legislative mandates that were in effect in FY 2014 (see NOT-OD-14-053 and NOT-OD-14-046) remain in effect under this CR including the salary limitation set at Executive Level II of the Federal Pay Scale as described in NOT-OD-14-052.
NIH Operates Under a Continuing Resolution (NOT-OD-15-001)
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including NIH, operates under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (H.J.Res. 124) signed by President Obama on September 19, 2014. This Act (CR) continues government operations through December 11, 2014 at 99.9 percent of the FY 2014 enacted level.
Continuing the procedures identified under NOT-OD-14-055 and consistent with NIH practices during the CRs of FY 2006 – 2014, the NIH will issue non-competing research grant awards at a level below that indicated on the most recent Notice of Award (generally up to 90% of the previously committed level). Upward adjustments to awarded levels will be considered after FY 2015 appropriations are enacted, but NIH expects institutions to monitor their expenditures carefully during this period. All legislative mandates that were in effect in FY 2014 (see NOT-OD-14-053 and NOT-OD-14-046) remain in effect under this CR including the salary limitation set at Executive Level II of the Federal Pay Scale as described in NOT-OD-14-052.
September 26, 2014
NIH Progress Reports Submitted after October 1, 2014: Section on Individual Development Plans
As of October 1, 2014 all National Institutes of Health progress reports (RPPRs) must include a section to describe how individual development plans (IDPs) are used to identify and promote the career goals of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers associated with the award. At this point, NIH is willing to accept a description of whether the institution uses IDPs or not and how they are employed to help manage the training and career development of those individuals. Currently Berkeley does not have an institution-wide IDP policy but such a policy will be developed.
Here is implementation information provided by NIH:
NIH progress reports using the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) must include a report on the use of IDPs in Section B. Accomplishments, Question B.4. Actual IDPs should not be included. Instead, grantees will report on whether they use IDPs for all the graduate students and postdoctoral researchers included in Section D. list of Participants. The use of IDPs as well as the manner in which IDPs are used is expected to be determined by the awardee institution, but the RPPR will include a brief description of how and whether IDPs are used to help manage the career development of students and postdocs associated with that award. A similar response is required for all T, F, K, R25, R13, D43 and other awards or award components designed to provide training and professional development opportunities for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers.
Reminder, the RPPR is currently required for all type 5 progress reports submitted using a Streamlined Non-Competing Award Process (SNAP), and will be required for all non-SNAP progress reports submitted on/after October 17, 2014 (see NOT-OD-13-035 and NOT-OD-14-092).
For more information, see Revised Policy: Descriptions on the Use of Individual Development Plans (IDPs) for Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Researchers Required in Annual Progress Reports beginning October 1, 2014 (NOT-OD-14-113).
August 7, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH to Require Individual Development Plan Description in Progress Reports
Here is implementation information provided by NIH:
NIH progress reports using the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) must include a report on the use of IDPs in Section B. Accomplishments, Question B.4. Actual IDPs should not be included. Instead, grantees will report on whether they use IDPs for all the graduate students and postdoctoral researchers included in Section D. list of Participants. The use of IDPs as well as the manner in which IDPs are used is expected to be determined by the awardee institution, but the RPPR will include a brief description of how and whether IDPs are used to help manage the career development of students and postdocs associated with that award. A similar response is required for all T, F, K, R25, R13, D43 and other awards or award components designed to provide training and professional development opportunities for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers.
Reminder, the RPPR is currently required for all type 5 progress reports submitted using a Streamlined Non-Competing Award Process (SNAP), and will be required for all non-SNAP progress reports submitted on/after October 17, 2014 (see NOT-OD-13-035 and NOT-OD-14-092).
For more information, see Revised Policy: Descriptions on the Use of Individual Development Plans (IDPs) for Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Researchers Required in Annual Progress Reports beginning October 1, 2014 (NOT-OD-14-113).
August 7, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH to Require Individual Development Plan Description in Progress Reports
Federal Agencies Collaborating on Federal RePORTER
The National Institutes of Health is collaborating with other federal agencies to create Federal RePORTER, a web portal to search federal-funded science projects across multiple agencies.
In an NIH Office of Extramural Research blog post, Take a Look at the Science Research Supported by Federal Funders, Deputy Director for Extramural Research Sally Rockey describes the project, part of the STAR METRICS® program.
Federal RePORTER is still in alpha testing. However, the public is invited to try out the new search tool and provide feedback.
The database currently includes research projects funded by several Department of Health and Human Services divisions (NIH, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration, Administration for Children and Families, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality), as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Center for Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine and the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs of the Department of Defense, and the United States Department of Agriculture.
In an NIH Office of Extramural Research blog post, Take a Look at the Science Research Supported by Federal Funders, Deputy Director for Extramural Research Sally Rockey describes the project, part of the STAR METRICS® program.
Federal RePORTER is still in alpha testing. However, the public is invited to try out the new search tool and provide feedback.
The database currently includes research projects funded by several Department of Health and Human Services divisions (NIH, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration, Administration for Children and Families, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality), as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Center for Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine and the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs of the Department of Defense, and the United States Department of Agriculture.
September 04, 2014
UC Berkeley New Faculty: Grants and Contracts and More, an Introduction Using “Speed Networking”
New UC Berkeley faculty members have much to do and little time to do it. The Vice Chancellor for Research is sponsoring an informal luncheon and information session (in speed dating format) designed to give faculty members that have been at UC Berkeley three years or less a chance to quickly learn about the services provided by the various central campus offices that assist faculty with grants and contracts and some other aspects of research administration.
- Date and Time: September 15, 2014, 12:00-1:30 pm
- Lunch/Meeting Location: Heyns Room, UC Berkeley Faculty Club
- RSVP Required (space is limited)
- How you can find external funding opportunities and stay up-to-date on new funding initiatives
- Where you can go to get help with everything from basic grant writing to the coordination of large multidisciplinary and multi-institutional projects
- How you can effectively navigate the many compliance requirements that impact your research
- How you can protect and transfer your intellectual property
- “Who does what” at UC Berkeley from pre award proposal development through grant close out
- Berkeley Research Development Office
- Intellectual Property and Industry Research Alliances
- Industry Alliance Office
- Office of Technology Licensing
- Research Administration and Compliance
- Sponsored Projects Office
- Office for Animal Care and Use
- Office for Protection of Human Subjects
- Research Conflict of Interest Office
August 27, 2014
NIH Issues Genomic Data Sharing Policy
The National Institutes of Health has issued the final NIH Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) Policy that “will apply to all NIH-funded, large-scale human and non-human projects that generate genomic data,” effective for funding applications submitted for the January 25, 2015 receipt date and thereafter.
The NIH Office of Extramural Research has issued implementation guidelines for grant applications and awards. Dr. Sally Rockey, NIH Deputy Director for Extramural Research, states in her blog post that applicants “are expected to state in their cover letter if their proposed research will generate large-scale human or non-human genomic data. If so, applicants are expected to include a genomic data sharing plan, and NIH will ask peer reviewers to comment on this plan, though it will not factor into the overall impact score for the project (unless specified otherwise in the funding opportunity announcement).”
The NIH news release states, “A key tenet of the GDS policy is the expectation that researchers obtain the informed consent of study participants for the potential future use of their de-identified data for research and for broad sharing. NIH also has similar expectations for studies that involve the use of de-identified cell lines or clinical specimens.”
Resources
The NIH Office of Extramural Research has issued implementation guidelines for grant applications and awards. Dr. Sally Rockey, NIH Deputy Director for Extramural Research, states in her blog post that applicants “are expected to state in their cover letter if their proposed research will generate large-scale human or non-human genomic data. If so, applicants are expected to include a genomic data sharing plan, and NIH will ask peer reviewers to comment on this plan, though it will not factor into the overall impact score for the project (unless specified otherwise in the funding opportunity announcement).”
The NIH news release states, “A key tenet of the GDS policy is the expectation that researchers obtain the informed consent of study participants for the potential future use of their de-identified data for research and for broad sharing. NIH also has similar expectations for studies that involve the use of de-identified cell lines or clinical specimens.”
Resources
- NIH Genomic Data Sharing
- NIH Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) Policy (NOT-OD-14-124)
- Implementation of the NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy for NIH Grant Applications and Awards (NOT-OD-14-111)
- NIH news release: NIH issues finalized policy on genomic data sharing
- NIH Rock Talk blog: Expanding the Impact of Genomic Data
August 26, 2014
FY 2015 Composite Fringe Benefit Rates Posted
The approved UC Berkeley composite fringe benefit rates for Fiscal Year 2015 received from Space and Capitol Resources are now posted on the the SPO Salary and Benefits page. The Fiscal Year 2015 rates are effective for the period July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015.
Projections for future fiscal years also are included for planning purposes only.
Projections for future fiscal years also are included for planning purposes only.
August 21, 2014
2014 Sponsored Projects Annual Report Published
The Sponsored Projects Annual Report, Fiscal Year 2014 is now available on the SPO web site. The report provides information on campus proposals and awards during the past year; in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014, the Berkeley campus received $738.5 million in contract and grant awards.
August 07, 2014
NIH to Require Individual Development Plan Description in Progress Reports
The National Institutes of Health will require that investigators submitting NIH annual progress reports on or after October 1, 2014 include a section describing how individual development plans (IDPs) are used to identify and promote the career goals of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers associated with the award.
Investigators using the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) for NIH progress reports must include a description on the use of IDPs in Section B. Accomplishments, Question B.4., on how and whether they use IDPs for all the graduate students and postdoctoral researchers included in Section D. list of Participants. Note that actual IDPs should not be included. A similar response will be required for all T, F, K, R25, R13, D43, and other awards or award components designed to provide training and professional development opportunities for graduate students and postdocs.
Investigators using the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) for NIH progress reports must include a description on the use of IDPs in Section B. Accomplishments, Question B.4., on how and whether they use IDPs for all the graduate students and postdoctoral researchers included in Section D. list of Participants. Note that actual IDPs should not be included. A similar response will be required for all T, F, K, R25, R13, D43, and other awards or award components designed to provide training and professional development opportunities for graduate students and postdocs.
DOE Open Access: Office of Science to Require Data Management Plan; New Public Portal
The U.S. Department of Energy has announced “new measures to increase access to scholarly publications and digital data” resulting from DOE-funded research.
DOE Office of Science solicitations and invitations issued on or after October 1, 2014 for new, renewal, and some supplemental funding will require “a Data Management Plan that describes whether and how the digital research data generated in the course of the proposed research will be shared and preserved.” Other DOE research offices will be implementing data management plan requirements within the next year, according to the DOE announcement.
DOE has also launched a new Public Access Gateway for Energy and Science (PAGES) to provide free public access to accepted peer-reviewed manuscripts or published scientific journal articles within 12 months of publication.
DOE Office of Science solicitations and invitations issued on or after October 1, 2014 for new, renewal, and some supplemental funding will require “a Data Management Plan that describes whether and how the digital research data generated in the course of the proposed research will be shared and preserved.” Other DOE research offices will be implementing data management plan requirements within the next year, according to the DOE announcement.
DOE has also launched a new Public Access Gateway for Energy and Science (PAGES) to provide free public access to accepted peer-reviewed manuscripts or published scientific journal articles within 12 months of publication.
July 30, 2014
MOOCs and Human Subjects Research
Rebecca Armstrong, Director of Research Subject Protection at UC Berkeley, has published an article on the Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research (PRIM&R) blog, Ampersand.
The article, Getting ahead of the wave: MOOC’s and human subjects research, discusses the issues of massive open online courses (MOOCs), educational research, and, by extension, human subjects research and IRB review.
The article, Getting ahead of the wave: MOOC’s and human subjects research, discusses the issues of massive open online courses (MOOCs), educational research, and, by extension, human subjects research and IRB review.
July 25, 2014
USDA Creating New Foundation for Food and Agricultural Research
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has announced the creation of a new Foundation for Food and Agricultural Research (FFAR), that will “leverage public and private resources to increase the scientific and technological research, innovation, and partnerships critical to boosting America's agricultural economy.”
FFAR was authorized by Congress as part of the 2014 Farm Bill and will operate as a non-profit corporation seeking and accepting private donations to fund research activities that focus on problems of national and international significance. Congress provided $200 million for the foundation which must be matched by non-federal funds.
FFAR will fund research in areas that include plant and animal health; food safety, nutrition and health; renewable energy, natural resources, and environment; agricultural and food security; and agriculture systems and technology.
FFAR was authorized by Congress as part of the 2014 Farm Bill and will operate as a non-profit corporation seeking and accepting private donations to fund research activities that focus on problems of national and international significance. Congress provided $200 million for the foundation which must be matched by non-federal funds.
FFAR will fund research in areas that include plant and animal health; food safety, nutrition and health; renewable energy, natural resources, and environment; agricultural and food security; and agriculture systems and technology.
AAAS: Federal Budget Process 101
The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has published The Federal Budget Process 101. The article, written by Matt Hourihan, Director of the AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Program, provides a step-by-step summary of the complicated annual budget cycle, from the President’s budget formulation, through Congressional appropriations, then to the execution of the budget by federal agencies starting October 1, the beginning of the federal fiscal year.
The AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Program provides detailed and timely analyses of federal research and development funding trends, including, for example, Research and Development Funding in FY 2015 Appropriations.
The AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Program provides detailed and timely analyses of federal research and development funding trends, including, for example, Research and Development Funding in FY 2015 Appropriations.
July 02, 2014
OACU/ACUC to Launch eProtocol July 2014
The UC Berkeley Office for Animal Care and Use (OACU) and the Animal Care and Use Committee (ACUC) are transitioning from a paper-based protocol submission and review process to a web-based system called Berkeley eProtocol in July 2014. This is the same system that has been in use by the UCB Office for Protection of Human Subjects (OPHS) and the Committee for Protection Human Subjects (CPHS) since 2009. Within eProtocol, the two different protocol systems are designated as eProtocol IACUC (animals) and eProtocol IRB (humans subjects).
eProtocol is a proven system that has not only been in place at Berkeley since 2009, it’s also in use at many other academic institutions, including Stanford University, University of Texas (Austin), Colorado State University, Harvard University, and University of Minnesota, to name a few.
How does this impact you?
eProtocol is a proven system that has not only been in place at Berkeley since 2009, it’s also in use at many other academic institutions, including Stanford University, University of Texas (Austin), Colorado State University, Harvard University, and University of Minnesota, to name a few.
How does this impact you?
- Effective July 1, 2014, all new protocols must be submitted online via eProtocol.
- eProtocol will be available for submissions starting July 30, 2014.
- New submission received prior to August 25, 2014, will be reviewed at the October 8th ACUC meeting. See the ACUC web site for submission deadlines.
- Protocols due for their de novo (three-year) review in October 2014 must be submitted online via eProtocol.
- Revisions to existing “electronic” protocols (“eProtocols”) will be made using the eProtocol system.
- Annual reviews and revisions to existing “paper” protocols can continue to use the paper-based process up until the protocol’s de novo submission.
- Investigators may opt to submit a revision as a new electronic eProtocol and they are strongly encouraged to contact the OACU Director regarding this possibility.
- eProtocol will be a “one-stop shop” for investigators submitting both human and animal research protocols (one PI dashboard to navigate from).
- PIs can designate up to two other people to have “editing” access to the protocol.
- Protocols will be readily accessible online for all team members through “view only” access.
- eProtocol sends automatic email reminders to the PI, Lab Contact and third designated individual on protocol for protocol annual renewals and three-year de novo reviews.
- eProtocol sends automated emails acknowledging receipt of submission, when review questions from ACUC/OACU have been sent to the PI, and when the protocol action has been approved.
- PIs can “clone” (i.e. copy) a protocol and edit from that point or they can choose to cut and paste from a Word document into the text fields in answering questions. Or, both strategies can be used when writing/developing a new protocol submission.
- eProtocol provides secure, worldwide access (where the internet is available) for the PI to work on documents and even submit them.
- Because documents (animal use protocols, review questions, attachments) reside within the web-based system, there are no version control issues.
- After initial protocol submission, annual reviews and subsequent de novo submissions will be greatly simplified.
- eProtocol simplifies the process of revision submission and we anticipate it will speed the approval process along.
- eProtocol will help the PI and ACUC ensure compliance more efficiently and effectively, particularly for USDA-regulated species.
June 26, 2014
SPO Service Schedule September 12, 2014
On Friday, September 12, 2014, the majority of Sponsored Projects Office staff will be involved in a regional meeting with sponsored project officers from Stanford University and UCSF. SPO services on this date therefore will be limited to front-desk administrative duties. Proposal and award set-up activity will resume on Monday, September 15. Individuals submitting proposals or other time-sensitive transactions during this time frame should plan accordingly.
June 16, 2014
UCOP Launches OMB Uniform Guidance Page
The Research Policy Analysis and Coordination office in the University of California Office of the President has launched a new web page to centralize information on the OMB Uniform Guidance. The page includes a Federal Resources section with links to the new Guidance and other federal information and a Higher Education Resources section including links to analysis from the Council on Governmental Relations, the Federal Demonstration Partnership, and other organizations.
As UC develops its implementation plan, information and resources will be posted to the site.
May 12, 2014 Research Advocate: NSF Issues Draft Implementation Plan for OMB Uniform Guidance
January 30, 2014 Research Advocate: COFAR Posts Training Webcast on Federal Grants Reform Uniform Guidance
January 2, 2014 Research Advocate: OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
December 19, 2013 Research Advocate: OMB to Issue “Super Circular” Grant Reform Guidance
As UC develops its implementation plan, information and resources will be posted to the site.
May 12, 2014 Research Advocate: NSF Issues Draft Implementation Plan for OMB Uniform Guidance
January 30, 2014 Research Advocate: COFAR Posts Training Webcast on Federal Grants Reform Uniform Guidance
January 2, 2014 Research Advocate: OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
December 19, 2013 Research Advocate: OMB to Issue “Super Circular” Grant Reform Guidance
June 03, 2014
Department of Education Webinars on Funding Opportunities
The U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences (IES) is hosting a series of webinars in June related to research funding opportunities. The first is on June 5 from 11:00 am to 12:30 pm Pacific Time. See IES Funding Opportunities Webinar Series for more information and to register.
- Overview of Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships in Education Research, June 5
- Overview of Continuous Improvement Research in Education (CIRE) and Evaluation of State and Local Education Programs and Policies (State and Local), June 9
- Overview of Education Research & Development Centers Competition (84.305C), June 10
- Application Submission Process, June 11
- Application Submission Process, June 25
May 30, 2014
NSF Clarifies Policy on Abstracts and Titles
The National Science Foundation has issued Important Notice to Presidents of Universities and Colleges and Heads of Other National Science Foundation Awardee Organizations: NSF Abstracts and Titles (Notice No. 136) to clarify the NSF policy on award abstracts and titles. NSF is acting to ensure that abstracts and titles clearly convey to the public justification for NSF actions and funding decisions.
The notice states:
The Title of an NSF supported project must describe the purpose of the research in nontechnical terms to the fullest possible extent.
There are two major components of the NSF Abstract:
The notice states:
The Title of an NSF supported project must describe the purpose of the research in nontechnical terms to the fullest possible extent.
There are two major components of the NSF Abstract:
- A nontechnical description of the project that states the problem to be studied, and explains the project’s broader significance and importance, that serves as a public justification for NSF funding. This component should be understandable to an educated lay reader. It may include such information as the theoretical or analytical foundation of the proposed research, the fundamental issues that may be resolved by the research, the project’s relation to NSF’s mission, the project’s place in the context of ongoing research in the field, the project’s potential impact on other fields, and the prospect that it will lead to significant advances or the integration of related lines of inquiry.
- A technical description of the project that states the goals and scope of the research, and the methods and approaches to be used. In many cases, the technical description may be a modified version of the project summary submitted with the proposal.
May 21, 2014
Exciting Developments in Phoebe!
The Sponsored Projects Office is committed to making Phoebe available to all departments and units across campus. We also are always looking for ways to make proposal preparation within Phoebe more straightforward and trouble free. In that vein, we are pleased to announce the following recent developments in Phoebe.
Guidance for Small Units Joining Phoebe
Is your department or unit interested in accessing Phoebe? Please consult SPO’s new guidance.
Submit to Sponsor
Want to know if your proposal has been submitted? Contract and Grant Officers (CGOs) at SPO are now able to click on a newly exposed button in the system labeled “submit to sponsor.” The button is only visible to CGOs and, upon submitting proposals to agency sponsors, CGOs will now immediately click on that button, which will update the status of the record to “Approval Pending – Submitted.” The status appears in the upper, right-hand corner of the record and can be viewed by principal investigators (PIs), department approvers, and CSS/department administrators with appropriate access.
Phoebe Proposal Preparation Checklist - Now Available
New to Phoebe or just want to make sure you have completed all the required proposal steps? Please visit our Proposal Checklist for Departments, now included in the Phoebe Instructions.
PHS FCOI PI Certification Form - No Longer Required for Proposals in Phoebe
Note that this form is still required at other stages of the funding cycle – new award, non-competing award, no cost extension – but it is not required as an upload for proposals in Phoebe. PIs now are able to certify to the language on the form as part of the online approval process within Phoebe. See What SPO Requires: PHS FCOI Guide for Department Research Administrators and PIs for more information.
Reminder: Avoid Identity Theft
Please remember a proposal initiator should NEVER log into Phoebe with a PI’s CalNet information. If a PI asks you to use his or her CalNet ID to carry out PI functions within Phoebe explain that a CalNet ID should never be shared with anyone for any reason. This is to protect the PI’s personal data, which should be kept private, and to ensure that PI approvals and certifications within Phoebe are valid. The approvals that we track in the system are serious in nature and we want to avoid any gray areas regarding approval and/or allegations that someone’s sensitive personal information has been misused.
We hope these updates are useful, and please feel free to write to our mailing list at phoebe-help@lists.berkeley.edu with any questions or ideas for improvements.
Guidance for Small Units Joining Phoebe
Is your department or unit interested in accessing Phoebe? Please consult SPO’s new guidance.
Submit to Sponsor
Want to know if your proposal has been submitted? Contract and Grant Officers (CGOs) at SPO are now able to click on a newly exposed button in the system labeled “submit to sponsor.” The button is only visible to CGOs and, upon submitting proposals to agency sponsors, CGOs will now immediately click on that button, which will update the status of the record to “Approval Pending – Submitted.” The status appears in the upper, right-hand corner of the record and can be viewed by principal investigators (PIs), department approvers, and CSS/department administrators with appropriate access.
Phoebe Proposal Preparation Checklist - Now Available
New to Phoebe or just want to make sure you have completed all the required proposal steps? Please visit our Proposal Checklist for Departments, now included in the Phoebe Instructions.
PHS FCOI PI Certification Form - No Longer Required for Proposals in Phoebe
Note that this form is still required at other stages of the funding cycle – new award, non-competing award, no cost extension – but it is not required as an upload for proposals in Phoebe. PIs now are able to certify to the language on the form as part of the online approval process within Phoebe. See What SPO Requires: PHS FCOI Guide for Department Research Administrators and PIs for more information.
Reminder: Avoid Identity Theft
Please remember a proposal initiator should NEVER log into Phoebe with a PI’s CalNet information. If a PI asks you to use his or her CalNet ID to carry out PI functions within Phoebe explain that a CalNet ID should never be shared with anyone for any reason. This is to protect the PI’s personal data, which should be kept private, and to ensure that PI approvals and certifications within Phoebe are valid. The approvals that we track in the system are serious in nature and we want to avoid any gray areas regarding approval and/or allegations that someone’s sensitive personal information has been misused.
We hope these updates are useful, and please feel free to write to our mailing list at phoebe-help@lists.berkeley.edu with any questions or ideas for improvements.
May 15, 2014
Phoebe Unavailable on Sunday, May 18, 2014, 8:00-10:00 am
Phoebe, the UC Berkeley system for proposal approvals and routing, will be unavailable on Sunday, May 18, 2014 from 8:00 am to 10:00 am, for scheduled database maintenance.
May 12, 2014
NSF Issues Draft Implementation Plan for OMB Uniform Guidance
The National Science Foundation has published a draft of the NSF implementation plan for the OMB Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200) and a request for comments in the May 9 Federal Register: Comment Request: National Science Foundation Proposal/Award Information-NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide.
NSF is asking for comments by July 8 on the draft PAPPG, available on the NSF Policy Office site. NSF is interested in public comment on NSF’s implementation of the OMB Uniform Guidance, as well as the policy changes identified in the PAPPG. Comments regarding the content of the Uniform Guidance should not be submitted.
NSF has highlighted text in yellow that implements the Uniform Guidance. Yellow highlighting appears in the following cases:
January 30, 2014 Research Advocate: COFAR Posts Training Webcast on Federal Grants Reform Uniform Guidance
January 2, 2014 Research Advocate: OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
December 19, 2013 Research Advocate: OMB to Issue “Super Circular” Grant Reform Guidance
NSF is asking for comments by July 8 on the draft PAPPG, available on the NSF Policy Office site. NSF is interested in public comment on NSF’s implementation of the OMB Uniform Guidance, as well as the policy changes identified in the PAPPG. Comments regarding the content of the Uniform Guidance should not be submitted.
NSF has highlighted text in yellow that implements the Uniform Guidance. Yellow highlighting appears in the following cases:
- Use of specific references to the Uniform Guidance;
- Direct replication of text from the Uniform Guidance; and
- NSF’s implementation of requirements from the Uniform Guidance that are imposed on agencies.
- Limitation to two months salary compensation for faculty. and
- Alternative to the Federal Financial Report.
January 30, 2014 Research Advocate: COFAR Posts Training Webcast on Federal Grants Reform Uniform Guidance
January 2, 2014 Research Advocate: OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
December 19, 2013 Research Advocate: OMB to Issue “Super Circular” Grant Reform Guidance
May 01, 2014
National Science Board Publishes Report on Reducing Investigators’ Adminstrative Workloads
The National Science Board has released a new report, Reducing Investigators’ Administrative Workload for Federally Funded Research, based on responses from thousands of scientists to a request for information to identify which federal agency and institutional requirements contribute most to PIs’ administrative workload.
The NSB press release states the report “recommends limiting proposal requirements to those essential to evaluate merit; keeping reporting focused on outcomes; and automating payroll certification for effort reporting. The NSB further recommends an evaluation of animal research, conflict of interest, and safety and security requirements, and encourages universities to review their IRB and IACUC processes to achieve rapid approval of protocols.”
See the press release and report for further information.
The NSB press release states the report “recommends limiting proposal requirements to those essential to evaluate merit; keeping reporting focused on outcomes; and automating payroll certification for effort reporting. The NSB further recommends an evaluation of animal research, conflict of interest, and safety and security requirements, and encourages universities to review their IRB and IACUC processes to achieve rapid approval of protocols.”
See the press release and report for further information.
April 17, 2014
NIH and AHRQ Announce Change in Resubmission Policy
The National Institutes of Health and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality have issued NIH and AHRQ Announce Updated Policy for Application Submission (NOT-OD-14-074), changing the policy on resubmission of grant applications.
The NIH Guide notice states, “Effective immediately, for application due dates after April 16, 2014, following an unsuccessful resubmission (A1) application, applicants may submit the same idea as a new (A0) application for the next appropriate due date. The NIH and AHRQ will not assess the similarity of the science in the new (A0) application to any previously reviewed submission when accepting an application for review.”
Dr. Sally Rockey’s Rock Talk blog post, A Change in Our Resubmission Policy, provides background and additional information.
Update: On April 22, NIH published Clarifications to the NIH and AHRQ Policy for Application Submission (NOT-OD-14-082) and revised the Frequently Asked Questions: Resubmissions of NIH Applications.
The NIH Guide notice states, “Effective immediately, for application due dates after April 16, 2014, following an unsuccessful resubmission (A1) application, applicants may submit the same idea as a new (A0) application for the next appropriate due date. The NIH and AHRQ will not assess the similarity of the science in the new (A0) application to any previously reviewed submission when accepting an application for review.”
Dr. Sally Rockey’s Rock Talk blog post, A Change in Our Resubmission Policy, provides background and additional information.
Update: On April 22, NIH published Clarifications to the NIH and AHRQ Policy for Application Submission (NOT-OD-14-082) and revised the Frequently Asked Questions: Resubmissions of NIH Applications.
April 16, 2014
FDP Publishes Faculty Workload Survey Report
The Federal Demonstration Partnership has published the 2012 Faculty Workload Survey Research Report. In 2012, the FDP conducted a survey of principal investigators of federally funded projects to determine the impact of federal regulations and requirements on research. The FDP received responses from 13,453 PIs (a 26% response rate) from 111 FDP member institutions.
The new report states that overall, “PIs reported that almost half of their available research time for federal projects had to be allocated to project-related requirements instead of the content of their research projects. PIs estimated that an average of 42% of their research time associated with federally funded projects was spent on meeting requirements rather than conducting active research.” The 2012 results are similar to those found in the 2005 FDP Faculty Workload Survey, “suggesting little change since the original survey was conducted.”
See the 105-page Report and the FDP Faculty Standing Committee documents for detailed analysis and background.
The new report states that overall, “PIs reported that almost half of their available research time for federal projects had to be allocated to project-related requirements instead of the content of their research projects. PIs estimated that an average of 42% of their research time associated with federally funded projects was spent on meeting requirements rather than conducting active research.” The 2012 results are similar to those found in the 2005 FDP Faculty Workload Survey, “suggesting little change since the original survey was conducted.”
See the 105-page Report and the FDP Faculty Standing Committee documents for detailed analysis and background.
April 04, 2014
NIH Expands RPPR for Non-SNAP Progress Reports on April 25
The National Institutes of Health will open the use of the federal-wide progress reporting form, the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR), for all Type 5 non-SNAP (Streamlined Non-competing Award Process) progress reports on April 25, 2014. NIH expects to require use of the RPPR for non-SNAP progress reports in October 2014. See NIH Notice NOT-OD-14-064 for details.
April 02, 2014
DARPA Launches Biological Technologies Office
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has announced the creation of a new Biological Technologies Office to explore the intersection of biology and the physical sciences. The BTO goals are to “harness the power of biological systems by applying the rigorous tools of engineering and related disciplines, and to design next-generation technologies that are inspired by insights gained from the life sciences.” The initial BTO portfolio includes programs transferred from the Defense Sciences and Microsystems Technology Offices, but will also include new opportunities.
April 01, 2014
France A. Córdova Sworn in as NSF Director
France A. Córdova was sworn in March 31, 2014 as the director of the National Science Foundation for a six-year term.
Córdova is president emerita of Purdue University, where she served as president from 2007 to 2012. Among many other prestigious positions, Dr. Córdova was the UC Riverside chancellor and distinguished professor of physics and astronomy from 2002 to 2007, and she was the vice chancellor for research and professor of physics at UC Santa Barbara from 1996 to 2002.
More information is available in the NSF press release.
Córdova is president emerita of Purdue University, where she served as president from 2007 to 2012. Among many other prestigious positions, Dr. Córdova was the UC Riverside chancellor and distinguished professor of physics and astronomy from 2002 to 2007, and she was the vice chancellor for research and professor of physics at UC Santa Barbara from 1996 to 2002.
More information is available in the NSF press release.
March 13, 2014
On-Time Proposals: What You Can Expect from SPO
Sponsored Projects Office Director Pamela Miller sent the following email to the SPO sponews-l mailing list on March 12, 2014:
To the Campus Community:
Thank you for your efforts to ensure that UC Berkeley’s proposals for research funding are submitted on time and in compliance with sponsor requirements. Successful research administration is really a team activity and the Sponsored Projects Office is committed to providing the best support we possibly can to UC Berkeley’s research community.
We know that faculty members and their departmental or Shared Services research administrators are working very hard to meet the campus’s Five Day Proposal Submission policy. At SPO, we want you to know that we are doing our part to efficiently manage on-time proposals and are instituting new measures to provide necessary and timely feedback to the faculty. SPO therefore will provide a response within two working days to all proposals submitted to SPO at least five working days before the funding agency deadline.
To be more specific, if the proposal is complete, SPO will, at minimum, provide a “triage” review within two working days covering the major elements of the proposal required by the sponsor and will inform the principal investigator and/or research administrator of the results. Please note: This will not be the final review of the proposal. After the initial triage review, the SPO CGO will continue to review the proposal and provide a final complete review within the next few days.
If the proposal is incomplete, SPO will identify the missing components required by the sponsor and return the proposal to the PI and/or research administrator within two working days.
If a proposal cannot be submitted on time, even with a draft technical section, the PI should request an exception to the VCR’s late proposal policy. To manage SPO’s workload and to provide equitable treatment to the on-time proposals, late proposals approved by the VCR will be processed after on-time proposals due that same day have been submitted.
We know that submitting applications for funding can be a complex, and at times, stressful activity. At SPO we are working hard with our partners in Shared Services and in the departments to ensure that that the process goes as smoothly as possible and that Berkeley is always positioned to achieve a successful result. Thank you for your assistance.
Pamela F. Miller, Ph.D.
Director, Sponsored Projects Office
University of California at Berkeley
2150 Shattuck Ave.
Berkeley, CA 94704-5940
Phone: 510-642-2925
Email: plfmiller@berkeley.edu
To the Campus Community:
Thank you for your efforts to ensure that UC Berkeley’s proposals for research funding are submitted on time and in compliance with sponsor requirements. Successful research administration is really a team activity and the Sponsored Projects Office is committed to providing the best support we possibly can to UC Berkeley’s research community.
We know that faculty members and their departmental or Shared Services research administrators are working very hard to meet the campus’s Five Day Proposal Submission policy. At SPO, we want you to know that we are doing our part to efficiently manage on-time proposals and are instituting new measures to provide necessary and timely feedback to the faculty. SPO therefore will provide a response within two working days to all proposals submitted to SPO at least five working days before the funding agency deadline.
To be more specific, if the proposal is complete, SPO will, at minimum, provide a “triage” review within two working days covering the major elements of the proposal required by the sponsor and will inform the principal investigator and/or research administrator of the results. Please note: This will not be the final review of the proposal. After the initial triage review, the SPO CGO will continue to review the proposal and provide a final complete review within the next few days.
If the proposal is incomplete, SPO will identify the missing components required by the sponsor and return the proposal to the PI and/or research administrator within two working days.
If a proposal cannot be submitted on time, even with a draft technical section, the PI should request an exception to the VCR’s late proposal policy. To manage SPO’s workload and to provide equitable treatment to the on-time proposals, late proposals approved by the VCR will be processed after on-time proposals due that same day have been submitted.
We know that submitting applications for funding can be a complex, and at times, stressful activity. At SPO we are working hard with our partners in Shared Services and in the departments to ensure that that the process goes as smoothly as possible and that Berkeley is always positioned to achieve a successful result. Thank you for your assistance.
Pamela F. Miller, Ph.D.
Director, Sponsored Projects Office
University of California at Berkeley
2150 Shattuck Ave.
Berkeley, CA 94704-5940
Phone: 510-642-2925
Email: plfmiller@berkeley.edu
NIH Postdoctoral Stipend/Salary Increase
Vice Chancellor for Research Graham Fleming issued the following CALmessages notice regarding NIH postdoctoral salary/stipends on March 12, 2014:
Date: March 12, 2014
Sender: Graham Fleming, Vice Chancellor for Research (Control Units)
To: Faculty
Subject: NIH Postdoctoral Stipend/Salary Increase
On February 10, 2014 the National Institutes of Health (NIH) issued a Notice (NOT-OD-14-046) establishing stipend levels for FY2014 Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Awards (NRSA). The NIH notice can be found at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-14-046.html.
Article 4, “Compensation,” Section A-3 of the UC-UAW Contract for Postdoctoral Scholars states, “increases to the University salary/stipend minima rates shall be made in accord with the NIH Notice pertaining to the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) Stipend levels.” The effective date of the new salary scale is the first day of the payroll period following the NIH Notice, which is March 1, 2014.
Therefore, all Postdoctoral Scholars that are newly appointed, or whose reappointment/anniversary date is on or after March 1, 2014, must be at the appropriate annual stipend/salary minimum, based on years of postdoctoral experience as follows:
0 yrs. $42,000
1 yrs. $43,680
2 yrs. $45,432
3 yrs. $47,244
4 yrs. $49,128
5 yrs. $51,096
The implementation of the new scale does not automatically affect the salaries of Postdoctoral Scholars, with the exception of Kirschstein Fellows. For the Kirschstein Fellows who were granted FY2014 awards but issued these awards using the FY2012 stipend levels, their stipends will be adjusted to the FY2014 levels by the NIH. For all others, the new scale affects those who are newly appointed or whose reappointment/anniversary date occurs March 1, 2014 or later.
In addition, UC-UAW Contract, Article 4, “Compensation,” Section D states, “All Postdoctoral Scholars shall be placed on at least the appropriate NIH-NRSA rates based on the Postdoctoral Scholar's experience on June 1, 2014.” If it’s determined that a Postdoctoral Scholar is below the appropriate experience level, CSS Team 9 will notify the VCR Office and contact PIs to request authorization to move the postdoc to the appropriate experience level effective June 1, 2014.
If you have any questions regarding these postdoctoral scholar salary changes, please contact your HR Generalist in CSS Team 9, or email vcroap@berkeley.edu.
February 20, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH Publishes Fiscal Policy for Grant Awards for FY 2014
Date: March 12, 2014
Sender: Graham Fleming, Vice Chancellor for Research (Control Units)
To: Faculty
Subject: NIH Postdoctoral Stipend/Salary Increase
On February 10, 2014 the National Institutes of Health (NIH) issued a Notice (NOT-OD-14-046) establishing stipend levels for FY2014 Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Awards (NRSA). The NIH notice can be found at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-14-046.html.
Article 4, “Compensation,” Section A-3 of the UC-UAW Contract for Postdoctoral Scholars states, “increases to the University salary/stipend minima rates shall be made in accord with the NIH Notice pertaining to the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) Stipend levels.” The effective date of the new salary scale is the first day of the payroll period following the NIH Notice, which is March 1, 2014.
Therefore, all Postdoctoral Scholars that are newly appointed, or whose reappointment/anniversary date is on or after March 1, 2014, must be at the appropriate annual stipend/salary minimum, based on years of postdoctoral experience as follows:
0 yrs. $42,000
1 yrs. $43,680
2 yrs. $45,432
3 yrs. $47,244
4 yrs. $49,128
5 yrs. $51,096
The implementation of the new scale does not automatically affect the salaries of Postdoctoral Scholars, with the exception of Kirschstein Fellows. For the Kirschstein Fellows who were granted FY2014 awards but issued these awards using the FY2012 stipend levels, their stipends will be adjusted to the FY2014 levels by the NIH. For all others, the new scale affects those who are newly appointed or whose reappointment/anniversary date occurs March 1, 2014 or later.
In addition, UC-UAW Contract, Article 4, “Compensation,” Section D states, “All Postdoctoral Scholars shall be placed on at least the appropriate NIH-NRSA rates based on the Postdoctoral Scholar's experience on June 1, 2014.” If it’s determined that a Postdoctoral Scholar is below the appropriate experience level, CSS Team 9 will notify the VCR Office and contact PIs to request authorization to move the postdoc to the appropriate experience level effective June 1, 2014.
If you have any questions regarding these postdoctoral scholar salary changes, please contact your HR Generalist in CSS Team 9, or email vcroap@berkeley.edu.
February 20, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH Publishes Fiscal Policy for Grant Awards for FY 2014
March 05, 2014
Contracts and Grants Accounting Offers Q&A Session on PeopleSoft C&G
PeopleSoft Contracts and Grants (C&G) is a new financial system being implemented soon at Berkeley to serve the specialized accounting requirements of sponsored awards. Contracts and Grants Accounting is hosting an informational Q&A session on March 13, 2014 on how the system and complementary business processes will support and improve grants management and compliance. This session is open to all.
Contracts and Grants System (C&G) Informational Q&A
Thursday, March 13, 2014
2:00 - 3:30 pm
Haas Pavilion Club Room
Thursday, March 13, 2014
2:00 - 3:30 pm
Haas Pavilion Club Room
February 21, 2014
NSF Issues Revised Award Terms and Conditions
The National Science Foundation has revised the NSF Award Terms and Conditions to parallel changes made to the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide. The revised Terms and Conditions will apply to all new NSF awards and funding amendments to existing NSF awards issued on or after February 24, 2014.
Each set of terms and conditions is accompanied by a summary of the changes made to that document. In addition to clarifications and other changes made to the conditions, the significant change involved supplementing the Program Income Article with information on the annual program income reporting requirement.
NSF has revised the following documents:
Each set of terms and conditions is accompanied by a summary of the changes made to that document. In addition to clarifications and other changes made to the conditions, the significant change involved supplementing the Program Income Article with information on the annual program income reporting requirement.
NSF has revised 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
- Fixed Amount Award Conditions
- Administration of NSF Conference or Group Travel Grant Special Conditions (FL 26)
February 10, 2014
NIH Publishes Fiscal Policy for Grant Awards for FY 2014
The National Institutes of Health has issued NIH Fiscal Policy for Grant Awards FY 2014 (NOT-OD-14-055) and related notices that provide guidance for the remainder of fiscal year 2014 (through September 30, 2014).
FY 2014 Funding Levels: Non-competing continuation awards that have already been made in FY 2014 were generally funded at levels below that indicated on the most recent Notice of Award (generally up to 90% of the previously committed level) as described in NOT-OD-14-012, and in NOT-OD-14-043. Such reductions may be fully or partially restored, depending on the Institute or Center. Non-competing continuation grants (research and non-research) including those that remain to be issued in FY 2014 likely will be made within the range between the commitment level indicated on the Notice of Award and 3 percent below that level. Out-year commitments for continuation awards in FY 2015 and beyond will remain unchanged. The number of competing awards will likely exceed the number of competing awards in FY 2013. The NIH awarding Institutes/Centers (IC) will develop and post their fiscal policies consistent with overall NIH goals and available FY 2014 funds.
Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards (NRSA): Consistent with the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, and with the recommendations of the Advisory Committee to the Director regarding the Biomedical Research Workforce, the NIH will increase undergraduate and graduate student stipends by 2 percent. Entry level postdoctoral stipends will be increased to $42,000 with 4 percent increases between the individual levels of experience. The full range of stipend adjustments for FY 2014 is described at NOT-OD-14-046.
New Investigators: NIH will continue to support new investigators on R01 equivalent awards at success rates comparable to that of established investigators submitting new (Type 1) R01 equivalent applications. Achievement of comparable success rates should permit the NIH to support new investigators in accordance with the policies established in FY 2009 and subsequent years as described at NOT-OD-09-013 and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/new_investigators/index.htm.
Salary Limits: Section 203 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2014 prohibits payments for salaries under grants and other extramural mechanisms in excess of Executive Level II. It should be noted, that Executive Level II was increased by 1 percent from $179,700 to $181,500 by Executive Order 13655 that became effective January 12, 2014. See NOT-OD-14-052 for additional information.
Other Legislative Mandates: Other statutory requirements are described in NOT-OD-14-053.
Additional Information: Additional details on Fiscal Operations, including specific funding strategies for ICs will be posted at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/financial/index.htm.
February 14, 2014 Update: Rock Talk Blog Fiscal Policies, and More, for 2014
January 16, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH Salary Cap Increases to $181,500
- NIH Fiscal Policy for Grant Awards FY 2014 (NOT-OD-14-055)
- Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) Stipends,Tuition/Fees and Other Budgetary Levels Effective for Fiscal Year 2014 (NOT-OD-14-046)
- Notice of Salary Limitation on Grants, Cooperative Agreements, and Contracts (NOT-OD-14-052)
- Notice of Legislative Mandates in Effect for FY2014 (NOT-OD-14-053)
FY 2014 Funding Levels: Non-competing continuation awards that have already been made in FY 2014 were generally funded at levels below that indicated on the most recent Notice of Award (generally up to 90% of the previously committed level) as described in NOT-OD-14-012, and in NOT-OD-14-043. Such reductions may be fully or partially restored, depending on the Institute or Center. Non-competing continuation grants (research and non-research) including those that remain to be issued in FY 2014 likely will be made within the range between the commitment level indicated on the Notice of Award and 3 percent below that level. Out-year commitments for continuation awards in FY 2015 and beyond will remain unchanged. The number of competing awards will likely exceed the number of competing awards in FY 2013. The NIH awarding Institutes/Centers (IC) will develop and post their fiscal policies consistent with overall NIH goals and available FY 2014 funds.
Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards (NRSA): Consistent with the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, and with the recommendations of the Advisory Committee to the Director regarding the Biomedical Research Workforce, the NIH will increase undergraduate and graduate student stipends by 2 percent. Entry level postdoctoral stipends will be increased to $42,000 with 4 percent increases between the individual levels of experience. The full range of stipend adjustments for FY 2014 is described at NOT-OD-14-046.
New Investigators: NIH will continue to support new investigators on R01 equivalent awards at success rates comparable to that of established investigators submitting new (Type 1) R01 equivalent applications. Achievement of comparable success rates should permit the NIH to support new investigators in accordance with the policies established in FY 2009 and subsequent years as described at NOT-OD-09-013 and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/new_investigators/index.htm.
Salary Limits: Section 203 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2014 prohibits payments for salaries under grants and other extramural mechanisms in excess of Executive Level II. It should be noted, that Executive Level II was increased by 1 percent from $179,700 to $181,500 by Executive Order 13655 that became effective January 12, 2014. See NOT-OD-14-052 for additional information.
Other Legislative Mandates: Other statutory requirements are described in NOT-OD-14-053.
Additional Information: Additional details on Fiscal Operations, including specific funding strategies for ICs will be posted at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/financial/index.htm.
February 14, 2014 Update: Rock Talk Blog Fiscal Policies, and More, for 2014
January 16, 2014 Research Advocate: NIH Salary Cap Increases to $181,500
January 30, 2014
COFAR Posts Training Webcast on Federal Grants Reform Uniform Guidance
On January 27, 2014, the Council on Financial Assistance Reform (COFAR), held a training webcast on the major updates to the Office of Management and Budget’s recently reformed guidance on Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (2 C.F.R. 200). COFAR is now providing recordings of the webcasts.
The Uniform Guidance will be implemented one year from publication on December 26, 2014. OMB and COFAR will continue to engage federal and non-federal stakeholders over the next year to facilitate a smooth implementation process.
Participants in the webcast included:
February 12, 2014 Update: COFAR Releases Frequently Asked Questions
January 2, 2014 Research Advocate: OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
December 19, 2013 Research Advocate: OMB to Issue “Super Circular” Grant Reform Guidance
The Uniform Guidance will be implemented one year from publication on December 26, 2014. OMB and COFAR will continue to engage federal and non-federal stakeholders over the next year to facilitate a smooth implementation process.
Participants in the webcast included:
- Norman Dong, Interim Controller Office of Management and Budget
- Kathy Bialas, Assistant General Counsel, from the Department of Housing and Urban Development
- Jean Feldman, Head Policy Officer, Division of Institution & Award Support, National Science Foundation
- Stephen Daniels, Director of the Division of Policy, Review and Resolution, Department of Labor
- Terry Ramsey, Senior Technical Advisor, Department of Health and Human Services
- Laura Watson, Associate Deputy Administrator, Department of Labor
- COFAR Training Intro (11 minutes)
- COFAR Training Administrative Requirements (85 minutes)
- COFAR Training Cost Principles (35 minutes)
- COFAR Training Audit Requirements (50 minutes)
- COFAR Training Administrative Requirements
- COFAR Training Cost Principles
- COFAR Training Audit Requirements
February 12, 2014 Update: COFAR Releases Frequently Asked Questions
January 2, 2014 Research Advocate: OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
December 19, 2013 Research Advocate: OMB to Issue “Super Circular” Grant Reform Guidance
January 29, 2014
Proposal Timing
The Sponsored Projects Office is renewing its commitment to providing a timely response to campus principal investigators (PIs) who submit proposals in accordance to the Vice Chancellor for Research Five Day Proposal Submission Policy. To accomplish this goal, SPO is asking the campus community to renew its efforts to meeting the following proposal submission requirements established by the VCR:
Although deviations from policy are sometimes unavoidable, PIs are cautioned that when SPO does not have adequate time to review a complete proposal, the proposal is at much greater risk for submission failure, rejection without review, and low funding priority scores.
- The proposal must be received by SPO at least five working days before the funding agency deadline or the deadline of the lead institution when UC Berkeley is a subrecipient.
- The proposal submitted to SPO must be complete. Incomplete proposals will be returned without SPO review.
Although deviations from policy are sometimes unavoidable, PIs are cautioned that when SPO does not have adequate time to review a complete proposal, the proposal is at much greater risk for submission failure, rejection without review, and low funding priority scores.
January 27, 2014
UC Berkeley New Faculty: Grants and Contracts and More, an Introduction Using “Speed Networking”
New UC Berkeley faculty members have much to do and little time to do it. The Vice Chancellor for Research is therefore sponsoring an informal luncheon and information session (in speed-dating format) designed to give all faculty and non-faculty principal investigators who have been at UC Berkeley three years or less a chance to quickly learn about the services provided by the various central campus offices that assist faculty with grants and contracts and some other aspects of research administration.
- Date and Time: February 11, 2014, 12:00-1:30 pm
- Lunch/Meeting Location: Heyns Room, Faculty Club
- RSVP Required (space is limited)
- How you can find external funding opportunities and stay up-to-date on new funding initiatives
- Where you can go to get help with everything from basic grant writing to the coordination of large multidisciplinary and multi-institutional projects
- How you can effectively navigate the many compliance requirements that impact your research
- How you can protect and transfer your intellectual property
- “Who does what” at UC Berkeley from preaward proposal development through grant closeout
- Berkeley Research Development Office
- Intellectual Property and Industry Research Alliances
- Industry Alliance Office
- Office of Technology Licensing
- Research Administration and Compliance
- Sponsored Projects Office
- Office for Animal Care and Use
- Office for Protection of Human Subjects
- Research Conflict of Interest Office
January 23, 2014
FY 2014 Federal Budget Appropriations Approved: Resources for Analyses of Agency Funding
On January 17, 2014, the President signed into law H.R. 3547, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, providing fiscal year 2014 appropriations for the federal government through September 30, 2014. Several national organizations provide analyses of these appropriations related to research and development funding and other areas relevant to universities.
The American Association for Advancement of Science (AAAS) R&D Budget and Policy Program R&D in FY 2014 Appropriations page provides in-depth reports on the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014. Current topics include:
The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Budget and Appropriations page offers information and news, including a January 17 update, Congress Approves FY 2104 Omnibus Funding Bill.
The American Association for Advancement of Science (AAAS) R&D Budget and Policy Program R&D in FY 2014 Appropriations page provides in-depth reports on the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014. Current topics include:
- Overview
- Department of Agriculture
- Department of Energy
- Department of Homeland Security
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration
- National Institutes of Health
- National Science Foundation
The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Budget and Appropriations page offers information and news, including a January 17 update, Congress Approves FY 2104 Omnibus Funding Bill.
January 16, 2014
NIH Salary Cap Increases to $181,500
The National Institutes of Health posted NIH Operates Under a Continuing Resolution (NOT-OD-14-043) on January 16, 2014.
The notice states that NIH is operating under the continuing resolution (CR) through January 18, 2014 at the fiscal year 2013 post-sequestration level, and includes the following guidance:
“Continuing the procedures identified under NOT-OD-14-012 and consistent with NIH practices during the CRs of FY 2006 – 2013, the NIH will issue non-competing research grant awards at a level below that indicated on the most recent Notice of Award (generally up to 90% of the previously committed level). Upward adjustments to awarded levels will be considered after FY 2014 appropriations are enacted, but NIH expects institutions to monitor their expenditures carefully during this period. All legislative mandates that were in effect in FY 2013 (see NOT-OD-12-034 and NOT-OD-13-064) remain in effect under this CR including the salary limitation set at Executive Level II of the Federal Pay Scale. It should be noted, that the Executive Level II was increased by 1 percent from $179,700 to $181,500 by Executive Order 13655 that became effective January 12, 2014.”
January 24 update: NIH has revised the Salary Cap Summary web page to include 2014.
The notice states that NIH is operating under the continuing resolution (CR) through January 18, 2014 at the fiscal year 2013 post-sequestration level, and includes the following guidance:
“Continuing the procedures identified under NOT-OD-14-012 and consistent with NIH practices during the CRs of FY 2006 – 2013, the NIH will issue non-competing research grant awards at a level below that indicated on the most recent Notice of Award (generally up to 90% of the previously committed level). Upward adjustments to awarded levels will be considered after FY 2014 appropriations are enacted, but NIH expects institutions to monitor their expenditures carefully during this period. All legislative mandates that were in effect in FY 2013 (see NOT-OD-12-034 and NOT-OD-13-064) remain in effect under this CR including the salary limitation set at Executive Level II of the Federal Pay Scale. It should be noted, that the Executive Level II was increased by 1 percent from $179,700 to $181,500 by Executive Order 13655 that became effective January 12, 2014.”
January 24 update: NIH has revised the Salary Cap Summary web page to include 2014.
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) update from EH&S
The distribution of free lab coats and safety glasses/goggles for the campus research community will be the week of February 24, 2014 at Memorial Stadium. While much progress has been made on the steps needed to get laboratories ready for this event, help in reminding applicable principal investigators (PIs) or other laboratory personnel would be appreciated. Additionally, it is always worth pointing out that this process also leads to free laundering of lab coats.
Steps labs need to take:
There will be two iPads given away each day of the fitting event, free pizza parties for every lab on campus that reaches 100% participation, and other enticements to encourage participation. Please contact Brandon DeFrancisci if you have any questions:
Brandon DeFrancisci
Associate Director For Health and Safety
Environment, Health & Safety
University of California, Berkeley
317 University Hall, MC 1150
Berkeley, CA 94720-1150
office: 510 643-6394
cell: 510 812-1543
Steps labs need to take:
- Ensure the lab’s roster is kept up-to-date. It is very important to click on the “click here if lab roster is current” button. (Over 80% of campus labs have done this step. If a lab hasn’t, there will be a week’s lag before the next step can be done once they do this step.)
- Each PI must then “activate” their lab in the Lab Hazard Assessment Tool (LHAT) and then either complete the assessment or assign and have a delegate complete the assessment. (Over 160 PIs have activated, and over 110 have completed their assessment).
- Upon completion of the assessment, everyone in the lab must go to LHAT to review the assessment, watch a 6 minute training video, and obtain a voucher for the PPE distribution event in February.
- Everyone in the lab needs to then register at Eventbrite for the two-hour window of their choice to pick up their PPE.
There will be two iPads given away each day of the fitting event, free pizza parties for every lab on campus that reaches 100% participation, and other enticements to encourage participation. Please contact Brandon DeFrancisci if you have any questions:
Brandon DeFrancisci
Associate Director For Health and Safety
Environment, Health & Safety
University of California, Berkeley
317 University Hall, MC 1150
Berkeley, CA 94720-1150
office: 510 643-6394
cell: 510 812-1543
January 09, 2014
Statement of Economic Interests (700-U) Form Revised for 2014
The State of California has issued a revised 700-U Statement of Economic Interests for Principal Investigators for immediate use. The revised form, dated 2013/2014, is available on the Conflict of Interest Committee web site and is the only version that will now be accepted. If you have any questions please contact Jyl Baldwin (jbaldwin@berkeley.edu, 2-8110). This year, no changes have been made to the form itself, and there are no substantive changes to the instructions.
State of California law requires disclosure of financial interest in the sponsor of a research project; the donor of a research gift; and, under certain circumstances, the provider of materials under a Material Transfer Agreement (MTA) when that sponsor, donor, or provider is a non-governmental source. For research projects, the Statement of Economic Interests for Principal Investigators (Form 700-U) should accompany the proposal and Proposal Review Form to the Sponsored Projects Office or to the Industry Alliances Office. For MTAs, the Form 700-U should accompany the Material Transfer Agreement Review Form to the Industry Alliances Office.
State of California law requires disclosure of financial interest in the sponsor of a research project; the donor of a research gift; and, under certain circumstances, the provider of materials under a Material Transfer Agreement (MTA) when that sponsor, donor, or provider is a non-governmental source. For research projects, the Statement of Economic Interests for Principal Investigators (Form 700-U) should accompany the proposal and Proposal Review Form to the Sponsored Projects Office or to the Industry Alliances Office. For MTAs, the Form 700-U should accompany the Material Transfer Agreement Review Form to the Industry Alliances Office.
January 02, 2014
OMB Publishes Federal Grants Reform Guidance
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Council on Financial Assistance Reform (COFAR) published the reform to Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in the December 26, 2013 Federal Register. The new guidance combines and replaces OMB Circulars A-21, A-110, A-133, and five other grants circulars.
OMB has provided the following documents as supporting material to help review and understand the changes.
December 19, 2013 Research Advocate: OMB to Issue “Super Circular” Grant Reform Guidance
OMB has provided the following documents as supporting material to help review and understand the changes.
- Uniform Guidance Crosswalk from Predominant Source in Existing Guidance
- Uniform Guidance Crosswalk to Predominant Source in Existing Guidance
- Uniform Guidance Cost Principles Text Comparison
- Uniform Guidance Audit Requirements Text Comparison
- Uniform Guidance Definitions Text Comparison
- Uniform Guidance Administrative Requirements Text Comparison
December 19, 2013 Research Advocate: OMB to Issue “Super Circular” Grant Reform Guidance
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)