- Our Expertise
- Research Highlights
- Contact Us
The following is offered to assist in multiple areas. However, if your question is not found below or additional information is needed, please contact OSP at 573-341-4134 or email@example.com.
A: The Principal Investigator (PI) is the person who is responsible for the substantive and financial development, management, and oversight of a sponsored project. The PI writes the proposal, develops the budget, seeks university approval for the project, carries out the substantive work if the grant is awarded, manages the award budget and writes any technical reports.
A: A full-time employee of the University and hold the title of Regular or NTT Faculty. Members of the Faculty who are retired may serve as PI provided they are in an active pay status/appointment and there is at least one College/Center/Department willing to provide the necessary administrative commitment to permit the program to be carried out.
A: Request for Proposal is also known as an RFP. An RFP can be issued by either a private or government organization. Typically, the RFP provides specific information about a program or line of research that the sponsor wishes to fund. The RFP also provides information about budget parameters, mandatory forms, additional information required, any restrictions, the legal due date, and submission format. Your OSP administrator will review the RFP with you to ensure that the administrative requirements are met.
A: For most proposals, it takes three days. OSP requires receipt of “submission ready” proposals, three day prior to the sponsor’s submission deadline.
Requests for IRB, animal care and IP to be retained by the sponsor at the end of the award have pre-approval procedures that may take additional time.
OSP will do everything possible to accommodate compressed time frames for proposal submission, but cannot guarantee that all University decision makers will be available for approval and signature. If there is a compressed time frame, it is critical the PI contact the Vice Provost for Research or Director of OSP to discuss the situation as soon as possible
A: OSP require submission and be granted submission access in NSF Fastlane at least 3 business days prior to the sponsor’s proposal submission deadline. You can expect that OSP will:
- Assist with budget development
- Complete the ePSRS
- Complete and submit for authorized signature required sponsor forms
- Assemble the final proposal package for review and approval of University signatory
- Submit the proposal electronically via sponsor’s required portal or deliver the proposal via email or over-night per the sponsor’s requirements.
A: You should notify OSP of any planned proposal as soon as possible. Please provide a link to or copy of the guidelines and the due date. This early notification will provide time to read the guidelines and assist with the development of a comprehensive budget. It will also provide time for the internal approval process at the university.
A: Assuming a reasonable length of time between proposal development and submission, you can expect that your grants and contracts administrator will:
- Review the guidelines and make you aware of any special or unusual requirements
- Put forward any internal pre-approval necessary
- Complete all business forms and provide general university information
- Assist with budget development
- Route the completed proposal package through the university
- Submit the proposal to the sponsor
- Check on the status of the proposal both internally (with you) and externally (upon request)
- Maintain the complete proposal file until the proposal is either accepted or declined
Please note: Proposals will not be submitted if the full proposal package is not received 3 business days prior to submission deadline.
A: OSP does not write proposals, but offers specialized proposal development assistance for multi-investigator projects that are for awards in excess of $1M or multidisciplinary or multi-institutional. Customized assistance may include solicitation analysis, project management of the proposal process, and narrative development support. PIs can maximize Proposal Development staff services by securing assistance early in the process and enabling their Proposal Developer to function as a full project team member through proposal submission.
A: OSP staff can meet with university faculty and staff to discuss the opportunity and assist with understanding of the RFP. OSP staff can help develop budgets and justification along with the creation of the e-PSRS. In addition, OSP can provide institutional information that is frequently requested by sponsors. This information can include: general university capability statements, lists of past awards and examples of similar projects. OSP also completes all the business forms necessary for a proposal submission and assists with sponsor requests for university financial information including: financial statements, the tax exempt letter, and audit reports.
A: Always check the guidelines for sponsor-specific proposal content and format requirements. A generic checklist below is provided for cases in which such guidelines do not exist.
To ensure the quality of the technical proposal, Principal Investigators should prepare answers to the following:
- What title or project name will reflect the essence of the proposed research?
- What is the research problem or need for this activity? Have you reviewed current literature to determine the need for such a project or conducted a needs assessment?
- What do you hope to accomplish specifically as a result of this project?
- How will you accomplish the project goal? Why your approach is particularly suited to the problem? Discuss the activity concept, project structure, and/or formal methodology.
- How will you prove your results? An evaluation plan, complete with measures of efficiency, effectiveness, or outcomes as appropriate to the project design and methodology should be described.
- What special compliance issues and risks are associated with the project?
- Where will the project be conducted? Have space needs been evaluated?
- When will work on the project begin? When will it conclude?
- What are the qualifications for serving as the Principal Investigator on this particular project?
- How much will it cost for you to perform this work? (This question can be fully answered only after the cost has been prepared with the assistance of the OSP staff. Effective technical proposals, however, should indicate bottom-line costs, along with the levels of effort to be invested by the Principal Investigator and other key project personnel.)
A: Salary must be based on institutional base rate and will be calculated according to whether you are paid for nine months or twelve months of effort.
A: For proposal budgets that cover multiple years it is suggested the budget reflect for annual salary increases. The annual salary increase figure used by OSP is 3% per year. This increase is for budgeting purposes only. It does not guarantee this increase.
A: No. Your submission of a proposal through the university indicates that you are submitting as a university employee rather than a private practitioner. As such, all budgets represent your compensation through the university as well as compliance with Human Resources and payroll rules and regulations.
A: The Principal Investigator or designated project staff should work with OSP on budget development. The signature of the Principal Investigator is the first one required on the university approval form and signifies agreement to the scope of work and budget. The Principal Investigator cannot delegate this approval to project staff.
A: You can expect your assigned OSP administrator to:
- Review the guidelines and make you aware of any special budgetary requirements
- Assist in developing a budget that matches the scope of work
- Enter the budget on forms required by sponsor
- Provide you with institutional information for the budget narrative
A: Full–time University faculty and regular staff working on sponsored projects are eligible for University benefits. FICA is withheld from the salaries of all employees paid through the University payroll system, including part–time staff. Exceptions are graduate students in assistantship or fellowship categories. The employer's portion of FICA and retirement are charged to sponsors as direct costs. The University and the employee share coverage for other benefits according to the options available at the time of hiring.
A: Indirect costs, also known as Facilities and Administration (F&A) or overhead costs, are expenses not directly attributable to any one project and incurred by the University for its facilities and services. Indirect costs are not profit, but are real costs to the University to support sponsored activities. Examples include building maintenance and operation, utilities, libraries, computer services and other facilities, payroll, accounting, purchasing, research administration, departmental administration, personnel services, and general administration. The University attempts to recover a small portion of these costs through the inclusion of indirect costs in proposal budgets. All universities have indirect rates.
If the sponsor has a written policy limiting the amount of indirect costs that may be recovered, the university will honor that policy.
A: Modified Total Direct Cost (MTDC) is determined by subtracting the cost of equipment, tuition, fellowships, and subcontract amounts over $25,000 from the total direct costs to determine the F&A base, to which the applicable rate is applied.
A: The Modified Total Direct Costs (MTDC) basis excludes assessment of indirect costs on:
- Capital expenditures
- Space rental
- Subgrants or subcontracts after the first $25,000
- Participant support - defined as pass-through costs to support program participation directly attributable to an individual who is not an employee of the University or a consultant providing a service (such as those attending a training program)
A: The University has a negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement with the US Department of Health and Human Services. The rate agreement is available on OSP website.
A: The University honors any written sponsor policy prohibition on recovery of indirect costs. Some private organizations and some government programs stipulate in their guidelines that they only allow a small percentage of indirect costs to be included on their grant budgets. In these cases, the budget can be developed according to these guidelines. If the sponsor has no written prohibition, full indirect costs must be included.
A: At least three (3) business days are needed to process a proposal to allow for appropriate thorough review and to obtain corrections, if needed.
A: OSP maintains the university registry for several electronic proposal submission and grants administration platforms including NSF Fastlane, the NIH Commons, the GMS System for the Department of Justice, and Grants.Gov. OSP also maintains upgraded computer equipment and staff resources to assist Principal Investigators with electronic submission.
A: No. All proposals are due in OSP 3 business days prior to the sponsor’s deadline as a complete proposal package. The only edits permitted after that time are those requested by OSP to help ensure compliance or best practice.
Three business days (hard deadline) prior to sponsor’s submission deadline submit to the designated OSP pre-award administrator the following (or, as appropriate, release the proposal for electronic submission, for example, via NSF FastLane):
- Final proposal (Summary, Project Description, References, Budget, Budget Justification, Biographical Sketches and/or other sections as required by the sponsor)
- Specific forms required by sponsor
- If applicable, information from external collaborators as stated above
- Signed Electronic Proposal Signature Routing Sheet (ePSRS)
A: PSRS refers to the university’s Proposal Signature Routing Sheet. It is the approval process for the PI, Co-PIs and PI Department Chairs, Deans of the proposal. The signatures indicate agreement to the proposal and concurrence that the proposal can be sent to the sponsor. All signatures must be obtained before the proposal can be submitted. The Vice Provost for Research or Director of OSP are the signatory authority for the University.
A: Signatures required vary with the type of project being proposed. When the Principal Investigator signs the approval form, he or she is approving the entire proposal and assuming responsibility for:
- the scope of scientific and technical effort
- preparation of required technical reports
- management of the project within the budget and time constraints of the proposal in compliance with sponsor regulations and University policies
The Principal Investigator may not delegate his or her authority to approve proposals.
Academic unit heads and college Deans certify the academic soundness of the project, facility and space availability, cost sharing (other than any indirect cost waiver that is a documented sponsor policy), course release arrangements, and the compatibility of the project's goals with the teaching unit's objectives.
Proposals are routed through the appropriate levels for approval based upon the nature of the proposal. A project involving faculty or staff from more than one unit must be routed through all units involved. Your OSP administrator can provide information about specific signatures needed for your project.
A: Yes, they may under certain guidelines. Please contact OSP to determine appropriateness, what is the F&A cost and to begin the approval process.
A: OSP will advise you to begin the protocol submission process with the applicable compliance committee.
A: The Office of Sponsored Programs reviews various information on the proposal such as, but not limited to, research compliance issues, whether costs are allowable, allocable, and reasonable; if cost sharing is required, if F&A requirements of the sponsor are being met; as well as verifying that sponsor requirements and University guidelines and objectives are being met. Information concerning sponsor type, funding source, and other variables are entered and tracked by the Office of Sponsored Programs.
A: When preparing proposal budget/financial plans, several budget categories are excluded when arriving at the base amount to which the appropriate F&A rate is applied (see definition from NSF Grant Proposal Guide below).
(v) Participant Support (Line F on the Proposal Budget):
This budget category refers to costs of transportation, per diem, stipends and other related costs for participants or trainees (but not employees) in connection with NSF-sponsored conferences, meetings, symposia, training activities and workshops." (See GPG chapter II.D.7). For some educational projects conducted at local school districts, however, the participants being trained are employees. In such cases,
the costs must be classified as participant support if payment is made through a stipend or training allowance method. The school district must have an accounting mechanism in place (i.e., sub-account code) to differentiate between regular salary and stipend payments. Generally, indirect costs (F&A) are not allowed on participant support costs. The number of participants to be supported must be entered in the parentheses on the proposal budget. These costs also must be justified in the budget justification section of the proposal. Some programs, such as Research Experiences for Undergraduates, have special instructions for treatment of participant support.
In the absence of a sponsor specific restriction, the budget category of participant support should not be excluded from the F&A base. The exclusion of participant support is a National Science Foundation specific policy. If uncertain, review announcement guidelines to determine applicability.
A: No, the principal investigator and other investigators must personally sign the ePSRS.
A: University policy states that all proposals for funding and research awards be signed by the University’s official. At S&T that is the Vice Provost of Research or Director of Sponsored Programs.
A: No, all contracts are issued to the Board of Curators and they have delegated authorization to the President who has re-delegated responsibility to each campus Chancellor who has re-delegated that signatory authority to the Vice Provost of Research or Director of Sponsored Programs.
A: F&A costs are calculated on the first $25,000 of each subcontract.
A: Although NIH has adopted the modular budget format for budgets of $250,000 per year and less, S&T, as do many universities, requires a detailed itemized budget for internal purposes. Under Cost Accounting Standards (CAS), the burden is on the University to apply costs consistently. Without a detailed budget, OSP does not have any way to assure costs are in general compliance with CAS.
A: Notify your assigned OSP administrator as soon as possible. Your proposal will be retroactively routed through the university approval process. All signatories will review your proposal to see if they agree with parameters, conditions, budget, and commitments that were made. In the most extreme cases, you may be asked to withdraw the proposal. The university always reserves the right to request modification of or reject an award received when there is no approved proposal on file with OSP.
A: Discuss the grant with your department chair and ask for their approval to begin transfer discussions with your former institution. Once you have received this approval, contact your assigned OSP administrator to arrange transfer logistics. The OSP staff will need to work closely with the staff at your previous institution so be prepared with their names and contact information. Once all the details have been agreed upon between the two institutions, the proposal, budget, and letters agreeing to accept the transferred grant will go through the University proposal routing approval process.
A: Occasionally, sponsors require the University to make a contribution to a project's total cost needs. This is known as cost-sharing. Cost-share can include faculty time, remitted tuition, or the assistance of a graduate research assistant. Cost-sharing must have the advance concurrence of the Department Chair or Center Director since their budgets are usually affected.
Cost sharing will be examined and/or audited by the sponsor organizations, the budget proposal must include the dollar value of all such services. Unless the sponsor makes cost share a requirement of the proposal budget, it is strongly discouraged. In the case of NSF, cost share is prohibited unless specified in the RFP. Contact your OSP administrator for assistance with calculating cost-share for the proposal budgets.
A: Cost-share may also be contributed by the partners on a project. This is called third party cost-share. Even though the cost-share is offered by a third party, once it is listed on our budget, it becomes the responsibility of S&T to document and report. To document third party cost-share for the proposal, the University will require a letter listing the cost-share and information detailing how the costs were derived. This letter must be signed by someone with the authority to commit the organization. At the award stage, the subcontract issued to an organization will include provisions for certifying and reporting on cost-share offered by the third party.
A: Fastlane is the National Science Foundation's electronic proposal and award system. It is the point of entry for submission of proposals, revised budgets, progress reports and requests for no-cost extensions.
A: Please contact your OSP administrator.
A: The NIH salary cap is the highest amount of direct salary that a faculty member can charge to a grant. The amount is tied to the category of Executive Level I of the Federal Executive Level Pay Scale. This amount is subject to change.
Salary rates by year can be found at the following website: http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/policy/salcap_summary.htm.
If a faculty member's salary is higher than the NIH cap, the proposal budget should reflect the actual base salary. Therefore, should the cap be increased, the University is permitted to recover salary at the higher rate.
A: Up to 3 on each proposal.
A: The Office of Sponsored Programs.
A: You can expect that your grants and contracts administrator will:
- Review the award
- Set up the budget in PeopleSoft and issue the MoCode for spending
- Issue request for payment to sponsors
- Assist PI’s with the monitor expenditures and cost share
- Advise PI and departmental staff on the allowablity of expenses
- Assist in the correction of expenses
- Submit financial reports to sponsors
- Submit requests for budget revisions to sponsors
- Submit requests for no-cost time extensions to sponsors
- Put forward any necessary internal forms for review and approval to VPR or Director
- Review subcontract invoices for appropriateness and route for payment
- Work with auditors on all sponsored activity review
- Submit all close out documents to sponsors
- Maintain the complete official project file until closed
A: The Grant Award Summary, (GAS) is a document issued to the PI at award set up time indication award amount, award begin and end dates, budget, cost sharing, if applicable, project number, project Title, Sponsor name, name of grants and contracts administrator in OSP who will responsible for award management and the project’s MoCode.
A: Summer salary paperwork is a personnel action and is initiated by department. Check with your personnel administrator on the process within your unit. The paperwork for other costs is also initiated by your unit.
A: Will the person be a staff person or a consultant? If hiring a person to work on a sponsored project, it requires a personnel action. If hiring a consultant to work on a sponsored project, requires a consulting agreement through business services. Both action are initiated by the Principal Investigator in conjunction with the personnel administrator in the unit. Individuals hired on a sponsored project are subject to all S&T policy and procedures as well as the terms of the grant agreement. Your personnel administrator will need confirmation that that the grant budget will serve as funding source for this employee or consultant and will need the account number that has been established for your grant.
A: S&T employees or current S&T students cannot be paid as consultants. Please contact your OSP administrator for more information if you want to include these positions on your grants. The personnel action will need to be initiated by your unit.
A: Grant fund purchases should be made according to the approved budget that is part of the grant agreement. If you need to spend funds differently from the way it appears in the approved budget, you may need to request a rebudget of your grant funds. Please contact your award grant and contracts administrator.
A: The Principal Investigator must request such action from OSP in writing. If sponsor approval is required, OSP will obtain the approval before the rebudget is authorized.
A: Consultants or subcontractors perform essential services on awards that are not available from existing project personnel. The Principal Investigator must discuss all proposed agreements in advance with their OSP administrator to determine if the work will be performed under a service agreement or a subcontract. Service agreements are processed and signed through Business Services. Payments to consultants are processed by the department. Subcontractors must be identified at the time of proposal submission and are approved by the sponsor. Subcontract agreements are processed through OSP. Payments to subcontractors will be initiated by OSP with payments processed through shared services.
A: Cost-share is part of the proposal budget and appears in either a separate column or a separate column listed as "Other" for third party cost-share on the ePSRS. Once an award is made, it is the responsibility of the University to track the cost-share.
A: The situation should be discussed with your OSP administrator as soon as it becomes a problem. The agreements with contractors are typically written so that there are clear performance and payment milestones. The longer you wait to formally bring it to the contractor's attention, the less work gets done and the more difficult the situation becomes. OSP can work with you and any other offices in the university necessary to resolve the issue.
A: The PI on the project is responsible for the approval of expenditures on grants and contracts. The fiscal approver of each department is then responsible for the approval in the accounting system. OSP staff are available as a resource if those approving expenditures have a question about a grant account expense.
A: OSP is responsible for invoicing to sponsors and preparing all financial reports. In some instances, the contract may have special reporting or invoicing requirements. These special cases will be coordinated in advance between the Principal Investigator and the grants and contracts administrator managing the award.
A: The PI prepares the technical reports. Most sponsored projects require technical reports detailing progress. These reports are part of the contractual agreement between the sponsor and the university.
Failure to submit reports on a timely basis may not only affect adversely the Principal Investigator's (and the University's) ability to receive further support from the sponsor, but may result in a loss of payment for costs already incurred. Recently some agencies have developed electronic submission procedures for technical reports that require certification by the Institutional Official. In order to provide the certification to the agency, the Principal Investigator must route the report to OSP. After review, the Institutional Official authorize the electronic submission.
A: OSP sends a copy of the award document outlining the reporting requirements to the PI. It is the responsibility of the PI to review and note report due dates.
A: Principal Investigators are required to copy their post award administrator on the submission of all technical reports to the sponsor. OSP must track all contract deliverables for reporting have been met. This inclusion on the report submission, ensures award compliance.
A: Discuss this with your OSP administrator as soon as it becomes an issue. Research shifts that create a redirection of the statement of work described in the original proposal must be discussed with the sponsor. The PI may request changes in scope or period of performance to OSP. OSP will review and seek approval of changes with the sponsor.
A: This is one of the issues addressed during the grant close-out period. Grant funds are to be used only for the purpose of the grant. If the work is complete, in most cases the funds must be returned to the sponsor, unless there are specific provisions in the agreement. Please check with your OSP administrator about your specific grant or contract. What is grant close–out? The grant close-out period is the period 60-90 days before the end of the award to 90 days following the period of performance in which the Principal Investigator and OSP reviews the technical and financial aspects of the award to make sure that all goals have been met and that all funds are properly expended.
A: The grant award summary (GAS) specifies the dates of the period of performance of the grant. The final financial reporting requirements are handled by OSP. The Principal Investigator is responsible for the final technical report. OSP handles any non-financial contractual paperwork required to close the grant.
A: Discuss this with your OSP grants and contracts administrator. It may be possible to request a no-cost extension from the sponsor. Occasionally, the completion of grant or contract work may require more time than originally specified. If no additional funds are necessary, a no–cost extension may be requested from the sponsor.
The Principal Investigator must notify OSP in writing of the need for a no–cost extension at least 60 days prior to the project expiration date so that OSP can obtain the sponsor's approval.
A: The University is subject to audit by sponsors for specific programs and is also audited for its administration of sponsored programs in accordance with the OMB Circular A-133. Auditors representing sponsors will periodically examine the University's records for the purposes of:
- determining whether contract or grant funds were used in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and procedures
- making objective appraisals of the financial accounting system and administrative controls to ensure that programs are being charged with appropriate amounts
- determining the accuracy of the financial reports and records
A: Office supplies (pens, paper, notebooks, clips, stamps, envelopes, ink cartridges/copying toner, local telephone service, etc.) are those costs that are incurred for a “common or joint objective” of the university and, therefore, cannot be identified readily and specifically with a particular sponsored project. While one can easily recognize that a notepad might be “needed” for a research project, we don’t want to have to set up an accounting system to track all of the department’s notepad inventory in order to direct cost them to all the various accounts/projects on which they are used. So, although it is possible to practically direct charge any cost to a project, the accounting system that would be required and the staff effort to ensure each unit of these various costs are properly distributed makes it an unrealistic and inefficient way of handling such costs.
Therefore, the federal cost principles expect the University to normally absorb these charges by unrestricted operational accounts and recover those costs through the indirect cost reimbursement process. This expectation holds true even where in some cases the federal sponsor imposes F&A rate restrictions on certain grant programs.
Clerical staff, i.e., those individuals that provide general support to departmental functions and whose time associated with each of the many individual tasks would be difficult, impractical and/or inefficient to track to each of those benefiting “tasks,” are assigned under the category of “departmental administration.”
The F&A recovery process generates several millions of revenue dollars for the University as the sponsored projects are invoiced. It is these revenues that “replenish” the departmental accounts from which the departmental supplies, services, and clerical support were charged. From this perspective, it should not be difficult to understand why the Federal cost principles expect the University to be reimbursed by the F&A cost recovery process, and not by direct charging these costs to a project.
A: A major project requiring a full time clerical employee could possibly be an extraordinary circumstance, thus justifying the direct costing of clerical salaries.
- Large, complex programs such as General Clinical Research Centers, Primate Centers, Program Projects, environmental research centers, engineering research centers, and other grants and contracts that entail assembling and managing teams of investigators from a number of institutions.
- Projects that involve extensive data accumulation, analysis and entry, surveying, tabulation, cataloging, searching literature, and reporting (such as epidemiological studies, clinical trials, and retrospective clinical records studies).
- Projects that require making travel and meeting arrangements for large numbers of participants, such as conferences and seminars.
- Projects whose principal focus is the preparation and production of manuals and large reports, books and monographs (excluding routine progress and technical reports).
- Projects that are geographically inaccessible to normal departmental, administrative services, such as research vessels, radio astronomy projects, and other research field sites that are remote from campus.
- Individual projects requiring project-specific database management; individualized graphics or manuscript preparation; human or animal protocols; and multiple project-related investigator coordination and communications.
These examples are not exhaustive nor are they intended to imply that direct charging of administrative or clerical salaries would always be appropriate for the situations illustrated in the examples. For instance, the examples would be appropriate when the costs of such activities are incurred in unlike circumstances, i.e., the actual activities charged directly are not the same as the actual activities normally included in the institution's facilities and administrative (F&A) cost pools or, if the same, the indirect activity costs are immaterial in amount. It would be inappropriate to charge the cost of such activities directly to specific sponsored agreements if, in similar circumstances, the costs of performing the same type of activity for other sponsored agreements were included as allocable costs in the institution's F&A cost pools. Application of negotiated predetermined F&A cost rates may also be inappropriate if such activity costs charged directly were not provided for in the allocation base that was used to determine the predetermined F&A cost rates.
A: The University defines “equipment” as any tangible, nonexpendable property having: (1) a useful life of more than one year, and, (2) an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit. Items not meeting these two conditions are not to be classified as, and placed in, the equipment category.
The costs of additions, major repairs, enhancements, or improvements subsequent to the initial acquisition should be capitalized if the following are met: the costs meets the capitalization threshold; and useful life of the asset is extended beyond its original life; or functionality of the asset is extended and/or the service capacity or efficiency is increased.
Repair or maintenance expenditures that keep the asset in its normal operating condition or that bring the asset back to its original state without either extending the useful life or improving upon the functionality or service capacity of the asset are not considered capital expenditures and should be expensed in the period incurred.
A: A quoted price for services from a consultant, collaborating institution, or other organization must be “backed-up” in writing from that party. This documentation (e.g., a proposal which contains the proposed technical work, a budget estimate, and authorized institution/company signature) is required as a matter of sound business practice to indicate that the University has reviewed and accepted that party’s intended participation, and therefore supports inclusion of that activity as part of S&T’s proposed effort.
Additionally, by inclusion of this material in the University’s proposal, OSP is therefore authorizing the issuance of the appropriate agreement to the named party. When the party is named and their Scope of Work (SOW) is sufficiently described as a part of the University’s application, a sub-award can be issued at the time of award.
A: Keep in mind that in many cases, as a result of the imposition of the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS), federal sponsors no longer perform in-depth reviews of proposal budgets. Under CAS, the federal agencies expect the applicant to be familiar with the Cost Principles and to exclude non-allowed costs from those budgets. As a result, Universities cannot depend on the “rationalization” that since the sponsor did not remove it from the awarded budget that, in fact, the sponsor has “approved” that cost item. In order to position your argument along that line, at a minimum the proposal’s budget should include a separate page titled “Budget Justification” in which those non-routine or normally non-allowed expenses are identified and justified for the project – OSP initially must make the judgment call based upon the circumstances of the PI’s justification.
A: There are two terms, “matching” and “cost sharing,” that are often used interchangeably. “Cost Sharing/matching” is used when the sponsor has specified a particular dollar to dollar (or ratio) requirement which is to be supplied from non-federal sources in order to receive the federal (or sponsor) funding, i.e., the sponsor has essentially established what the applicant will share. “Cost sharing/matching” therefore refers to any portion of the project’s costs not borne by the sponsor. For Missouri University Science and Technology purposes, all cost sharing is accomplished either as a cash outlay (an expenditure) or as release time. Existing University resources (space, equipment, supplies on hand, etc.) are not allowable as cost sharing.
Tips to determine allowability for federal cost sharing or matching:
- The cost share must have been included in the sponsor’s approved budget;
- The cost item must first be of the type allowed by the Cost Principles;
- The cost item must be necessary to, and reasonable for, project performance;
- The cost item must be verifiable (e.g., by official accounting records);
- The cost item must provide an obvious benefit to the project;
- The cost item cannot be used as cost sharing also on another federal project.
All of the above conditions must be met in order for a cost item to be claimed or proposed as cost sharing or matching. The concept of “in-kind” cost sharing means that the University is to receive from an entity or individual - other than the sponsoring agency or the University’s own sources — items such as services and supplies through a process under which no cash transaction takes place.
A: You may request a departmental guarantee using a “departmental guarantee” request form. The department chair will be required to approve. The form can be found on the OSP website.
A: Allowable costs must be reasonable and allocable. A cost is reasonable if the amount paid is consistent with the amount that a prudent person under similar circumstances would pay. A cost is allocable if 1) it was incurred solely to advance the work of the project; 2) if it benefits both the project and the institution in general in portions that can be reasonably approximated; or 3) if it is necessary to the overall operation of the institution.
A: An Effort Verification Report, (EVR) is a certification of the effort spent working on sponsored research projects.
The OMB Uniform Guidance recognizes that faculty research, teaching, consulting, advising of students and administration activities are inextricably intermingled in an academic setting and is too burdensome to attempt to account each separately. Therefore, Federal standards require that faculty certify there effort on research twice a year.
Please note: Failure to certify effort will result in a disallowed salary cost and will be required to be transferred from the project.
A: At proposal time, PI and coPI’s determine the individual effort of each faculty working on the project. The ePSRS reflects that effort level and the PI and coPIs approval indicates their agreement of the credit. Shared credit is used to report the level of proposals, awards and expenditures for faculty promotion and awards.
At the time of a proposal submission, the proposal is recorded on tracking documents with corresponding proposal dollars by shared credit of the faculty of the proposal. If a faculty member is reviewed for tenure and or awards, it is that dollar amount that will be reflected on their dossier. For example, a proposal of $50K with a PI and coPI at 50% shared credit each, the value of the proposal for each is $25K.
At award time, the award is recorded on tracking documents with the corresponding award dollars per the approved shared credit. When the award is set up in PeopleSoft, the shared credit is recorded in the system. These percentages of effort, will determine the value of award and expenditures for reporting purposes. If a faculty member is reviewed for tenure or awards, these dollar amounts will be reported on the dossier. For example, an award of $40K is received with a PI and coPI sharing 50% credit, the value is $20K for each. Also, the expenses of the FY on this same award is $10K, the expenditures reported on the dossier will be $5K.
Please note: If shared credit is not given at submission or award time, it will not be reported. After an award is set up, the PI can change shared credit. Also, reallocation of funds to other research projects, will not be reflected in submission or awarded tracking documents. Expenditure reports will capture those reallocation projects.
A: Unfortunately, the PeopleSoft program will not allow the reporting of historical data. If changes are made they are reflected in the entire period.
Meaning, Dr. UMR has a DOE 4 year project with Dr. Jane Miner; each researcher has a level of credit at 50%. Dr. Jane Miner accepts a position at another University in year 2 of the project. Dr. Joe Miner comes to the University and is working in this same field. Dr. UMR asks Dr. Joe Miner to work on the project in a smaller capacity than Dr. Jane Miner. DOE approves. The shared credit is now 60%-Dr. UMR and 40%-Dr. Jane Miner. If we simply remove Dr. Jane Miner and add Dr. Joe Miner, credit for the expenses incurred in the previous years will be inaccurate.
Therefore, changes in shared credit require a new project to be set up.