Narration: Welcome to the Anatomy of an Administrative Shell mini course.

Transcription

1 Welcome to the Anatomy of an Administrative Shell mini course. 1

2 If you have previously joined us for other sponsored project mini courses, you will be familiar with the Sponsored Project Life Cycle. In the life cycle, Anatomy of the Administrative Shell falls within the Proposal Development and Submission phase. In this course, we will focus our attention on the administrative shell and its components. 2

3 The purpose of this mini course is to: Provide an overview of the main parts of a sponsored project proposal: the science and the administrative shell Explain how the scientific and administrative parts come together over the course of the proposal development process Describe the key components of the administrative shell in detail, including what constitutes a complete administrative shell for review by the Office for Sponsored Research Review the tools that are used to create a complete administrative shell 3

4 When you have completed this mini course you will be able to: Describe the two main parts of a sponsored project proposal: The Science and the Administrative Shell Identify the standard items that make up the administrative shell Understand how to fulfill internal (Northwestern University) requirements and sponsor based requirements relevant to creating a complete administrative shell Locate the tools and materials needed to create a complete administrative shell 4

5 If you joined us for the Introduction to Sponsored Research mini course, then you may remember that the sponsored research process typically begins with an idea from a scientist, generally referred to as the principal investigator or PI. The PI prepares a proposal to request funding from a sponsor that may be interested in supporting the PI s idea. Thinking back to another mini course A Beginner s Guide to Sponsored Project Solicitations, you may recall that the main way a PI identifies potential sponsors is through sponsor solicitations. A solicitation outlines a sponsor s funding interests and serves as the guide for constructing and submitting a proposal. In addition, some sponsors issue supplementary materials to provide standardized and/or more detailed guidance. For example, the SF 424 for the National Institutes of Health and the Grants Proposal Guidelines for the National Science Foundation [pop up images as spoken] Specifically, the solicitation and supplementary materials detail the two main parts that need to be included in a proposal: the the science and the administrative shell. As we walk through the next few slides, you may want to think about the proposal development process like that of designing a house. Think of the PI like an 5

6 architect, who wants to build a dream house and the proposal like the building plan that will outline this vision and request funding for it. 5

7 The technical portion of a sponsored project proposal or The Science provides the conceptual basis for the proposal. The Science outlines a detailed plan for executing the proposed research project and is developed by the PI and research collaborators. The key technical components include the technical narrative, references cited, and other documents specifically technical in nature, such as a project schedule or milestones and appendices. Keep in mind that you may hear the narrative referred to by a variety of names, including Methodology, Research Strategy, and perhaps the two most common terms Research Plan (for NIH proposals) and Project Description (for NSF proposals). 6

8 The Administrative or Admin Shell consists of the required elements of a sponsored project proposal that are non technical in nature. Often casually referred to as everything but the science, the admin shell is the structural support for a proposal. The admin shell provides the supporting documentation for the infrastructure of the proposal. For example, detailing the funding requested and how the funds will be used to execute the proposed project. A Research Administrator (or RA) working alongside the PI typically oversees the assembly of the admin shell. The key admin shell components are the proposal routing form, statement of work, budget, and budget justification. In a few slides we ll take a closer look at each of these as well as other important admin shell components. 7

9 Returning to our house design analogy, let s look at how the roles of the PI and RA intersect in the proposal development process. We start with the PI, who, like an architect, wants to build a dream house and has a grand vision of the people, the things, and activities that will make this house a functioning home. The final proposal like a building plan will outline this grand dream house. Just as a building plan must comply with building codes and zoning laws, so must a proposal be in compliance with the solicitation, other sponsorspecific materials, and federal laws and regulations. While the PI architect focuses on the aesthetics and functionality of the house, the RA plays a couple different roles. First, as civil engineer, the RA evaluates the structural integrity of the PI s design and ensures that the proposed building will meet code. Secondly, as building developer, the RA creates the supporting, nontechnical pieces that outline how to take the proposed project from dream to reality. 8

10 Although the PI and RA each have their own areas of focus, sometimes their jobs overlap. A good working relationship between the two makes for a better end product. 8

11 Throughout the proposal development process, OSR provides support to PI s and RA s. This includes helping to interpret sponsor guidelines as related to constructing the technical and administrative components. When it comes to proposal submission, OSR serves as Northwestern s designated authorized institutional official. Practically speaking, this means that OSR staff provide a thorough pre submission review to ensure that a proposal is complete, accurate, and in compliance with sponsor guidelines and Northwestern policies. When needed, OSR requests changes that will bring a proposal in line with these standards. When a proposal is complete, OSR provides institutional endorsement of the proposal on behalf the University. In order for OSR to have sufficient time for this review and approval process, complete proposal components must be submitted to OSR in advance of sponsor deadlines. The complete admin shell is due to OSR at least five business days before a sponsor deadline. The full proposal that is, the admin 9

12 shell and the science is due to OSR at least two business days before a sponsor deadline. 9

13 In starting to learn about proposal development at Northwestern, you may have heard of and maybe even started using InfoEd, the Electronic Research Administration support software that Northwestern uses for proposal development and proposal and award tracking. Please note that this minicourse is not meant to provide instruction on the use of InfoEd. If you would like to find out more, you can access InfoEd training resources using the onscreen link. Proposals are submitted by two general methods: System to system and nonsystem to system. System to system proposals are submitted electronically directly from the InfoEd Proposal Development (or PD) module to grants.gov. This method is used for proposals going to NIH and DOD, for example. Nonsystem to system proposals are submitted outside of InfoEd to the sponsor. For example, using an external submission platform like FastLane for NSF. Regardless of submission method, ALL proposals require an InfoEd record as a standard Northwestern business practice. An InfoEd record provides 10

14 centralized tracking of proposal development and submission. It also enables the collection of important proposal and award data. It is a best practice to notify your OSR contact and create an InfoEd record early in the proposal development process. When a record is created early, OSR can better anticipate upcoming proposal submission activity. 10

15 Now that we ve walked through what an admin shell is and how it fits into the overall process of proposal development and review, let s look more depth at the individual admin components. First, we ll take a close look at the components required for ALL Northwestern proposals and what makes each one complete. Then we ll turn our attention to the additional as applicable admin shell components. Use OSR s Admin Shell Checklist as a reference for assembling admin shell components. You can download a copy of the checklist from the OSR website using the onscreen link. The components of the Admin Shell that are always required are: The InfoEd proposal routing form and required approvals Statement of Work (SOW) Budget Budget Justification and Sponsor solicitation or guidelines. 11

16 Narration The Proposal Routing Form is a cover sheet in InfoEd that introduces the proposal and summarizes important administrative items. This includes information about the type of proposal and sponsor and demographic information about key personnel. The proposal routing form is not submitted to the sponsor but is important for internal Northwestern review, providing context for approvers and OSR staff. The Proposal Routing Form is the one proposal element that is generated entirely within InfoEd. The form is filled out prior to routing to the designated departmental and school users for review and approval. In fact, the form cannot be routed unless all mandatory fields have been filled out. For this component to be considered complete, all required approvals must be received along with the completed form itself. 12

17 The Statement of Work (or SOW) is a brief summary of the proposed project. It provides background information and outlines the proposed objectives and research activities. The SOW is often referred to as the Abstract or Project Summary or Scope of Work. OSR uses the SOW to inform the review of the admin components. The SOW is typically written by the PI or someone on the research team and provided to the RA for inclusion in the admin shell. The RA s job is to ensure that the SOW provided for admin shell review is complete, meaning, at minimum, a viable draft of the document. Viable draft means that it 1) provides sufficient information about the project plan in order to evaluate the admin components; and 2) will not substantively change with any further revision by the PI. Naturally, the final version of the SOW can be submitted for admin shell review, but it is not required until the final science is submitted to OSR. 13

18 13

19 The Budget is an itemized list of the estimated costs to execute the proposed project. In other words, how much funding is being requested from the sponsor. For most projects, a large part of the budget will be devoted to personnel costs. Personnel includes faculty researchers, postdocs and students, and lab technicians. Other costs include such things as materials and supplies, services, consulting costs, travel, and subawards to collaborating institutions. Most sponsors have specific guidelines about constructing a proposal budget. These guidelines outline required format and level of detail. A complete budget is a realistic request that accurately outlines all costs as instructed and is provided to OSR in the sponsor required format. Keep in mind that how you provide the budget to OSR can vary by proposal. 14

20 Although we won t address the many aspects of budgeting in this course, there is one basic concept that is important to understand when it comes to creating a complete budget: direct and indirect costs. These are the two general classes of costs included in the budget. Direct costs are costs that can be directly assigned to the execution of a specific project, such as personnel costs for the research team and supplies that will need to be purchased. The cost examples mentioned on the previous slide are all examples of direct costs. Indirect costs are not directly assignable to any specific project but contribute to the institutional resources and personnel required to make the execution of a project possible. Indirect costs are also called Facilities and Administrative or F&A costs or overhead costs. In general, F&A costs are calculated as a percentage of direct costs based on a standard, predetermined F&A rate. The F&A rate used in any given case will depend on a number of proposal specific factors, including type of sponsor and type of project activity. 15

21 The budget justification (or budget narrative) is a narrative written in lay language justifying the expenses outlined in the budget. In other words, a write up that describes the how and why of the costs outlined in the budget. Most sponsors have specific guidelines regarding budget justifications in terms of format, level of detail, and supporting documentation that should be included. For example, the justification for an NIH modular budget requires relatively little detail whereas a DOD procurement contract requires significant explanation. A complete budget justification provides sufficient documentation for budget costs in the format required by the sponsor Note: There are some cases when supporting documentation is not submitted to the sponsor but is required by Northwestern for internal purposes. A prime example is a capital equipment quote. 16

22 The final always required element of the admin shell is the sponsor solicitation or guidelines. Like the proposal routing form, the solicitation is not sent to the sponsor but is provided to OSR via InfoEd. In order to conduct a thorough review of a proposal, OSR needs to know exactly which guidelines are applicable to it. Including the solicitation as part of the admin shell ensures a common point of reference and that the correct standards are being applied. Remember: In addition to the always required items we discussed, all required non technical components identified in the solicitation are considered part of the admin shell. These items must be provided to OSR for review in order for the admin shell to be considered complete. One last thing to note is that are some exceptions to the requirement of providing the solicitation as part of the admin shell. For example, parent NIH R01 submissions. In these cases, the solicitation number must be identified, but a copy of the full solicitation is not required. Nonetheless, it is considered a best practice to always provide the full solicitation. 17

23 Perhaps the most common items that are required as additional pieces of the admin shell are as follows: Biographical sketches (or biosketches) are standardized documents that outline the educational, professional, and research experience of the key investigators who will carry out the project. For all practical purposes, biosketches can be viewed as always required items for NIH and NSF proposals. Current & Pending or Other Support documents list all of the PI s current sponsored research support and pending requests for research support; Facilities, Equipment, and other Resources Document(s) provide information about resources that will be used and made available for the project; Letters of support or collaboration document other individuals or institutional commitment to the proposed project. This can include details about services to be provided. For example, if a consultant is included in the budget, the letter from the consultant would state the hourly rate and the number of hours that will be devoted to the project; Capital equipment quote(s) should be provided if the proposal includes a request for such equipment; and Sponsor specific forms, and for some sponsors, system access. A best practice is to 18

24 check on sponsor system access early in the proposal development process as you may need to request special account access. 18

25 Some additional admin components that depend on the particular solicitation and research proposed include: Any financial conflict of interest (or COI) disclosures that are required of key personnel; Invitation or permission to submit for example, some solicitations are limited submissions, which are managed internally by the Office of Research Development to identify applicants from Northwestern who will submit on the institution s behalf. Another time when a letter of invitation is required is if a sponsor invites a specific PI to submit a proposal. If the project involves an outgoing subcontract, the admin shell must include the commitment package and documentation from each subrecipient. At minimum, a subrecipient commitment package includes a letter of intent (LOI), SOW, budget and budget justification If cost sharing is outlined in the proposal, then cost share documents must be provided as part of the admin shell. Finally, other documents as applicable. Although we ve discussed a wide range of possible admin shell inclusions, this does not represent an exhaustive list of all documents that may be considered part of the admin shell. To reiterate a key 19

26 point made earlier: If sponsor guidelines indicate that additional, non technical documents are required, these are also considered part of the admin shell and will need to be provided for the admin shell to be considered complete. 19

27 Handy references for some of the most common external sponsors can be found at these links on screen for the NSF s Grant Proposal Guide, DHHS s Form PHS 398, and the NIH s SF424. There are also many Northwestern specific resources that are helpful in constructing an admin shell. These include: The OSR Admin Shell Checklist OSR s F&A rate page Information on Subcontracting and The Northwestern Conflict of Interest Office Budget Development 20

28 Now let s look at how all of these pieces come together in the proposal development process: The PI comes up with an idea and informs the RA that she would like to submit a proposal for funding in response to a solicitation. The RA reads and evaluates the solicitation and pulls out her proposal development tools, including sponsor supplementary materials, the OSR admin shell checklist, and templates for standard admin shell documents. The RA creates an InfoEd record, including uploading a copy of the solicitation in the InfoEd record. The PI and her research team get to work on the science. Meanwhile, the RA works on assembling the proposal routing form, the SOW, budget, budget justification, and any other required admin shell components. Throughout this process, the PI and RA are in frequent communication. At least five days before the sponsor deadline, the RA submits the complete admin shell to OSR for review. While OSR is reviewing the admin shell, the PI puts the finishing touches on the science. During the review period, it is possible that OSR will provide feedback to the RA on the admin shell. The RA will incorporate any changes and get the final science from the PI. 21

29 Two days or more before the sponsor deadline, the RA will submit the final complete proposal. That is, the complete admin shell, including any edits from OSR, and the final science. OSR will review the complete proposal and inform the RA when the proposal is ready to submit. 21

30 Tips and tricks from experienced Research Administrators and OSR staff: Talk to your PI often and in detail. This may sound obvious, but it s important to communicate throughout the proposal development process. By doing so you can develop a much better understanding of how the science will impact the admin shell. You will also be to be on top of changes as the PI fleshes out the science and be proactive in adjusting the administrative components. Love the list: Follow the OSR admin shell checklist to make sure you include all must have items and identify any additional sponsor specific requirements. Remember: the exact admin shell components required for each proposal are determined by the solicitation. The admin shell checklist can assist you in your evaluation of the solicitation so you don t miss a thing. Pay attention to detail, even on the simple and straightforward things, such as biosketch formatting and page limits, and get the easy stuff squared away ASAP. Then focus your attention on the more involved pieces and carefully work through those things. One technique to help with getting the easy stuff done early is to Always be prepared: Keep items that are frequently required for proposals accessible and continually updated so that you re ready to go with standard items at any time. Examples include other support documents, NIH format biosketches, and the PI s list of trainees. Edit each item systematically and early. If possible, review things as soon as you receive them from the PI, request clarification (if needed), and edit right away. Catching mistakes early on in the process avoids last minute scrambling and potential mistakes in the days or hours before a proposal is due. Remember to give everything a second or even third review BEFORE submitting OSR. This enables OSR to focus on providing thorough, 22

31 substantive review of a proposal rather than spending time proofreading. Finally, Anticipate changes in budget requirements and rates. Sponsor budget requirements frequently change, so it is important to check not only the solicitation but also keep informed of changes to sponsors general guidelines and policies. Fringe and F&A rates also change typically annually so double check the OSR website for current Northwestern fringe and F&A rates. 22

32 Here are the concepts that have been covered in this mini course, Anatomy of an Administrative Shell. Take a few minutes to read through the terms on screen and see if you recall what all of them are. If you are uncertain about a topic, you may return to the related slides and view them again. For future reference, remember: if ever you need a refresher, you can view all or part of this course at any time. 23

33 Congratulations! You have now completed the Anatomy of an Administrative Shell mini course. Please do not forget to fill out a post course evaluation. Your feedback is helpful in providing the most effective training resources and content as possible. 24