New Policy on Facilities and Administrative (F&A) Costs

An important announcement regarding IDC rate for funded projects is that the university will no longer allow a reduced IDC rate without a published policy from the funding agency indicating a restriction in IDC rate.

Here is an abbreviated version of the announcement from the UF Administrative Memo October 2, 2013

F&A Costs, also known as indirect costs (IDC) or overhead costs, are fixed costs in support of research and other sponsored activities. F&A costs provide reimbursement for actual expenses that support extramural activities but cannot be directly charged to a project.

F&A costs result from shared services such as libraries; physical plant operation and maintenance; utility costs; general, departmental, and sponsored projects administrative expenses; and depreciation or use allowance for buildings and equipment.

Further, OMB Circular A-21 Section G. 1.a.(3). states “Each institution’s F&A cost rate process must be appropriately designed to ensure that federal sponsors do not in any way subsidize the F&A costs of other sponsors…”

Appropriate recovery of F&A for all activities is a necessary means to support those projects and to support compliance with state and federal laws and regulations. Under-recovery of the costs for any individual project places a disproportionate burden on UF rather than the sponsor of the activity.

Significant reductions in the state appropriations for the university’s activities have made the recovery of F&A costs on sponsored agreements more crucial to UF’s ability to provide the research infrastructure required for excellence in research and scholarship.

To this end, the university is reiterating its policy to budget the full federal negotiated F&A rate on all applications and awards unless that sponsor has a published policy restricting recovery or is a public entity listed on the Division of Sponsored Programs F&A Rates webpage.

Any questions can be directed to Stephanie Gray, Director, Division of Sponsored Research at 352-273-4062 or slgray@ufl.edu.

 

/by

How to Win Government Grants in Tough Times: Part 3

Building a Collaborative Grant-seeking Team

Writing a successful grant proposal involves teamwork. To assemble the best team possible, you will need to identify tasks, secure the necessary partnerships, and develop a timeline.

Main PI – Manages and is responsible for the overall project. Develops strategy and timeline. Determines and secures programmatic team members. Writes job descriptions. Creates proposal outline based on the Request for Proposal (RFP). Coordinates writing process with other team members. Guides process and quality assurance. Connects bigger picture with details. Plans fundraising strategy for matching funds. Makes final decision on proposal approach.

  • Programmatic Team – Includes key individuals with specific knowledge who serve as writers and/or provide content for their particular area of expertise (e.g., methodology, supportive services, institutional research data, logic model, evaluation). Provides feedback on proposal drafts.
  • Administrative Team – Accurately completes all forms and obtains required signatures. Has in-depth knowledge of RFP requirements. Develops a checklist of RFP requirements. Sets deadline dates for team tasks. Keeps team on task. Ensures proposal is complete, including supporting documentation. Checks details.
  • Budget Team – Develops budget according to RFP guidelines. Has specific knowledge of fiscal requirements. Works closely with programmatic team. Serves as liaison between the college and other units related to the grant process.
  • Editor – Compiles information (e.g., letters of commitment, biographies and CVs for project personnel). Proofreads for grammatical errors. Ensures clarity and consistency throughout proposal. Provides boilerplate text. Checks formatting and ensures each section meets RFP requirements.
  • Outside Readers – Confirm proposal is written for an education lay person.

A team approach with regular meetings ensures information is communicated immediately to the appropriate team member. The silo approach is ineffective in this competitive market. Remember, the more time the team spends on the front end, the more time will be saved in the long run.

Look for Part 4 of “How to Win Government Grants in Tough Times” in the December issue of the ORB.

Excerpted from The Chronicle of Philanthropy Webinar, August 13, 2013

/by

National Institutes of Health Funding and Public Access Policy

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy ensures that published results of NIH-funded research are accessible to the public.

Effective July 1, 2013, NIH moved into the enforcement stage, requiring full compliance with the policy before continuing year (type 5) funds will be released.

Final peer-reviewed manuscripts must be posted to the NIH Manuscript Submission (NIHMS) system upon acceptance for publication and be made publicly available on PubMed Central (PMC) no later than 12 months after the official date of publication.

Here are some important points to consider:

  • Awards are being withheld if there are publications not in compliance with the policy.
  • Alternatively, awards have been released but restricted so no spending is allowed until publications are in compliance.
  • NIH is identifying non-compliant articles during progress report submissions where the PI is instructed to identify new publications associated with the award. As a result, NIH has withheld the award funds.
  • NIH has published a list of known non-compliant articles. The UF Office of Research and the UF Libraries have been reaching out to the authors of the articles to assist them in bringing these articles into compliance.

Please log in to myNCBI at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ to ensure you are in compliance or contact the UF Libraries for individual support.

NIH Policy Access Policy is available at http://publicaccess.nih.gov/.

UF resources to assist with compliance are available at http://guides.uflib.ufl.edu/nih.

/by

Awarded Projects for October 2013

College of Education – Awarded Projects – October 2013
Principal Investigator: Lynda Hayes (PK Yonge)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: Local Instructional Improvement System
Project Period: 7/1/2013 – 6/30/2014
Award Amount: $58,350.81
Principal Investigator: Lynda Hayes (PK Yonge)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: Title I Part A: Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged 2013-2014
Project Period: 7/1/2013 – 6/30/2014
Award Amount: $124,292
Principal Investigator: Lynda Hayes (PK Yonge)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: Title II Part A: Teacher and Principal Training
Project Period: 7/1/2013 – 6/30/2014
Award Amount: $24,619
Principal Investigator: Patricia Snyder (CEECS/SESPECS)
Co-PI: Maureen Conroy (CEECS/SESPECS)
Funding Agency: University of Washington (DHHS Subcontract)
Project Title: Head Start National Center for Quality Teaching and Learning
Project Period: 9/15/2013 – 9/14/2014
Award Amount: $128,645
/by

Submitted Projects for October 2013

College of Education – Submitted Projects – October 2013
Principal Investigator: Nicholas Gage (SESPECS)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: University of Alabama (NIH Subcontract)
Proposal Title: Trajectories of Co-morbid Behavior Challenges in Adolescents with Intellectual Disability
Requested Amount: $49,999
Principal Investigator: Danling Fu (STL)
Co-PI: Cynthia Chennault (STL)
Funding Agency: National Security Agency
Proposal Title: STARTALK 2014 at the University of Florida for Teachers of Chinese
Requested Amount: $76,036
Principal Investigator: Michelina MacDonald (PK Yonge)
Co-PI: Christy Garison (PK Yonge)
Funding Agency: NEA Foundation
Proposal Title: Exploring Genetics Through Questions of Race
Requested Amount: $5,000
/by

IES and NSF Release Guidelines for Education Research and Development

A new report from the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation provides important cross-agency guidelines for preparing successful proposals and carrying out research funded by the two agencies—including obtaining meaningful findings and actionable results.

The report describes six types of research that can generate evidence about how to increase student learning:

  1. Foundational Research provides the fundamental knowledge that may contribute to improved learning and other relevant education outcomes.
  2. Early-Stage or Exploratory Research examines relationships among important constructs in education and learning to establish logical connections that may form the basis for future interventions or strategies to improve education outcomes.
  3. Design and Development Research develops solutions to achieve a goal related to education or learning such as improving student engagement or mastery of a set of skills.
  4. Efficacy Research allows for testing of a strategy or intervention under “ideal” circumstances, including with a higher level of support or developer involvement than would be the case under normal circumstances.
  5. Effectiveness Research examines effectiveness of a strategy or intervention under circumstances that would typically prevail in the target context.
  6. Scale-up Research examines effectiveness in a wide range of populations, contexts, and circumstances, without substantial developer involvement in implementation or evaluation.

For each research type, the report describes the purpose and expectations for theoretical and/or empirical justifications, research design, project outcomes, and external review.

To read the full report, go to http://ies.ed.gov/aboutus/.

 

/by

How to Win Government Grants in Tough Times: Part 2

Nothing short of an A+ proposal wins in this environment. Preparing ahead of time is critical to writing a competitive proposal. Typically guidelines are announced only 30 days in advance, so most successful writers have started the process much sooner.

Before the guidelines become available, you can search for the previous RFP. Typically, guidelines do not change much and you can use the previous RFP to start early.

Getting high points from reviewers is key. Most RFPs provide evaluation criteria with the total number of points for each section. Try to secure bonus and priority points wherever possible. You may wish to serve as a reviewer to learn what reviewers expect to see in a proposal.

Once the RFP becomes available, read and re-read the document fully. Design your narrative and budget together. You may wish to develop a logic model so you can see your plan on one page.  Some RFPs now require a logic model.

Plan for multidisciplinary collaborations to build a stronger proposal. Secure partners, evaluators, and letters of commitment in advance. Write job descriptions for key personnel and gather attachments for appendices.

Remember to write your proposal in a journalistic style omitting technical jargon. To improve the clarity of your writing, use headers, short sentences, and repetition. Most importantly, contact the OER as soon as you decide to pursue a funding opportunity, so we can help facilitate the process.

Look for Part 3 of “How to Win Government Grants in Tough Times” in the November issue of the Research Bulletin.

Excerpted from The Chronicle of Philanthropy Webinar, August 13, 2013

/by

Awarded Projects for September 2013

College of Education – Awarded Projects – September 2013
Principal Investigator: Michael Bowie (Recruitment, Retention and Multicultural Affairs)
Co-PI: Theresa Vernetson (Dean’s Area, Administration)
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: College Reach Out Program (CROP)
Project Period: 09/01/2013—08/31/2014
Award Amount: $82,374.64
Principal Investigator: Patricia Snyder (CEECS/SESPECS)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Florida State University
Project Title: Embedded Practices and Intervention with Caregivers (EPIC)
Project Period: 06/01/2013—05/31/2016
Award Amount: $87,846.00
Principal Investigator: Alice Kay Emery (SESPECS)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: Working with the Experts Project (Part B) 2013—2014
Project Period: 08/01/2013—07/31/2014
Award Amount: $175.000.00
Principal Investigator: Kent Crippen (STL)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: National Science Foundation
Project Title: ChANgE Chem: Transforming Chemistry with Cognitive Apprenticeship for Engineers
Project Period: 09/15/2013—08/31/2015
Award Amount: $194,617.00
/by

Submitted Projects for September 2013

College of Education – Submitted Projects – September 2013
Principal Investigator: Maria Coady (STL)
Co-PI: Ester de Jong (STL), Candace Harper (STL)
Funding Agency: The Spencer Foundation
Proposal Title: Mainstream Teachers of ELLs’ Use of Student Performance Data and Linguistic Pedagogical Knowledge to Inform Instructional Practices
Requested Amount: $297,138.00
Principal Investigator: Suzanne Colvin (STL)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Procter & Gamble
Proposal Title: Transforming Higher Education Teaching and Learning for the 21st Century
Requested Amount: $9,350.00
Principal Investigator: Anna McDaniel (College of Nursing)
Co-PI: M. David Miller (SHDOSE)
Funding Agency: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Proposal Title: Simulation Team Training for Timely Intervention During Respirator Deterioration
Requested Amount: $30,642.00
/by

How to Win Government Grants in Tough Times: Part 1

Budgets are shrinking at all levels of government making competition for government grants intense. Now is the time to learn the essentials of a successful grant proposal and how to set yourself apart from the competition.

The federal funding landscape is in an “age of sequestration” and is likely to continue this way into the future. This means fewer dollars for existing programs and fewer competitions. Programs are likely to be combined resulting in less money available.

The initial steps in strategic grant seeking include the following:   

  • Read the RFP thoroughly to make sure you qualify.
  • Always ask: Are we competitive?
  • Don’t be afraid to make tough decisions. Can you fulfill the requirements of the grant?
  • Does the RFP align with your goals and mission? Is it a good fit for you?
  • Look at the number of grants that will be awarded. If they are numerous, you have a better chance.

Here is an RFP checklist to help you decide whether a specific grant opportunity is right for you.

Look for Part 2 of “How to Win Government Grants in Tough Times” in the October issue of the Research Bulletin.

Excerpted from The Chronicle of Philanthropy Webinar, August 13, 2013

/by

How Researchers Network

Researchers rely heavily on networking at conferences and seminars and make little use of personal introductions, online social networking, or proactive self-promotion, according to Straight Talking, a report published by the UK researcher development organization, Vitae.

Vitae surveyed almost 500 researchers at eight UK universities and found that less than one-fifth regularly use online social networking to develop existing work contacts or make new ones. Only 14% feel comfortable asking someone they know to introduce them to an important person in their field, and 85% rarely send copies of their work to these prominent individuals.

Excerpted from Nature Jobs Blog posted by Rachel Bowden, April 17, 2012

/by

Export Control Reform Is Under Way

The U.S. government will implement new export control rules in October 2013 and January 2014. UF is evaluating procedures to ensure compliance with the new regulations. For a brief discussion of the new rules, see the July/August 2013 issue of Export Controls @ UF.

This information is important for

  • faculty and lab staff who have export control projects;
  • faculty who may be considering research projects with export control requirements;
  • research administrators who process projects with export control requirements.

Why is export compliance important?

Export control violations can result in penalties and fines which may apply to an individual, the institution, or both.

Please feel free to contact Brandi Boniface (boniface@ufl.edu or 392-2369) or the Division of Research Compliance at 294-1632 with any questions regarding export controls.

/by

Awarded Projects for August 2013

College of Education – Awarded Projects – August 2013
Principal Investigator: Philip Poekert (Lastinger Center for Learning)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Project Title: Gates Foundation Algebra Nation
Project Period: 07/31/2013—06/30/2015
Award Amount: $250,000.00
Principal Investigator: Lynda Hayes (PK Yonge)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: IDEA Part B, Entitlement 2013-2014
Project Period: 07/01/2013—06/30/2014
Award Amount: $196,593.00
/by

Submitted Projects for August 2013

College of Education – Submitted Projects – August 2013
Principal Investigator: Walter Leite (SHDOSE)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: US Department of Education/IES
Proposal Title: Project INCUBATE: Interdisciplinary Curriculum for Big Data Training in Education
Requested Amount: $3,755,757.00
Principal Investigator: Pasha Antonenko (STL)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: University of Kentucky (IES Subcontract)
Proposal Title: Managing Challenging Behaviors: Virtual Environment Training for Teachers in Elementary Schools (VETTES)
Requested Amount: $443,948.00
Principal Investigator: Maureen Conroy (CEECS/SESPECS)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Virginia Commonwealth University (IES Subcontract)
Proposal Title: Development and Validation of Treatment Integrity Measures of Classroom-based Instructional Interventions in Early Childhood Settings
Requested Amount: $179,506.00
Principal Investigator: Maureen Conroy (CEECS/SESPECS)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Virginia Commonwealth University (IES Subcontract)
Proposal Title: BEST in CLASS—Elementary: A Preventative Classroom-based Model
Requested Amount: $297,580.00
Principal Investigator: Holly Lane (SESPECS)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Kent State University (IES Subcontract)
Proposal Title: Exploring the Relationship Between Cell Phone Use, Social Network, and Academic Performance in Undergraduate College Students
Requested Amount: $167,840.00
Principal Investigator: Patricia Snyder (CEECS/SESPECS)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (IES Subcontract)
Proposal Title: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. Subcontract with UF
Requested Amount: $222,859.00
Principal Investigator: Elizabeth Washington (STL)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: University of Central Florida (IES Subcontract)
Proposal Title: The Florida Partnership for Civic Learning
Requested Amount: $37,259.00
/by

OER Report of Accomplishments

The OER has completed a draft of its annual report outlining data on externally funded projects and grants activities. We are pleased that faculty productivity has been sustained, and efforts toward securing external funding remain active.

The following represents a summary of accomplishments for FY 2012-2013:

•  COE faculty members in all schools and centers have submitted a total of 66 proposals, requesting $66.8 million. Proposal submissions included 18 NSF, 9 US Department of Education (5 for IES contracts), 10 Florida Department of Education, and 2 Spencer proposals.

• Research funding per faculty member totaled $429K, a 40% increase.

•  COE PIs and Co-PIs had 22 proposals funded totaling over $30 million in new awards, including one NSF and one US Department of Education/IES contract, a 17% increase.

•  Finally, COE schools and centers have 67 currently funded projects totaling $77.7 million, a 39% increase.

Congratulations for another banner year!

The final version of OER’s annual report will be available through the OER website soon.

 

/by