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


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

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 to ensure you are in compliance or contact the UF Libraries for individual support.

NIH Policy Access Policy is available at

UF resources to assist with compliance are available at

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

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