DGA Community Meeting December 13, 2011 1. DGA Community Meeting: Agenda December 13, 2011 Agenda ItemDiscussion Leader Welcome and IntroductionsMarisa.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
INTERREG and Tacis budgets Main differences: No breakdown of the Tacis budget between the partners is required; No strict limits for the project management.
Advertisements

The Governors Grants Office Presents: Smart Issues for Effective Grants Management Governors Grants Office Higher Education Conference May 22, 2012 Martin.
OMB Circular A133 Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations 1 Departmental Research Administrators Training Track.
© 2014 University of New Hampshire. All rights reserved. Uniform Guidance Highlights What you really need to know.
OMB Circular A-133 Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-Profit Organizations CReATE May 2013 Cathi Bass, Grants Compliance Manager Sponsored Research.
Rules Governing Sponsored Projects (aka OMB Circulars) Presented by Beverly Blakeney, Diane Cummings and Julie Macy.
Workshop Outline Building Blocks – Definitions Proposal Stage Lunch Break Subawards Subcontracts.
Subrecipient Monitoring CCIA Spring Conference Sheena Tran, Rancho Santiago CCD Tania Walden, Los Rios CCD Tracy Young, Coast CCD May 2013.
Subawards and Subcontracts Sponsored Projects Training Program October 17 th, 2011 Renee Hunt, Julie Macy & Dawn Pelkey.
Subrecipient Monitoring Webcast Presenters Pat O'Rourke, Irene St. Croix, Bridget Ware Department of Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services.
12/08/14.  Welcoming Remarks  ORS Updates  OSP Updates.
Subcontracts Subcontractor or Vendor How do you know?
1 Subgrants vs. Subcontracts TAA-CCCT Grants November 16, 2011.
JULY12, 2011 SESSION 7 OF AAPLS – BUDGETING FOR PROPOSALS WITH SUBCONTRACTS: ESTABLISHING RELATIONSHIPS APPLICANTS & ADMINISTRATORS PREAWARD LUNCHEON SERIES.
Subrecipient Monitoring OFFICE OF RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION 2010.
Jamie Young, Associate Director, Chicago Office for Sponsored Research, Northwestern University.
Subawards and Subrecipient Monitoring
Documenting Cash and In-Kind Match Project Director Training & Annual Meeting.
1 FY11 Title I Common Program Review Findings Julia Foodman & Matthew Nixon Title I Technical Assistance & Networking Session May 23, 2011.
Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200 Nicole Pilman, Uniform Guidance Implementation Coordinator Sue Paulson, Assistant Controller Pamela A. Webb, Associate VP for.
Conducting Collaborative Projects How to request a Subaward and when is a consultant needed? OSP Awareness Feb 16, 2012 osp.syr.edu
DGA Community Meeting September 13, DGA Community Meeting: Agenda September 13, 2011 Agenda ItemDiscussion Leader Welcome and IntroductionsMoira.
DGA Community Meeting November 15, DGA Community Meeting: Agenda November 15, 2011 Agenda ItemDiscussion Leader Welcome and IntroductionsMoira.
Grants & Contracts Support Group December 10, 2008 Subrecipient and Vendor Determination Checklist.
Subcontracts University of Washington School of Nursing (SON) Enhancing Research Methods: An Invited Conference
UNIFORM GUIDANCE OVERVIEW. OMB Circulars Before and After A-21 Cost principles for Educational Institutions A-21 Cost principles for Educational Institutions.
Subrecipient Monitoring. A formal binding legal agreement between your institution and another legal entity A portion of your sponsored project's.
Financial Management For Project Administrators. How Feds View Themselves.
Policy? Guidance? Standard Operating Procedure? Tips on how to achieve compliance with minimum red tape Carolyn Bargoot, Associate Director Post-Award.
Wisconsin Technical Service Providers (TSP) Plan.
Collaborating with Others? If so, why and how? OSP AWARENESS MARCH 5, 2015 OSP.SYR.EDU
NSF – HSI Workshop 1 Business Assistance NSF Workshop for Sponsored Project Administrators at Hispanic Serving Institutions April 13, Miami, FL April.
Financial Management How Can I Spend Award Dollars.
“Grants Boot Camp” Workshop Series January 9, 2014 Creighton University Sponsored Programs Administration 2500 California Plaza, Omaha, NE  Phone:
DGA Community Meeting June 12, DGA Community Meeting: Agenda June 12, 2012 Agenda ItemDiscussion Leader Welcome and IntroductionsMoira Kiltie.
Highlights of Post Award Sponsored Project Administration July 11, 2007 Office of Research Training & Compliance.
CONTRACTS & GRANTS PROCESS AT A RESEARCH UNIVERSITY FSU ALUMNI CENTER MAY 7, 2015 Post Award Processes Angie Rowe Associate Director – Sponsored Research.
BTOP OVERSIGHT WASHINGTON D.C. MAY 2012 U.S. DOC Inspector General Recovery Act Oversight Task Force 1.
Recipe for Success in Subcontracting Crystal Miller and Elizabeth Fowlkes.
Risk and Subaward Management under the Uniform Guidance U.S. Department of Education.
Jane Lee, Pre Award Administrator Sarah Lawrence, Pre Award Administrator OVPR Overview of Sponsored Programs.
Tips on Routing and Contracts: An Intro for the Campus Research Coordinator Michelle Artmeier Director of Award Services Ron.
10/16/2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Principal Investigators/ Program Directors/ Project Directors.
DGA Community Meeting February 14, DGA Community Meeting: Agenda February 14, 2012 Agenda ItemDiscussion Leader Welcome and IntroductionsMoira.
SUBAWARDS & SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING UNIFORM GUIDANCE AT K-STATE 2 CFR Part 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements.
“SPEAR” W ORKSHOP P RESENTED B Y : M ARCY F RIEDLE C OLLABORATIONS : S UBRECIPIENT V. C ONTRACTOR.
“SPEAR” W ORKSHOP O CTOBER 19 & 30, 2015 ANGELLE GOMEZ S UBAWARD R ISK A SSESSMENT / MONITORING.
Section 68 – What are your Sub- Recipients up to? (Sub-Recipient Monitoring – State Perspective) Wednesday, May 23, :30-2:45 Cindy Jarvis, Assistant.
Jaimie Lewis Omnitrans San Bernardino, California SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING.
A risk assessment is the process of identifying potential hazards an organization may face and analyzing methods of response if exposure occurs.
Community Liaison Training NCLB Parental Involvement Requirements “Creating an Audit Trail” October 19, 2007 Eduardo Elizondo, Director Federal Programs.
What’s your friend up to? Subrecipient Monitoring Issues Tom Egan, MIT OSP Jeannette Gordon, Division of Grants Compliance and Oversight OPERA, OER, NIH.
Subaward, Procurement, or Consulting? Herbert B. Chermside, CRA Prepared for Virginia Commonwealth University Grants Administration Training Series © 2003.
Juanita Syljuberget Alabama Cooperative Extension System May 23, 2012.
Sub-recipient Monitoring and Contractor Determination
Office of Sponsored Research and Programs (OSRP)
IUP Research Institute Post-Award Services
Subrecipient Monitoring
Subaward - 2 CFR A formal legal agreement between your institution and another legal entity An award provided by a pass-through entity (PTE) to.
Overview of Consultants in Sponsored Projects (OSR)
Managing Outgoing Subawards April 18, 2017
Subaward Life Cycle 10/24/17.
The Importance of Subrecipient Monitoring
Agreements OSR Symposium
OSP/DFA Research Administration Certification Program
Subrecipient vs. Contractor Determinations
Participant Support Costs
Office of Sponsored Research and Programs (OSRP)
KSU Sponsored Projects Overview
Understanding a Subrecipient Agreement
Presentation transcript:

DGA Community Meeting December 13,

DGA Community Meeting: Agenda December 13, 2011 Agenda ItemDiscussion Leader Welcome and IntroductionsMarisa Zuskar Sponsored Project Records Retention Kira Homo Marisa Zuskar Vendors vs. SubrecipientsLiz Denecke Post-Award General UpdatesMarisa Zuskar Pre-Award General Updates

Welcome and Introductions 3

Sponsored Project Records Retention Kira Homo, Electronic Record Archivist 4

Vendors vs. Subrecipients How do you decide? Liz Denecke 5

6 Subrecipient FEDERAL LANGUAGE A (b) MODIFIED DESCRIPTION (b) Federal award. Characteristics indicative of a Federal award received by a Subrecipient are when the organization: A subaward is the transfer of a portion of a sponsored award to a Subrecipient (Sub) for the purpose of the Sub contributing programmatic effort on the project. 1. Determines who is eligible to receive federal financial assistance. 1.Sub has the authority to issue a subaward/subcontract to a 3 rd party. 2. Has its performance measured against whether the objectives of the Federal program are met. 2. Unlike a Vendor who only has to provide the required goods or services to be evaluated successfully, a Sub’s performance is evaluated based on how well its work helped to meet the objectives of the project.

7 Subrecipient FEDERAL LANGUAGE A (b) MODIFIED DESCRIPTION 3. Has responsibility for making programmatic decision making. 3. A Sub takes full responsibility, including intellectual leadership, for the portion of UO’s Statement of Work (“SOW”) that it will undertake. In other words, UO assigns a defined portion of their SOW’s intellectually significant activity to the Sub to fulfill. 4. Has responsibility for adherence to applicable Federal program compliance requirements. 4. The Sponsor’s Terms and Conditions accepted by UO “flow down” to the Sub, who must agree to comply and be capable of complying with them (e.g. audit/conflicts of interest/IRB and IACUC).

8 Subrecipient FEDERAL LANGUAGE A (b) MODIFIED DESCRIPTION 5. Uses Federal funds to carry out a program of the organization as compared to providing goods or services for a program of the pass-through entity. 5. Work is performed by Sub’s personnel using Sub’s resources, usually at their site in a noncommercial setting, in an area or field in which they have specific expertise.

9 Vendor FEDERAL LANGUAGE A (c) MODIFIED DESCRIPTION (c) Payment for goods and services. Characteristics indicative of a payment for goods and services received by a vendor are when the organization: A procurement action is the purchase of goods/service with no transfer of programmatic effort from a Professional Service/Vendor (a dealer, distributor, merchant, or other seller providing goods or services). A Professional Service/Vendor: 1. Provides the goods or service within normal business operations. 1. A Vendor is a business selling either a product or goods (e.g. widgets) or services (e.g. routine soil testing). Under this definition, the professional services of a consultant could be treated as Vendor costs if they also meet items 2-5 below.

10 Vendor FEDERAL LANGUAGE A (c) MODIFIED DESCRIPTION 2. Provides similar goods or services to many different purchasers. 2. A Vendor sells its goods or services to many different purchasers. 3. Operates in a competitive environment. 3. A Vendor competes with other Vendors selling similar goods or services. 4. Provides goods or services that are ancillary to the operation of the Federal program. 4. A Vendor provides a good or a service that might be necessary to the success of the sponsored project. Vendors do not make programmatic decisions regarding the scope of work or their performance. Vendors are not critical to the intellectual purpose of the Statement of Work, e.g. widgets or routine soil testing.

11 Vendor FEDERAL LANGUAGE A (c) MODIFIED DESCRIPTION 5. Is not subject to compliance requirements of the Federal program. But see A (f) 5. A Vendor is subject to less constrained federal compliance requirements, and is NOT subject to federal program-specific programmatic compliance requirements. See A (f)

12 Budget Tips SPS FY2011 Annual Report Posted to the SPS website BUDGET TIP If the Party meets the definition of a Subrecipient, BUDGET this cost under the sub-award/sub-contract line item. BUDGET TIP If the Party meets the definition of a Vendor above, then BUDGET the Vendor under the supplies, consultants, or other line item.

1. University wants to agree to co-host a conference with another organization. The organization does not typically meet the definition of a Vendor, e.g. Nonprofit or university. The statement of work provides that the Organization would coordinate the production of meeting materials, conference meals, conference meeting rooms and AV equipment. UO was to reimburse Organization for half of those costs. Example 1

1. We concluded this was a procurement. Even though Organization is not a Vendor, University was not transferring any programmatic effort to Organization. Conclusion 1

2. A colleague at a private institution has effort on a project and a statement of work that states he/she will be obtaining, analyzing and interpreting data. The UO PI wants to list this colleague as a Co-PI on the project. The collaborating institution prefers to be paid via a PSC. Example 2

2. We concluded that this was a subaward relationship and therefore the Co-PI should be paid via a subaward. The preference of the collaborating institution is not determinative. Conclusion 2

3. A project requires software specific to the purpose of the award. The software must be developed, and the development is to be performed by a professor at another institution. That institution has responsibility for making decisions about how to develop the software to specifically meet the purpose of the project. Example 3

3. We concluded this was a subaward: The second institution had responsibility for making programmatic decisions in developing the software that would be central to the overall success of the project. Conclusion 3

–Example 4.A: School District (SD) will provide publicity, rooms, equipment, food/refreshments and parking for workshops. UO will reimburse SD for costs associated with providing those items. SD will arrange for substitute teachers to replace teachers while the teachers attend the workshops. UO will reimburse SD for the cost of the substitute teachers. Example(s) 4. Three SD contracts

Example 4.A. We concluded this was a procurement. There was no programmatic effort. Conclusions (4) SD contracts

–Example 4.B: SD will allow UO staff access to students for testing. SD will help UO staff schedule teachers for professional development training. SD will give UO demographic data. UO will reimburse SD for substitute teachers to cover teachers while in the development trainings. UO will pay SD teachers an incentive for providing trainings. Example(s) 4. Three SD contracts

Example 4.B. We concluded this was a procurement. There was no programmatic effort. Conclusions (4) SD contracts

–Example 4.C: SD staff will communicate weekly with UO Staff. SD will assist with implementing UO research activities in SD schools. SD will assist in development of research protocols and materials. SD will assist in the analyses, reporting and dissemination of project results. UO will reimburse for substitute teacher costs to free up teachers to participate in the project. UO will reimburse for extended contract hours for teachers to participate in the project. UO will reimburse SD for project materials. Example(s) 4. Three SD contracts

Example 4.C. We concluded this was a subaward because the SD assumed programmatic activities that would be central to accomplishing the intellectual purpose of the grant. Conclusions (4) SD contracts

25 STILL UNSURE WHETHER A PARTY IS A VENDOR OR A SUBRECIPIENT? SPS PREAWARD:SPS CONTRACTING: Kari Vandergust Rebecca Roby Glen Bennett Liz Denecke John Sites Orca Merwin

Post-Award General Updates 26

27 Post-Award General Updates SPS FY2011 Annual Report Posted to the SPS website Post-Award Associate Director Candidate Friday – this week! – 1:30 – 2:00 PM ORSA (SPS) Conference Room DGA Community Training: Cost Transfers Review why Cost Transfers are so “high risk” Discuss how to best complete the Cost Transfer Justification Form Review some tips and tricks for using the UO systems – PHAREDS and JVs!

Pre-Award General Updates 28