December, 2009 David Hart.  Allocation Stats  Processing  Interfaces.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Welcome to eDMR This PowerPoint presentation is designed to show eDMR users how to login and begin using the eDMR system.
Advertisements

The Performance Appraisal Process
User Services Transition To XD TG Quarterly Management Meeting, San Juan 12/7/2010 Amit & Sergiu.
Student Development The Gateway to … Opportunity Accomplishment Financial Solution Student Success Achievement Student Life.
Office of Sponsored Programs VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY The Office of Sponsored Programs has upgraded COEUS to accommodate the new Grants.gov C-Forms About.
PantherSoft Financials Smart Internal Billing. Agenda  Benefits  Security and User Roles  Definitions  Workflow  Defining/Modifying Items  Creating.
Effort Certification Training Certification Stage 1.
Module 4: Disaster Recovery Grant Reporting
Overtime Air Request Website (CWEB). Itinerary for this session: Sign In View Past overtime air requests history View Current overtime air requests View.
Advancing Excellence in America’s Nursing Homes A Review of 2 Clinical Tools: Pressure Ulcer and Restraints.
Trent’s ROMEO e-System
New Proposal Review Form Revised 09/10/2008 Office of Sponsored Projects (512)
ARRA Reporting. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Passed by Congress in early 2009 to stimulate the economy Main objectives of act Job preservation.
Cost Transfers Workshop June Background  The result of a recent audit conducted by Audit Services and Institute Compliance (ASIC) indicated that:
Users' Committee, 25 Oct 2010 Chandra Director’s Office Cycle 12 Peer Review  June 2010, Hilton, Logan Airport  No major changes in Cycle 12 
Pre-Authorization for Faculty Travel Request Form.
Proposal Training.  What is Budgeting by Priorities?  How do I participate?  How do I write my proposals? ◦ Narrative Requirements ◦ Mechanics.
The Advance CV Workgroup The Advance CV Workgroup June 17, 2015.
Objectives of the Lecture :
NCAA Division III Bylaw 15 – Financial Aid Brandy Hataway Jeff Myers.
Writing a Successful XSEDE Proposal
Advance and the Electronic Packet Advance and the Electronic Packet April 5,
FEBRUARY 9, 2011 SESSION 3 OF AAPLS – HOW TO FIND FUNDING AND READ AN RFA APPLICANTS & ADMINISTRATORS PREAWARD LUNCHEON SERIES Module B: Developing a Successful.
A Guide to the BIZNET Online Filing System STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES (DCF) DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES (DDS) DEPARTMENT.
December, 2009 Kent Milfeld, TG Allocations Coordinator.
XP New Perspectives on Microsoft Office Access 2003 Tutorial 12 1 Microsoft Office Access 2003 Tutorial 12 – Managing and Securing a Database.
Start Something Getting Ready for AIM September 2011 ™
User Programs Committee on Visitors, Appeals Process, Unified Access & Feedback.
Archived File The file below has been archived for historical reference purposes only. The content and links are no longer maintained and may be outdated.
Nipissing’s ROMEO e-System Internal Research Funding (IRF) Internal Research Grant Application Form (IRG)
The NIH Grant Review Process Hiram Gilbert, Ph.D. Dept. of Biochemistry, Baylor College of Medicine Xander Wehrens, M.D. Ph.D. Dept. of Molecular Physiology.
Coordinating the TeraGrid’s User Interface Areas Dave Hart, Amit Majumdar, Tony Rimovsky, Sergiu Sanielevici.
UFP/CS Update David Hart. Highlights Sept xRAC results POPS Allocations RAT follow-up User News AMIE WebSphere transition Accounting Updates Metrics,
My Bibliography/eRA Commons Integration More utility, less work Bart Trawick Neil Thakur Commons Working Group, 9/22/09.
NIH Mentored Career Development Awards (K Series) Part 5 Thomas Mitchell, MPH Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics University of California San Francisco.
Presubmission Proposal Reviews at the College of Nursing (CON) Nancy T. Artinian, PhD, RN, FAAN Associate Dean for Research and Professor.
1 Allocations RAT Recommendations Presentation to TG ARCH meeting July 10, 2008 Significant modifications from TG’08 slides are highlighted in red. Richard.
Slide #1 Computerised Transit Computer System Training Session Trader Application Users.
Rev.04/2015© 2015 PLEASE NOTE: The Application Review Module (ARM) is a system that is designed as a shared service and is maintained by the Grants Centers.
TeraGrid Allocations Discussion John Towns Director, Persistent Infrastructure National Center for Supercomputing Applications University of Illinois.
UNM Effort Certification Learn 08/13/ Why do we Certify? Effort is a mechanism to confirm salaries and wages charged to a sponsored project in relation.
In order to better understand the possible requirements for TeraGrid to accommodate the needs of users who would like to use multiple resources across.
Page 1 Mission-Based Management July 2010 Electronic CV System Users Group.
Project Chartering & Approval Process
1 Policy Recommendations for TeraGrid Resource Allocation Process Richard Moore TeraGrid’08 - June 2008 These are draft recommendations.
GLAST Science Support Center November 17, 2006 GUC Face-to-Face Meeting GLAST GI Program (with revised schedule) David Band, GSSC.
TeraGrid Institute: Allocation Policies and Best Practices David L. Hart, SDSC June 4, 2007.
SAN DIEGO SUPERCOMPUTER CENTER at the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Tapping into National Cyberinfrastructure Resources Donald Frederick SDSC
December, 2009 Kent Milfeld, TG Allocations Coordinator.
SAN DIEGO SUPERCOMPUTER CENTER Allocation Policies and Proposal Best Practices David L. Hart, TeraGrid Area Director, UFP/CS Presenter:
GMAP Grant Management, Application, and Planning Consolidate Application Training.
Caseload Management The WIC program is funded to serve eligible participants When funding does not allow for all eligible participants to be served, the.
Kent Milfeld, TACC TG Allocations Coordinator Aug. 13, 2009.
Torbay Council Partnerships Review August PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 2 Torbay Council Partnerships Background The Audit Commission defines.
Texas Association of Community Health Centers Annual Conference HRSA Guidance on Outreach and Enrollment Funding Presented by Lori McCain, CPA, CGMA Chief.
How To Use NCA’s Online Grant Application System.
Kent Milfeld, TACC TG Allocations Coordinator Aug. 13, 2009.
Comprehensive Continuous Improvement Plan(CCIP) Training Module 4 Funding Application Pages.
CPLTA – ONLINE CREDIT TRACKING SYSTEM
Training Documentation – Replacing GSPR with RFQ 2.0
BIM 360 Glue Migration to BIM 360 Account Administration (HQ)
Getting Started with the Grants Portal Grants
Sourcing Event Tool Kit Multiline Sourcing, Market Baskets and Bundles
Getting Started with the Grants Portal Non-Grants
Advanced Invitations.
Bringing Home the Bacon: Grant Writing Basics Unit 7 Grant Submission
MODULE B - PROCESS SUBMODULES B1. Organizational Structure
HOW TO USE THE NEW GLOBAL GRANT REPORT
SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY
Unit J: Creating a Database
Presentation transcript:

December, 2009 David Hart

 Allocation Stats  Processing  Interfaces

 Request and Allocation Trends Total Avail

 Dec TRAC Meeting (“MRAC Cycle”)

 Startups:

 Plenary Session for “top 10” requests.  Parallel Sessions for Others  Two Sessions, A Chair for each session  Minimal Overlap (no need to attend both sessions)  PHY/AST/ATM/CFD/ASC  CHE/MCB/DMS/DMR  Awards entered into common spreadsheet  Google Doc  Private document, accessible only by invitation.  Considerable Time Savings

 Parallel Sessions  Sept TRAC Meeting  PHY/AST/ATM/CFD/ASC FOS Session  35 Requests; 105M SUs Requested  CHE/MCB/DMS/DMR FOS Session  39 Requests; 105M SUs requested  Dec TRAC Meeting  PHY/AST/ATM/CFD/ASC FOS Session  33 Requests; 102M SUs Requested  CHE/MCB/DMS/DMR FOS Session  38 Requests; 103M SUs requested

* Required Forms POPS development team is always improving, and maintaining interface.

 Recent improvements  Auto-fill  Supporting Grants and Co-PI Information is now automatically “refilled” on renewal requests (supplements and justifications, too).  Confirmation of auto-fill now required Update PI Information Add/remove CoPIs Add/remove new/expire grants Modify Supporting percentage

 Document Upload improvements (in progress)  Single upload interface for all required docs  (Simple) Selection of Document type  Main Document, Progress Report, CV, co-PI CV, TG-related Publications, References,  Uses Submit button below entry form (no more confusion with “Save to Date”)  Upload date now appears in document list (no more confusion about revisions)

 System Selection (in redesign phase)  Present entry form is cumbersome (must scroll through pages of entry form or use index at top)  Re-evaluate necessity of collected data  Redesign input fields (& include comma notation in numbers)

Richard Moore

RAAR Report– (Recommended and Available Allocations Reconciliation)  Recommended Procedures for Handling Oversubscription  General Background  Recommendations  Solving the legacy MRAC/LRAC Cycle Problems  Review Process / Reconciliation  Defined Process to Adjust Recommended Allocations for Oversubscription

 REQUESTS = Original requests submitted from users  RECOMMENDED = Awards recommended by TRAC committee members based on merit review  AVAILABLE = Amount of time made available by the RPs for that allocation cycle  ALLOCATED = Awards actually made, based on both TRAC recommendations and availability (‘reconciliation’ or ‘normalization’ process)  Includes overall availability as well as specific machines

 Allocation award totals have traditionally been 60-70% of the Request totals.  Sept. TRAC Meeting: Requests = 810M, Available = 300M. Ouch!  Large differences in Recommended and Available Allocations require a mechanism to reduce Recommended Allocations to accommodate the available SUs (remove potential oversubscription).

 Legacy Large and “Medium” request cycles persist (MRAC/LRAC  quarterly and ½-yr cycles )  There is no simple way to normalize reductions across quarters (available and recommended allocations have to be reconciled at each meeting).  Request totals are difficult to predict. (From Oct to July 2009 oscillations seemed to dampen.)

 Eliminate MRAC/LRAC waves  90% of the requests request are “MRAC” size  10% of the requests are “LRAC” size  Recommend: Pro-actively re-distribute LRAC-type requests  By extension (1 quarter) or by early renewal (1 quarter)  TG staff contact specific users and ask them to switch cycles

 Keep Merit Review Process separate from Oversubscription adjustments  Let reviewers do what reviewers do best–> Provide Recommend Allocations based on merit:  Appropriateness of Methods  Efficient use of systems  Appropriateness of Computational Research Plan  Usage of previous allocations, publications  Allocations Officers take care of applying adjustments for oversubscription– a TeraGrid Problem

 Reviewers are not apprised of Oversubscription factor. (This will provide more consistent reviews of merit.)  Reviewers can use Funding to determine PI ability to manage and apply appropriate support to accomplish work in the Computational Research Plan. Reviewer should be blind to funding agency. (This encourages PIs to report ALL funding.)  For non-funded requests, science is reviewed by TRAC (no change from previous)  Benefits  Recommended Allocations – i.e. merit-reviewed demand - can be reported to NSF and the community.  Reconciling availability limitations is removed from merit review process – no double jeopardy.

 Adjustments will be applied across all requests, by a uniform process (as formulaic as possible).  Availability on individual machines/classes is the complicating factor  NSF has decided to no longer single out PIs with NIH funding for special restrictions on usage  However, funding source (NSF v non-NSF) will be considered  Factors to be used in reducing recommended allocations to fit availability  Funding source (preference given to NSF-funded research)  Size of award (preference given to small awards)  Across-the-board reductions  The details of how these factors will be applied are still being developed – and will be confirmed with NSF

 Recommended Allocations can be reported to NSF  Documents merit-reviewed demand  Oversubscription Adjustment (Reconciliation) criteria is removed from review process – no double jeopardy.  Funding support can be easily applied at Reconciliation stage.

 Funding  All non-NSF funded requests have equal consideration (NIH limits no longer apply– a “fair field” for all.)  When Adjustments are applied for oversubscription, NSF has priority or preference:  Adjustments for non-NSF funded projects (or proportion of non-NSF funding) will have a larger reduction factor.

 Formula: R * (F nsf + F non-nsf *R + ) * Recommended Allocation R = “global” Reduction factor F nsf = Fraction funded by NSF grants F nonnsf = Fraction funded by non-NSF grants R+ = Additional Reduction for non-NSF