1. OE PRE-AWARD UPDATE SOM FACULTY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 21, 2012 Susanne Hildebrand-Zanki - AVC, Research 1

2. Agenda  Progress to Date  Phase IA Survey Summary  Pre-Award Resources Advisory Board  UCSF Pre-Award Priorities for FY12-13  Questions 2

3. Progress as of June, 2012  Completed Phases IA, IB, and II, creating 6 teams in the new Research Management Services (RMS) structure  Reorganized Contracts and Grants  Developed and communicated Service Level Agreements (SLAs)  Formed Sponsored Research Advisory Board practices 3

4. 4

5. 5

6. 6

7. Mission Bay – 2 teams Teams A & B – Genentech Hall and Minnesota Street SFGH – 1 team Team E – Ward 24 7 Laurel Heights – 3 teams Team C (currently in 109) Team F (4th Flr) and G (3rd lfr) Team H – UC Hall Team I - UC Hall Parnassus – 3 teams Team D – UC Hall RMS Team Locations Mt Zion– 1 team Team J - Hellman Bldg

8. Sponsored Research Advisory Board  Provide input on service levels and service delivery  Advise on new and/or anticipated customer needs and requirements  Provide input on budget  Ensure alignment with UCSF-wide goals 8

9. Sponsored Research Advisory Board The committee will be comprised to represent the varied constituencies of pre-award administration  1 representative for the Schools of Dentistry, Nursing, and Pharmacy Dean’s Offices  1 representative for the School of Medicine Dean’s Office  1 Basic Science Investigator  1 Clinical Research Investigator  1 Social Science Investigator  1 Faculty Member representing the Academic Senate  3 MSOs, one each from SFGH, Parnassus, and Mission Bay Members will be appointed by the Deans. The Academic Senate representative will be appointed by the Chair of the Academic Senate. 9

10. 10

11. UCSF HR Priorities FY12-13  Customer Service and SLAs  Continuous Satisfaction Survey  Performance Metrics  Process and Procedure Refinement  Internal between C&G and RMS  External between RMS and our customers  Clear delineation of pre- and post-award responsibilities  Enabling technologies (CACTAS and eProposal)  Reporting  Funding Model for FY 13-14 11

12. Funding Options Recharge 1. By Proposal Disincentive to submit? Variable cost vs. complexity of proposal? Administratively burdensome 2. By Research Faculty Significant challenges in counting PIs Differentiate faculty/non-faculty? Administratively burdensome Indirect Cost Recovery 1. Use indirect cost recovery $ that go to the Schools to pay for pre-award services Reduced ICR $ to departments Potentially disproportionally affects departments with high award success rate and high effective indirect cost rate Eliminates recharges 12 Next Steps: reevaluate and refine funding model options

13. Questions? 13