 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| |
UCP Proposal Process Proposal and Award System (Beta Programs Only) Proposal and Award Sytem SANDBOX
Before beginning work on any proposal, be sure to carefully read the solicitation and make special note of any of the following. These situations may increase the time needed for review and may require additional processes:
Generally, the proposal package is due to the budget office 1 week prior to submission date, though we appreciate as much lead time as possible. **SA requires a 2 day lead time for electronic submission of proposals after budget office approval**
Continued funding refers to cases when agencies have awarded funds for a multi-year project, but require funding requests annually. These annual requests require full review by the budget office. These multi-year proposals do not require a new proposal number, but should reference the original proposal number. The following are necessary:
Some proposal solicitations limit submissions to one per institution. The budget and planning offices will notify programs of such proposals and will ask for a response from those wishing to submit. They will coordinate the effort to decide who will be submitting and whether or not a collaborative effort may arise out of it. UCAR will constitute the UCAR Education and Outreach Council to further promote communication, information sharing, and collaboration. The council will be composed of an Executive Board and members drawn from the leaders in education and outreach from across the institution. The council will meet regularly to share information about achievements of individual programs, funding opportunities, opportunities for collaboration, and other topics of interest to the membership and to raise issues upon which a consensus needs to be developed. Letter of Intent (LOI) or Notification of Intent (NOI) Some proposals require a letter of intent which the agencies use to gauge the number and the quality of institutions expecting to submit. An Advance Notice must be created for letters of intent and programs should notify the budget office. The budget office will submit NSF letters on Fastlane. No budget review is necessary but the budget office requires a full copy of the entire package. The full proposal will subsequently use the same advance notice number. Advance Notice for Letter of Intent An Advance Notice must be created for the Letter of Intent. Fill in the fields as best you can and estimate the budget amount. In the abstract field, list the dates for when the letter of intent and the full proposal are due. There is no need to answer the PACUR questions at this point. The Advance Notice will not be approved until the full proposal is submitted. At that time the Advance Notice should be updated. No cost extensions (requests for a change in the end date of a period of performance) need to be requested through the UCAR Contracts Office 90 days ahead of end date. This does not require a new proposal number, but should reference the original proposal number and clearly state the amount of additional time requested. If the no-cost extension requires the submittal of a budget for the remaining funds, the budget needs to be reviewed by the UCP budget office before submitting it to Sponsored Agreements. Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) and Memorandums of Agreement (MOAs) require a new proposal number and budget office review. MOU’s usually do not include a budget. The Contracts Office must be involved at the beginning of the process as only they have specifically delegated contractual authority necessary to sign contracts, grants, agreements, and other binding contractual instruments such as an MOU or MOA. Please be sure to provide all parties, including the Budget Office, with a copy of the final MOU. Some program solicitations require or request submission of a preliminary proposal in advance of submission of a full proposal. The two predominant reasons for requiring submission of a preliminary proposal are to:
Preliminary Proposal Review Preliminary proposals will follow the same review process as other proposals. Please submit the following to the Budget Office:
If you are invited to submit a full proposal you will reference the same proposal number as the preliminary proposal. The full proposal will follow the same review process as a new proposal. Advance Notice for Preliminary Proposal Please create an advance notice for any preliminary proposals. You will use this same proposal number if you are invited to submit a full proposal. The advance notice will not be officially approved until the full proposal has been submitted. Supplemental Proposals refer to situations where additional funding is requested for a current effort to assure adequate completion of the original scope of work. This does not require a new proposal number, but should reference the original proposal number and clearly state the amount of additional funding requested. A budget is required and the budget and project description must go through the standard review process. A proposal checklist referencing the original proposal number is required for the review process. Please note on the checklist that the enclosed budget is for supplemental funding. The following are necessary:
Reprogramming is defined as a deviation from a sponsor-approved budget, which has been incorporated by reference into, and become enforceable under, an award. Recipients may be required to request prior approvals for budget deviations, in accordance with an award's terms and conditions. Because reprogramming is dependent on award type and the specific terms and conditions incorporated into the award, situations will vary. When preparing reprogramming budgets, either the original rates or the current year rates can be used. However, since the rates have changed, it would be more appropriate to use the current year rates. Budget Office review and approval is required for Reprogramming requests. Procedural guidance and more information can be found here on the finance page. Prespending (Spending prior to award) Programs may ask for prespending on pending awards if there is an urgent need to begin work on a project prior to receipt of the award. Not all sponsors, however, will allow for prespending. The program administrator completes the Prespending/Overspending Questionnaire. The questionnaire asks for information regarding the status of funding and risk to the program should funds not be received. The program must have written or verbal documentation from the fund source that they intend to award the proposal with an indication of the start date. The Prespending/Overspending Questionnaire must be authorized by the division/program director, entity budget office, entity director, UCAR treasurer and vice president of F&A for requests under $100,000 and require an additional signature by the UCAR president for requests equal to or in excess of $100,000. Work cannot commence on a project until proper authorization is obtained. Procedural guidance, the Prespend/Overspend Questionnaire Form, and more information can be found here on the Treasury Operations page. Programs may receive direct requests for goods or services from a fund source in the form of an RFP. The program must distribute the RFP package to the budget office and Sponsored Agreements as soon as possible. Sponsored Agreements will review the package for terms and conditions as well as additional contractual language and will facilitate the exchange between the program and the fund source prior to proposal submission. The full proposal will then require budget office approval.
Indirects: UCAR Management Fee: Proposal submissions usually require a budget justification. The justification explains the cost basis for the line-items in the budget and justifies the funds requested. An explanation of requested funds should include information on how the figures were calculated, and specific information about how the funds will be spent and why. For travel, for example, the sponsor may require that the justification list the number of trips, travelers per trip, the estimated per diem, hotel, and flight rates, transportation costs, and the number of days on travel. The budget justification should include information about the rates used to calculate overhead and benefits. Our standard budget footnotes may be used for wording. In addition, some sponsors require a copy of our Rate Approval Letter, or our Rate Submission Letter (if rates are still proposed). Be specific and detailed where possible, while being mindful of any page limits imposed by the sponsor. Be sure to correctly match the amounts listed in the justification with those in the budget itself, especially if there have been several budget versions. Be aware of any agency specific requirements for the budget justification (e.g. NASA requires a personnel table and a detailed travel cost table while NSF requires the names and rates of pay for all senior personnel). Proposal Sole Source Guidelines – Effective March 1, 2010 New guidelines have been established in regards to the use of named subawardees/subcontractors in UCAR proposals. Any named suppliers must be justified as a sole source prior to submission of a proposal in order to maintain compliance with procurement guidelines for source selection from UCAR sponsoring agencies. When a subcontractor or subawardee is identified BY NAME in a proposal and is valued at $10,000 or more, a Sole Source Justification Form is required and shall be submitted to Contracts for approval prior to proposal review and approval by the entity budget office (please note that this also applies to Consultants). The Budget Office will require notification from Contracts that the sole source form has been approved before the proposal will be approved and submitted. To meet the requirements of the Sole Source Process, the PI must document the reason for naming the Subcontractor or Subawardee as a sole source and collect supporting documentation on source investigations. This can be a completed Form and/or documentation of source selection. Acceptable documentation may include but is not limited to: Sole Source Documentation Examples
Documentation of the selection process for named suppliers in UCAR proposals may be audited by UCAR sponsors; therefore auditable and defensible documentation for acquisitions and proposals is required. Additionally, once a specific source is named in the proposal, we may not be able to deviate from that source without notice and consent from the funding sponsor. You can view the full procedure on the Contracts website and download the form here. Please note that the procedure document also includes helpful definitions of the terms used above. Collaborative Proposals
All collaborative proposals must clearly describe the following in the proposal:
Collaborative proposals may be submitted in one of two ways:
Unfunded Collaborations Limits on Overhead/Indirect Costs At times, an agency or specific announcement may limit the percentage of indirect costs that may be applied to the budget. Under these circumstances additional forms, reviews, and approvals will be required. UCAR is required to collect full indirect costs on all outside funded projects regardless of if the award is from a federal agency or a non-profit foundation. Per OMB and the FAR, UCAR is required to charge equitably to all fund sources. If the agency limits the amount of allowable indirect costs to be charged to a project (ie. limit of 10% indirect costs on total direct budget costs) only the allowable amount would be charged to the sponsor and the remaining indirect costs must be applied to an allowable source of funds, such as the Program’s STORM funds.
Letters of Collaboration are required by PACUR as part of a proposal with university collaboration if the following applies:
The documentation from any unfunded university collaboration needs to be on university letterhead or sent via e-mail from a university e-mail address. The letter of collaboration should address the following:
Please send copies of letters of collaboration to the B&P office if you have them for the budget review process. Be sure to include them when sending a final copy of your proposal to the B&P office.
When submitting a proposal that involves collaboration with NCAR and/or Spark, the following guidelines should be observed: NOTE: Cross-Entity collaboration cannot be used to avoid FFRDC restrictions. UCP cannot issue subawards to NCAR.
Collaboration with NCAR: Collaboration with Spark: The Spark UCAR Science Education Office within the UCAR Office of Corporate Affairs includes activities that are General and Administrative (G&A) or indirect functions and direct funded activities such as the Significant Opportunities in Atmospheric Research and Science (SOARS) and The Community Building Program (CBP). Spark’s primary indirect function is to provide a service to all UCAR programs as part of UCAR’s education and outreach mission. As part of this function, Spark will typically not charge for services but may on occasion provide unique directed support above the normal G&A service. This guideline provides budget guidance for when it is determined appropriate for Spark services to be direct funded as part of UCP and NCAR activities. Guidance for SOARS and CBP activities is also included. Activities that support Spark’s primary indirect function should be consistent with their mission to support dissemination of UCAR science as a whole. This means that G&A services should integrate proposal activities and results into Spark’s ongoing educational activities rather than providing a unique service that is specific to the scientific content of an individual proposal. For example, as a general service Spark may highlight a successful proposal activity as one of many science examples in their tour and visitor programs, include the project in the portfolio of projects profiled in the Spark website, or encourage visiting teachers to leverage proposal results and tools as they design and disseminate standards-aligned resources for K-12 classrooms. Conversely, developing educational materials in support of a specific proposal objective, such as supporting content and interfaces for interactive models of water flow and transport, would be considered unique directed support. Spark Proposal GuidelinesNCAR - Computing Service Centers (CSC) Currently, 5 NCAR divisions have Computing Service Centers (CSC): CGD, ACD, HAO, MMM, RAL. CSCs were created to charge scientific computing and networking support in accordance with OMB circulars and NCAR management policy allocating the costs of scientific computing system infrastructure. Each of these divisions has their own CSC rate which is charged per work-time hour based on the estimated number of hours worked. Every employee is assigned a home division which will determine if a CSC rate should be applied. How do CSC’s apply to UCP? CSC charges will affect UCP in regards to joint appointments with NCAR and in preparing proposal budgets that include NCAR personnel. If an employee’s home division is one of the 5 CSC divisions, every hour they charge, no matter the account key, will be charged the CSC rate. It is important to budget for CSC charges so there are no surprises when they are charged. UCP administrators are encouraged to work with the partnering NCAR division in regards to joint appointments to assess the potential impact of CSC costs. NOTE: CSCs DO NOT INCUR OVERHEAD. Indirect costs are already figured into the rate. Proposal Preparation: Please include the following language in your budget justification under the purchased services category: This budget includes a charge for scientific computing and networking support in accordance with OMB circulars allocating the costs of scientific computing systems infrastructure. ALSO, please update your indirect cost footnotes to explain that “Indirect Costs are applied to all Modified Total Direct Costs (MTDC), which currently exclude equipment, participant support costs, and computing service center charges.” To find CSC Rates: Co-sponsorship is the term that NSF uses to describe the value of resources funded from NCAR's NSF Base Funding that is contributing to the performance of mutually beneficial research sponsored by another organization. It differs from cost-sharing because federal regulations prevent federal funds from being used as cost-share. Because of this distinction, it is vital that NCAR/UCAR proposals not suggest that the organization will share in the costs of a project. Note that cosponsorship ONLY applies to NCAR's NSF Base Funds and that employees that are not paid through NCAR Base Funds cannot show cosponsorship of their time on proposals. Be specific about cosponsorship of facilities and describe whether the amount of cosponsorship has already been allocated for the purpose described in the proposal. Incremental facility use, specific to the proposal, will be charged to the funding agency, unless the proposed activity directly supports an ATM area of interest and ATM approves full or partial cosponsorship. Cost Sharing
Cost sharing is most commonly required on proposals when the sponsor believes there may be tangible benefits to the award recipient(s). These are usually for infrastructure-building purposes, instrumentation/equipment/centers/facilities), or for awards where there is clear potential to make profit or generate income. Because federal funds may not be used for cost sharing, and because most of UCAR's funds are federal, cost sharing can be difficult. Most funds that can be used for cost sharing require the approval of the President of the Corporation. Also, any element of cost sharing is required by OMB Circular A-133 to be audited, so all cost sharing must be separately tracked. There are some ways in which cost sharing can be addressed, but it must be handled on a case by case basis to be sure all policy is followed. In order to insure that proposal requirements are met in ways allowable within UCAR, please do not address any cost sharing requirements without agreement from the UCP Budget Office.
NSF Cost Sharing - effective 18 January 2011 Effective January 18, 2011 NSF is now prohibiting voluntary committed cost sharing in all components of both solicited and unsolicited proposals. However, some mandatory cost sharing for some programs will still exist (MRI, etc.). Committed cost sharing is a quantifiable resource identifies in the budget that the institution must provide and specifically track. In FastLane, Line “M” on the 1030 will be grayed out when cost sharing is not mandatory. Organizations may, however, at their own discretion, continue to contribute any amount of voluntary uncommitted cost sharing to NSF-sponsored projects. But, NSF is changing the way that this information is presented to the agency. The most common form of voluntary uncommitted cost sharing our programs use is when a PI, Co-PI or other Senior Personnel does not request any funding on the proposal. If the proposal documents quantify the amount of effort this person will be dedicating to the project, it can be interpreted as committed cost sharing, which is prohibited. Personnel can still be named a PI or Co-PI on a proposal and not request any funds, but the following guidelines should be followed:
Instead, NSF is requiring that information concerning any senior personnel requesting no funds on a proposal should instead be addresses in the “Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources” section. NSF Cost Sharing Policy FAQs: http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=costsharefaqs
Current and Pending Support (C&P) A sample of an NSF C&P template can be found here. Currently Grants.gov does not have a specific C&P form. File Name Conventions
Interagency Transfers 1. NSF will implement the agreement by a Scientific Program Order/Amendment issued to the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) under Cooperative Agreement No. ATM-9732665 or any successor agreement and NSF will not, itself, be directly responsible for the provision of the goods or services contemplated under UCP's proposal to the other Federal Agency. 2. NSF assumes no liability for any costs above the funds obligated against Program Orders. 3. NSF may recover administrative costs consistent with Foundation Policy. For funds provided by Federal interagency agreement or fund transfer with NSF, the contact is:
If a proposal was written with the expectation of being funded by interagency transfer, the total funds requested includes funds to cover NSF's administrative costs, based on NSF's current rate, related to undertaking this activity. The following language should be included in the interagency transfer documentation: "This agreement includes funds to cover NSF's administrative costs related to undertaking this activity. Please refer to the proposal number on all correspondence with NSF." For funds provided by direct agreement with UCAR, contractual arrangements should be made with:
Please reference the UCAR proposal number on all correspondence with UCAR. Sponsored Agreements Signature Process THIS PERTAINS ONLY TO THE PORTION OF THE UCP PROPOSAL REVIEW PROCESS THAT INVOLVES OBTAINING AN AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE FROM SPONSORED AGREEMENTS ON AGENCY [BUDGET] FORMS. Program sends the budget, budget justification, and Statement of Work (SOW) to the UCP Budget and Administration Office electronically. This should be sent to ucpbp@ucar.edu. The Excel workbook for the proposal should include both the Excel budget and the agency budget form on separate tabs, or can be separate files. Filename and subject of email must include the UCAR proposal number (see example). The UCP Budget Office reviews the proposal, resolves any discrepancies/errors with the program via email, phone, or person-to-person. If this step is done electronically, clear file-naming conventions must be used to avoid confusion on the various versions. The UCP Budget Office emails the approval with the budget as an attachment (including the agency form) to the Program, with cc to Sponsored Agreements (SA). The final email may include instructions to SA on how the program wants the signature process to proceed. Clear communication between the programs and the budget office for the chosen method of obtaining signature on the budget form for that particular proposal is important. This could vary, depending upon the situation. Suggested options for the SA signature process are: 1) Program black bags/sends hard copy of agency form to Sponsored Agreements for signature, with instructions re: in what format the signed [budget] form is to be returned: Or 2) Sponsored Agreements uses copy attached to Budget Office email to sign and return via email (.pdf) or hard copy. For this option, instructions for SA would have to be included ahead of time, either from the Budget Office or from the program. Export Compliance Guidelines for DOD Proposals Export Compliance Guidelines for Proposals and Sponsored Projects Involving Department of Defense (DOD) Special attention must be given to proposed and active direct and indirect projects involving the Department of Defense, as these projects are much more likely to involve export controlled items and technical data than UCAR’s other sources of research funding. Please see the following guidelines for differentiating between fundamental research and restricted projects that may contain export controls in DOD proposals: http://www.fin.ucar.edu/guide/export_compliance_DoD.html
DOE Proposal Process President’s Advisory Committee on University Relations (PACUR) Advance Notice Guidelines - Full Version: Word Document Advance Notice Guidelines - PI Version: Word Document Letters of support are submitted by any persons not included as a part of the proposal but would like to express their personal support for the proposed activities. Relevant persons can express their support in a letter or an email. Please make sure to include any provided letters of support in your proposal copies for the budget office. Proposal Submission by UCP Visitors/Post Docs/Offsite Employees Requirements for UCP proposals:
UCP Program Director approval is required in all cases. Eligibility to Serve As PI On UCP Proposals Off-site Staff The program will give the UCP Budget Office adequate time to review these potential submissions and follow up if there are questions. On-site and Off-site Visitors Visitors will not usually be allowed to submit proposals as a PI under the UCAR affiliation. If special circumstances exist, the Program should discuss this with the UCP Budget Office before committing anything to the Visitor. A visitor could participate as a Co-PI in a UCAR proposal in collaboration with a UCAR PI, or with his/her host institution or sponsor. Participation as a PI or Co-PI under affiliation with the host institution/sponsor, where the award does not come through UCAR, will be decided by the host institution. Offsite visitors will need the approval of their supervisor at their host institution. UCP Program Director approval is required in all cases. Post Docs Eligibility for Proposing to Solicitations Many solicitations include limitations that could prohibit UCAR from proposing. Organization type could be limited to only degree granting institutions. Solicitations may also exclude Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC). NCAR is an FFRDC but UCP is not. UCP can propose to these solicitations. Many times we can propose to solicitations where we are not eligible to be the lead institution but we can be a subaward to an eligible institution. However, UCAR is considered a single entity and UCP can not provide a subaward to NCAR. Specific to NSF, any proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. The mentoring plan must be included as a Supplementary Document, not to exceed one page. Proposals that do not include the mentoring plan as a supplementary document will be returned without review (See the NSF Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II Section C.2.j). Examples of mentoring activities include:
NSF limits salary compensation for senior project personnel to no more than two months of their regular salary in any one year. This limit includes salary compensation received from all NSF-Funded grants. If anticipated, any compensation in excess of two months must be disclosed in the proposal budget, justified in the budget justification, and must be specifically approved by NSF in the award notice (See the NSF Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II Section C.2.g.i.a) It is important to note how much NSF support is being shown in the C&P's for senior personnel. If the amount listed in the C&P combined with the amount of support requested in the proposal exceeds 2 months for any one year, the waiver language should be included. As a justification, we recommend inserting the language below as a separate section in your budget justification. UCAR is not an academic insitution and will therefore request a waiver to this policy with every proposal.
Effective January 18, 2011 NSF is now requiring a plan for data management and sharing of the products of research, known as the Data Management Plan, for all proposals submitted on FastLane. This document can only be two pages and FastLane will be enabled to upload it as a separate supplementary document, similar to the PostDoc Mentoring Plan. (from the NSF GPG http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_2.jsp#IIC2j) Plans for data management and sharing of the products of research. Proposals must include a supplementary document of no more than two pages labeled “Data Management Plan”. This supplement should describe how the proposal will conform to NSF policy on the dissemination and sharing of research results (see AAG Chapter VI.D.4), and may include:
It is important to note that a valid Data Management Plan may include only the statement that no detailed plan is needed, as long as the statement is accompanied by a clear justification. Additionally, jointly submitted proposals and proposals with one lead institution issuing subawards are considered to be a single project and should include only one supplemental combined Data Management Plan.
The “Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources” section of FastLane is a required part of the system. NSF is expanding the use of this section following that change in the Cost Share policy (http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_2.jsp#IIC2i). The information provided in this section is used to ensure that reviewers, NSF program officers, and grantee officials have sufficient information regarding investigator capabilities and institutional resources. The Facilities section of the proposal should be used to provide a comprehensive description of all resources (both physical and personnel) necessary for, and available to a project, without reference to cost, date of acquisition, and whether the resources are currently available or would be provided upon receipt of the grant. It is very important that content in this form is narrative in nature and does not include any quantifiable financial information. For example, if you are mentioning the role that the unfunded PI will play, you cannot mention that they will be committing 1 month to the project, etc. Please contact the Budget Office for additional guidance and sample Facilities forms. NASA China Funding Restriction and Certification Process NASA and the Office of Science and Technology are restricted from using funding to enter into or fund a contract of any kind to participate, collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company, at the prime recipient level or at any subrecipient level, whether the bilateral involvement is funded or performed under a no-exchange of funds arrangement. For UCAR purposes, the restriction applies to any collaborations, funded or unfunded, with China (People’s Republic of China), any Chinese government run enterprises, any company or university incorporated under the laws of China, or individuals in any way affiliated with these entities. The restriction does not apply to the purchase of commercial or non-developmental items. Therefore, any activities that involve Chinese collaborators or visitors (non-UCAR employees) that could fall within the "collaborative" area (funded or unfunded) that are part of any projects that receive NASA funds or use the results of NASA funded projects will need to be reviewed by UCAR Contracts. NASA requires that UCAR sign an assurance of compliance to this Chinese restriction at the time of proposal. In order for UCAR to sign the assurance, UCAR needs a record of compliance by the Principal Investigator and any UCAR named Co-PI’s (excludes Co-Investigators). To this extent, UCAR Contracts will now require a form to be signed by the UCAR Principal Investigator at time of proposal submission for each NASA proposal where UCAR is the lead organization or in cases where UCAR is requested to certify by the lead organization. A form will also be required of any named sub-recipients at time of proposal. For further information regarding the process required at the time of proposal please see the document titled “Additional Background on NASA’s Restriction on Funding Activity with China” found on the Contracts website here. Please note that this document includes a section of FAQs.
The UCAR Open Access Policy is a formalization and update of existing policies that have been in effect at UCAR for many years. NOAA CPO Administrative Fee
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proposal Updates |
FY2014 RATES
IMPORTANT NSF PROPOSAL UPDATES |
Click here for the complete UCP Proposal Workshop Presentation
