1 / 32

GRANTS PROCESS VANDERBILT

GRANTS PROCESS VANDERBILT. @. Office of Sponsored Programs. LEARNING OBJECTIVES. By the end of the session, you should be able to explain: how a grant is initiated when and how OSP is involved the various elements of a grant submission

margo
Download Presentation

GRANTS PROCESS VANDERBILT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GRANTSPROCESS VANDERBILT @ Office of Sponsored Programs

  2. LEARNING OBJECTIVES By the end of the session, you should be able to explain: • how a grant is initiated • when and how OSP is involved • the various elements of a grant submission • the steps within OSP during the grant process • the established timelines and expectations • the common pitfalls in the grant process

  3. 1. START PROPOSAL IN COEUS

  4. ABOUT COEUS • A relational database • Users can build proposals and budgets • Proposals can be approved in an electronic, real-time process • Faculty can submit most federal proposals to Grants.gov • Process to manage all research awards

  5. 2. LOG PROPOSAL INTO PEER

  6. PEER is a Vanderbilt system • Paperless Environment for Electronic Review • A web-based program, or “application” for OSP to transact business with our customers • Electronic submission of numerous business items including grant-related requests and certifications, research and service/consulting contracts, and more • Purpose: Speed turn around times, increase compliance, track workflow, and reduce paper usage

  7. 3. TRIGGER COIs

  8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST • When submitting a proposal, PI/Co-Investigators must complete a Conflict of Interest Certification in PEER • Certification states whether or not they have a significant (<$5,000) interest in the project that is being submitted for funding • Once notification is received that an award is eminent, a review will be conducted by the Faculty Affairs Office to determine if a conflict exists. • Once this review has been completed, spending on an award may begin.

  9. 4. TRIGGER PI ASSURANCES

  10. PI ASSURANCE • Regardless of sponsor, the PI & any multiple and/or Co-PIs complete PI assurance in PEER • The assurance states that the individual certified that: • The information submitted within the application is true, complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge; and • I am aware that any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or claims may subject me to criminal, civil or administrative penalties; and • I agree to accept responsibility for the scientific conduct of the project and to provide the required progress reports if a grant is awarded as a result of the application.

  11. PI ASSURANCE Furthermore, the person certifies that: • I will observe all sponsor and Vanderbilt policies; and • I will inform compliance committees (IRB and/or IACUC) if there is a change to the project that will require additional approval; and • I will adhere to institutional safety regulations for research involving radioisotopes, biohazards, or recombinant DNA as set forth by Vanderbilt Environmental Health and Safety.

  12. 5. COMPLETE SPONSOR FORMS

  13. SPONSOR-BASED FORMS Many federal agencies and non-federal sponsors have their own methods of submitting grant proposals that Vanderbilt must use, including: • National Science Foundation: Fastlane • American Heart Association: Grants@Heart • NIH Program Grant: Paper submission • NIH Training Grant: Adobe submission • American Cancer Society: Proposal Central • Gates Foundation: email

  14. 6. COMPLETE BUSINESS SECTION IN COEUS

  15. BUSINESS SECTION OSP typically only reviews the business section, which includes: • Line-Item Budget & Budget Justification • Equipment and Facilities: These two documents explain Vanderbilt’s capacity to conduct the research. • Project Summary/Abstract: This is a brief summary of the proposed work. • Project Narrative: This is a brief statement of the benefit to public health. • Letters of Intent to Form a Consortium: for all incoming/outgoing subcontracts • Sponsor documentation (for non-grants.gov proposals) • Any other business/compliance documents (ex. current and pending document)

  16. OTHER PROPOSAL SECTIONS OSP typically only reviews the business section, however, OSP will check to ensure that the PI intends to load documents where needed for compliance • Research Plan • Biosketches: the biosketch is a person’s CV presented in specific format • Human and animal subjects documents • Bibliography • Other required documents (ex. Multiple PI Leadership Plan)

  17. 7. ROUTE COEUS PROPOSAL FOR APPROVAL

  18. GRANTS TIMELINE • 10 business days before the sponsor deadline  PI + department finalize business sectionand routes the proposal for approval • 8 business days before the sponsor deadline  OSP receives proposal for review and approval • 3 business days before the sponsor deadline  PI submits proposal to sponsor

  19. 8. KEY PERSONS SUBMIT COIs

  20. 9. PIs SUBMIT PI ASSURANCES

  21. 10. INTERNAL UNITS REVIEW & APPROVE PROPOSAL

  22. PROPOSAL REJECTION • Proposals may be rejected by an approving unit or the central office (OSP, VA, Hospital Finance) for a myriad of reasons • Most reasons for rejection stem from instances of non-compliance

  23. CORRECTING REJECTED PROPOSALS • In working with a rejected proposal, there is no need to copy it, just open the rejected proposal, correct all errors and reroute for approval. • Units that previously approved the proposal will need to approve it again; however, in some instances units may be bypassed (request this in PEER) to expedite the process.

  24. REROUTING PROPOSALS

  25. 11. DEPARTMENT UPLOADS FINAL DOCUMENTS

  26. 12. IF REQUIRED OSP SIGNS SPONSOR “FACE PAGE”

  27. 13. PI COMPLETES FINAL REVIEW & SIGNS OFF • Final review of the proposal should include ensuring that all the science-related documentation has been successfully uploaded and that it is compliant with sponsor guidelines • For Coeus submissions, this must occur prior to the PI approving the proposal

  28. 14. PI OR OSP SUBMITS PROPOSAL (AS APPLICABLE) • Depending on the sponsor or the technology, OSP may be required to submit the application on behalf of the PI, such as American Heart Association grants or Adobe submissions • In these instances, the PI may be required to complete all sections of the proposal in advance of the internal deadline • In Coeus, a proposal is labeled “submitted” once the final approver has approved the proposal, whether or not it has been literally submitted • In some rare instances, OSP can submit on behalf of the PI (must be requested via PEER)

  29. 15. PI VERIFIES RECEIPT OF PROPOSAL

  30. WARNINGS & ERRORS • Warnings: could result from computer error, will be examined by CSR at NIH • Errors: cannot proceed in validation process, must be resubmitted as a changed/corrected application if time allows

  31. eRA COMMONS IS THE NIH PORTAL • eRA Commons is an online interface where grant applicants, grantees and federal staff at NIH and grantor agencies can access and share administrative information relating to research grants. • Functions include: • Track the status of their grant applications through the submission process, view errors and/or warnings and check the assembled grant image • View summary statements and score letters • View notice of award and other key documents • Submit Just-in-Time information • Submit the required documentation • Submit Progress Reports

  32. PROPOSAL REJECTION

More Related