Faculty Guide to Sponsored Programs

Oakland University is deeply committed to academic freedom, not only for the sake of the faculty, but for those we serve as well. Ultimately, academic freedom is crucial to our society; it affords the individual faculty member the opportunity to remain uncommitted to a particular course of action or end result, thus ensuring accurate, objective and unbiased results.

The Office of Sponsored Programs has a responsibility to ensure that grant and contract agreements protect our institution's integrity and each faculty member's academic freedom. OSP, and The Research Office more broadly, work closely with faculty members to preserve and protect that freedom.

OSP also has a responsibility to the institution to protect it from unnecessary risks and liabilities and to ensure the proper stewardship of sponsored funds. This responsibility necessitates the creation of appropriate mechanisms for the accountability of sponsored funds. It also requires compliance with certain public policies, the filing of assurances and certifications regarding regulatory compliance, and the complete disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. All those involved in the conduct and management of sponsored programs must abide by these mechanisms and policies.

Two terms, Principal Investigator and Project Director, are often used interchangeably by sponsors, contract negotiators, proposal reviewers, research administrators, and others. The terms are used synonymously herein, with preference given to the term Principal Investigator and its acronym PI.

When more than one individual is considered to be primarily responsible for the scientific, technical, and administrative conduct of a project, each person shall be considered a co-principal investigator. Each co-principal investigator must meet the same eligibility requirements as those set forth for principal investigator. It should be noted that many extramural funding agencies recognize only one principal investigator. In addition, it is important for efficient and effective communication both within and outside the University to have one person designated as the "project correspondent."

Thus, in those cases when more than one faculty member is listed in the proposal as coprincipal investigator, one should be designated primus inter pares (first among equals). This person should be named first in any listing in the proposal and should be identified on university forms as the Investigator/Project Correspondent.

Each project must have a designated leader (PI) who will see that the terms of the grant or contract are fulfilled. University policy requires that the PI be a full-time appointee and paid on a University payroll. Faculty with emeritus status may participate in sponsored projects with special consideration.¹ Further information can be obtained from the Office of Sponsored Programs. Graduate students may serve as PI only when that is a sponsor requirement, such as with the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program. However, because spending authority is never granted to a student, there must be a faculty mentor assigned to the project.

¹ Fixed term and other non-regular faculty/staff may serve as PIs. In such instances, University policy requires: (1) that the individual is qualified for and willing to carry out the duties of PI; (2) that this appointee is familiar with the duties required; (3) that a faculty member on a standing appointment is qualified to assume responsibility for this project and will do so in the event that the fixed term faculty member is unable to complete the work. This exception will be approved by the Vice President for Research.

Although the University is legally responsible to the sponsor as the actual recipient of a grant or contract, the PI is also held accountable for the proper fiscal management and conduct of the project. To assist faculty in this responsibility, the University provides supporting administrative services and has established procedures to help meet both sponsor and university administrative requirements. The University is, ultimately, legally and financially responsible and accountable to the sponsor for the performance of the activity funded and the proper use of funds, but without the full cooperation and vigilance of the PI, the University would fail in its stewardship role. In the truest sense, therefore, the sponsored programs process is a joint effort between the PI and the University; both must do their part well in order to achieve success.

The PI must comply with all the terms and conditions of a sponsor’s award and see that project funds are managed efficiently and effectively within approved budgets. The PI must also ensure that the project is completed in a diligent and professional manner.

Projects are conducted as a department, college, or campus function. If the project is over-expended or if auditors disallow an expenditure, the University must ask the appropriate academic unit to cover this cost. The PI is therefore responsible to the sponsor, unit, and the University for ensuring that the requirements of the award are met and the policies of the University are followed.

Freedom to publish is essential to the fulfillment of the University's responsibility to disseminate the findings of research. The University therefore works with the faculty member to preserve this right in sponsored agreements.

There can be acceptable delays and/or restrictions on publications, however. For instance, because technology transfer is a form of results dissemination for the public good, the University may choose to accept delays in publication when such delays are necessary in order to seek patent protection.

Moreover, publications involving patents may limit discussion to statements of new discoveries and interpretations of scientific facts and need not reveal specific information of processes or methods that are proprietary in nature.

Papers describing discoveries often are withheld pending additional confirmations believed to be essential. Faculty also have refrained from releasing information where general knowledge might lead to nonproductive speculation and exploitation.

Finally, in those exceptional cases in which researchers are involved in government-classified research, publications are subject to the restrictions imposed by the government.

Per the faculty collective bargaining agreement, Oakland University faculty retain ownership of their intellectual property. The University recognizes, however, the importance of transferring that technology to the commercial sector where it can benefit the people it serves. Therefore, the University works with faculty to evaluate that intellectual property for commercial potential and patentability and assists with the assignment, application for and prosecution of patents. The Technology Transfer Office will also assist with licensing, corporate introductions, and contract analysis.

The academic department is the traditional home for instruction and discipline-oriented research. Another base of research is an intra-college unit formed of faculty and students from departments within a college--for example, a research center. These centers or laboratories are administered by a director, a department head, or a dean. They work as an organized research team to address questions that could not be addressed within a single unit, facilitate the preparation of grant proposals and research reports.

The third organizational base for research is the inter-college research institute. These operate similarly to research centers and yet, the necessary inclusion of different schools and colleges adds administrative complexity to the mix. Some faculty involved in research institutes may hold joint appointments.

The Vice President for Research has overall responsibility for the University's research program. Reporting to the Vice President is the Director of Sponsored Programs, who provides leadership to OU’s extramural relations in connection with the sponsored support of University research, instruction, artistry, and service programs.

Units reporting to this office, which are of interest to those seeking sponsored support include:

• Research Development
• Office of Sponsored Programs
• Research Integrity and Compliance
  • IRB
  • IACUC and animal care
  • IBC
• Technology Transfer and IP
• OU, Inc small business incubator
• Advanced Research Methodology Services

Government agencies and private foundations have long recognized the value of using academic talent to assist them in meeting their goals. Grants from both sources support a wide variety of activities aimed at goals as diverse as expanding scientific knowledge, promoting social equality, and fostering economic development. Although it sometimes appears that virtually any activity can be supported, in fact, sponsors fund projects that fit within specified missions. Government agencies disburse tax dollars to meet public needs that have been recognized by congress or state legislatures. In many cases, the authority to spend is very broad, but in all cases, an agency can fund only activities that fit within its authority.

Foundation grant making may appear more idiosyncratic, but it is not without its own inherent logic. While foundations do have much greater discretion in disbursing their funds, they must operate within the boundaries established by the Internal Revenue Service to maintain their tax-exempt status. They have demonstrated a strong concern for public approval and a sincere wish to see their money well spent.

Both types of funding sources want to fund projects that hold promise of contributing in the area(s) for which they feel responsibility. Consequently, whether you are applying to a government program or a foundation, it is important to propose a clearly thought-out project with measurable outcomes in the area of identified need.

Once the work of research development undertaken by the investigator has gotten as far as identifying the next-right-project and a potential sponsor, the work changes materially. Sponsors fund activities in the service of scientific ideas.

No matter how good your ideas or noble your intentions, you must translate them into a specific set of activities in order to get funding. Potential sponsors must know what you actually plan to do in order to determine whether investing in your project represents an effective use of their resources. Whether you want to set up a training program, demonstrate a novel approach to service delivery, or conduct basic research, the task of moving from an idea to a practical work plan is the same. You must define the problem or need you wish to address, formulate goals and objectives for your response to that problem, and then decide what specific actions have to be taken to fulfill those goals and objectives.

A good way to do this is to develop a concise outline containing each of the elements listed below. As you do so, keep working on each section until you have established a strong, logical connection between the activities you propose to undertake and the resolution of the problem you have defined. Developing the outline should allow you not only to organize your thoughts into a coherent plan of action, but also to muster the arguments you will need to persuade a potential sponsor of the value of your proposed activities. As you work on each section, try to look at the project from the perspective of a potential donor. Why would someone support this activity? Who might benefit from it, or what might be accomplished because of this work?

Statement of Need or Problem to be Addressed

What really needs to be done? What significant need(s) are you trying to meet? What services need to be delivered to whom, or what gaps exist in the knowledge base of your field? Thinking critically about these questions will allow you to "carve out" a workspace for yourself by defining the problem you want to address. Remember the problem must be both significant and manageable. Potential sponsors must be convinced not only that a problem is important enough to deserve attention but also that some impact on the problem is possible.

Goals and Objectives

Set out an overall goal for your project by delineating what you actually intend to accomplish. Think about what impact you hope to make on the problem. What caused the problem, or what factors contribute to it, and how can these factors be modified to alleviate the problem? What specific measurable changes could be made inside the project period? Your answer will allow you to develop a set of project objectives -- i.e., a statement of precise outcomes that can be measured to determine actual accomplishments.

Plan of Action, Project Design, or Methodology

What specific activities would enable you to meet the objectives you have set? How can they be conducted? For a research proposal, you must select an appropriate methodology and then establish a clear rationale for its adoption. For a service or demonstration project, think about the number and types of people who would be served and who would provide the specific service components.

Budget and Personnel Requirements

Estimate the personnel requirements of the project. How many people with what types of qualifications would be needed to carry out the project? What space, equipment, and travel resources would they need? How much time is necessary to complete the project activities? Once you have answered these questions, your pre-award Grants and Contracts Officer will be able to determine the dollar value of each of the items mentioned to get a fairly accurate estimate of the financial requirement of the project. In all cases where it is allowed by the sponsor, the University’s Facility & Administration Costs (also called “indirect” or “overhead” costs) will be included.

Title

When you have finished outlining the project, chose a simple title that explains what you plan to do. There is no particular merit to spending hours arriving at a clever acronym for your project. The general idea is to have a concise and precise title; cute is over-rated.

After you have thought out each of these elements, review what you have prepared in order to be sure that the overall plan is logical and consistent. It should now be relatively easy to write a brief outline of the project, which can be used as the basis for the next step in the development of a proposal. The outline should include:

• Title of the proposed project
• Statement of need or problem to be addressed
• Plan of action, project design, or methodology
• Budget and personnel requirements.

There is almost always considerably more to developing a final proposal than is outlined here. But these elements will be required for almost any proposal, and do provide a basis for moving beyond the blank page.

Before you proceed (or begin) to identify potential sponsors, take time for two additional steps. First, conduct a thorough bibliographic search, not only to avoid duplication of existing studies or activities, but also to uncover information that may strengthen your proposal. Second, evaluate your qualification in relation to the requirements of the project. Sponsors want to know that your ideas and activities are meritorious, absolutely. But they also want to know that you are the right person - the very best person- to carry those ideas and activities forward.

Be realistic in assessing whether you have the necessary experience, interest, and ability not only to carry out the project but also to compete for funding. It is equally important to assess how the project fits with your institution's mission, size, and resources. Grants generally are made to institutions, not individuals; typically, sponsors require evidence of institutional commitment before they will consider supporting a project, however impressive an individual's proposal may be.

Once you have identified potential sponsors, it is important to obtain as much information as possible in order to ascertain their likely interest in your project. The information needed can usually be found in printed materials readily available to the public, since government agencies are subject to strong reporting requirements, and foundations are required by law to make information on their giving practices available to the Internal Revenue Service and the public. Pay particular attention to the following factors:

• the purpose of the program
• stated program priorities
• recipient eligibility requirements (including geographic restrictions)
• types of activities eligible for funding
• particular funding mechanism (grant, contract, etc.)
• budget restrictions and/or matching/cost-sharing requirements
• level of competition (total funds available and, where known, projected number of awards and range)
• availability of application forms or specific proposal guidelines
• application deadlines and review cycles
• giving history (types of organizations and activities funded in the past)

If the information you have obtained leads you to think that a funding announcement is relevant to your work, it is, in most cases, appropriate and advisable to contact agency staff to verify the accuracy of your reading of their materials and to ascertain the current status of the program (funding levels, deadlines for applications, any change in program priorities). Very occasionally, a sponsor will indicate that these contacts are not welcome or permissible and this preference must, obviously, be honored.

Prior to contacting private funding sources, faculty it is often helpful to contact your Research Development Officer through The Research Office. The RDOs have considerable experience in tracking down the correct Program Officer, which is often harder than seems probable. Also, we have guidance about how to prepare for and participate in these meetings

Contact with a potential sponsor often begins with an email that includes a brief précis of the proposed project, with a request for a meeting in the next two weeks or so. These meetings are typically phone conversations or Zoom meetings. Sometimes, The Research Office does have funding to travel to Washington to meet directly with Program Officers; contact the Vice President for Research about that possibility.

You should not expect a commitment for funding at this point, but you should be able to obtain an indication of the relevance of your work to the sponsor's current interests. The sponsor's reaction to your preliminary inquiry will allow you to assess whether it is worth your time and effort to proceed with the development of a full proposal.

The format or presentation of a particular proposal document will depend on the requirements of the sponsor to whom you are applying. Most government agencies have application forms and very specific proposal guidelines, while other sponsors might be less directive. The sponsor guidelines trump anything that might be said here. Nonetheless, there are, elements that all proposals should contain, even though they often have different names.

Narrative

The main body of the proposal should be a narrative laying out exactly what you plan to do and why. It should include all of the elements in your outline, with supporting information and elaboration. Generally, you begin with a statement of the need or problem you will address. It is important that you make no unsupported claims. For service projects, you should document the need through a needs assessment. In the case of research projects, you should provide a rationale for the need of your project and the impact of projected results.

Next, state the overall goals and specific objectives of the project, making sure there is a clear, logical connection between the problem you have defined and the response you are proposing.

Finally, describe your plan of action or methodology, providing sufficient detail for the reader to judge whether your project can be run both efficiently and effectively. The narrative should demonstrate that you have thought out all aspects of the project carefully, including what you will do when things do not go according to plan. It must convince the reviewer of the significance of the problem, the appropriateness of your proposed response, and your ability to conduct the proposed activities. Be sure its logic is cogent and its organization strong.

Evaluation

Effective program evaluation has become increasingly crucial as the funding available for research programs has diminished in terms of real dollars. Most sponsors recognize - and some require- the incorporation of an evaluation component in project management plans. This might be a separate document from the research plan. However, even if it is not strictly speaking required, you should indicate how you will know if your project achieved what it set out to accomplish.

An investigator might want to take advantage of another service sponsored by the OU Research Office: Advanced Research Methodological Services (ARMS). ARMS is available to assist Principal Investigators with tasks related to research design, measurement, data management, analysis, and communication of results. All assistance for proposal development is free of charge. However, a PI who uses these services is expected to use the ARMS during the project and to include those costs in the proposal budget.

Budget

Although too often viewed as a tedious technicality of interest only to accountants, the budget, in fact, is a key element of any proposal. It outlines your project in fiscal terms and is often used by reviewers to get a quick sense of how the project would be organized. The narrative and the budget tell the same story – just in different languages.

The most frequent budget line items include salaries and fringe benefits, lab supplies required for the project, equipment, travel, and institutional overhead. Your pre-award Grants and Contracts Officer will take the lead in helping you to build a compliant and competitive budget and budget justification. Nothing will move forward without the PI’s approval, but the actual work of translating the research plan into costs can be undertaken by the GCO.

Proposal solicitations in some instances call for institutional cost-sharing as a condition for an award. While the University is firmly committed to assisting faculty in the pursuit of outside funding for research initiatives and program development, the resources available for cost-sharing are limited. All cost sharing must be approved by the institutional official who administers the source of funds providing the cost share. All cost-sharing must be documented in accordance with University and sponsoring agency policy.

Requests for institutional cost sharing through the use of indirect costs must be submitted in writing to the Vice President for Research. You can obtain the form from your GCO. Such requests shall identify the amount of institutional cost sharing proposed, the amount of cost sharing the academic units involved are providing, and the rationale and justification for utilizing indirect costs for cost sharing or for waiving indirect costs.

Accurate estimates of all your expected costs are important. Reviewers know the cost of doing work in their field, and figures that are either too high or too low may cause them to question your familiarity with the field and your abilities as a project administrator. Your Grants and Contracts Officer can help you compile realistic budget figures and should be consulted as you develop this section of the proposal.

Abstract

Prepare a brief abstract of the proposal, keeping in mind that reviewers may rely on it heavily in evaluating the proposed project. Be sure to cover all the key elements in the proposal but also to conform to any length limitations imposed by the sponsor. Although this section will appear first in the final document, it is best written after the main sections of the proposal have been completed. Bear in mind that this portion of the proposal may become publicly available, so base your writing on that possibility.

Appendices

Any materials (such as charts, graphs, tables, or illustrations) that add important data but would impede a smooth reading of the narrative should be included as appendices. Concise vitae of project participants might be included as appendices, unless the guidelines stipulate otherwise. Remember, however, that the sponsor is interested in relevant work and experience, not in everything that an individual has ever done. Also, do not use appendices to subvert sponsor-imposed page limits. Sponsor reviewers will notice that and will not look favorably on the attempt.

As you write the full proposal, keep the following points in mind.

First, follow sponsor guidelines. By filling out forms incorrectly or failing to supply requested information, you prejudice a potential sponsor against your project. Many sponsors will return your proposal without review for this kind of mistake.

Second, address stated criteria. If points are assigned to the various sections of a proposal (as program guidelines will indicate,) one weak section may omit the chances of an otherwise strong proposal.

Third, use clear, precise language aimed at your specific audience; avoid jargon or unnecessarily technical terminology. It is often helpful in writing the proposal to be familiar with the review procedures used by the particular sponsor, i.e., whether reviewers are informed laypersons or peers in a particular field.

Once the proposal has been completed, two additional steps need to be taken. Agency staff and foundation personnel commonly recommend that applicants have their proposals read by colleagues for strength of logic and clarity of expression. This is also something that your Research Development Officer will be willing to do for you. This often-neglected step can be very important in the proposal development process, as your colleagues' comments can help produce a stronger proposal.

The proposal must then be reviewed by your Grants and Contracts Officer for compliance, internal clearance and final approval. Remember to allow enough time to secure all necessary approvals and signatures before the application deadline. The university policy is that OSP should have final documents from the PI five (5) business days before the deadline.

Advance fund numbers are requested only when OSP receives informal notification of an upcoming award or believes there is a reasonable likelihood of funding based upon information from the sponsor (e.g. a JIT request). When it is important to the science, we can set up a fund number in advance of receiving an actual Notice of Award. The advance fund number allows the unit to set up a restricted budget and begin incurring expenses as of the proposed effective date of the award.

However, this is slightly risky behavior. Should the award not materialize, or the effective date is other than stated on the request, the risk for unallowable expenses falls entirely upon the unit. OSP will require the establishment of a contingency fund at the departmental level to be used to cover this situation. To minimize risk to the departmental funds, the department is also encouraged to set a spending limit that they will authorize before the receipt of the Notice of Award.

Notices of Award are transmitted by the sponsor to the OSP. If the document is sent to the principal investigator, it should be forwarded immediately to OSP. The University requires that all sponsored program awards be processed by OSP. OSP also provides final recommendations for acceptance of bilateral agreements, which are then executed by an authorized official. This is administratively handled by OSP.

Award Review Process

When awards are received in OSP they are assigned to a post-award Grants and Contracts Officer. The GCO first conducts a preliminary review of any non-standard award documents and accompanying terms and conditions. The pre-review highlights possible problem areas that impose risk upon the University. Pre-review is not necessary for most unilateral awards, e.g., NIH, NSF because we accept those terms and conditions at proposal stage.

Award Negotiation

If terms must be negotiated, the GCO will work with OU’s Office of Legal Affairs to negotiate with the sponsor. Faculty members are not authorized to negotiate grants and contracts on behalf of the University. This negotiation could take a bit of time, but it is all in the interest of protecting the science, the PI, and the University research enterprise.

PIs may, and in some instances should, participate in discussions with the agency, but only on programmatic, noncontractual issues. In doing so, however, they should be sure to advise the agency that they are not permitted to make commitments on behalf of the University. A report (an email is fine) of any discussions preliminary to official negotiation should be given immediately to OSP to prevent any miscommunications with the agency.

Once negotiations are completed and the award is fully executed, OSP sends a request to University Accounting to establish a restricted account (often called a “fund number”). With that fund number in place, an internal Notice of Award is sent to the PI, the Chair, and the Dean and spending on the project may begin. If there was an Advance Account, the contingency fund can now be released.