Post on 29-Jan-2016
description
transcript
OE PRE-AWARD UPDATE
SOM FACULTY COUNCIL MEETINGJUNE 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
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
4
5
6
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
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 BayMembers will be appointed by the Deans. The Academic Senate representative will be appointed by the Chair of the Academic Senate.
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
Funding Options
Recharge1. 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 Recovery1. 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
1212
Next Steps: reevaluate and refine funding model options
13
Questions?