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?