Grants and Research at NSF & Government-wide Grants Initiatives

NSF and Government-wide Initiatives NSF and Government-wide Initiatives

Grants.gov and Research.gov at NSF & Government-wide Grants Initiatives

Andrea NorrisDivision Director IRM/DIS

Mary SantonastassoDivision Director BFA/DIAS

November 9, 2006

NSF and Government-wide Initiatives NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 2

Government-wide GrantsInitiatives


Background

• Grants.gov

– Government wide Policy and Implementation Governing Structures for e-Grants Initiatives

– Grants.gov’s Purpose and Goals

– Current and Future Status

– How NSF has Implemented Grants.gov


Background (Cont.)

• Grants Management Line of Business (GMLOB)

– What is the Grants Management Line of Business?

– GMLOB Purpose and Goals

– Current and Future Status

– NSF’s Diverse Roles in the GMLOB: Leading and Implementing


The Federal Grant Streamlining Program

The Chief Financial Officers Council

Pre-Award Work GroupDepartment of Defense Chair

P.L. 106-107 PMOHHS

Grants Policy CommitteeNational Science Foundation and Energy

Co-Chairs

Interagency Committee onDebarment and Suspension

EPA Chair

CCR TeamEPA Chair

Mandatory Work GroupVacant Chair

Cost Principles TeamOMB Chair

Indirect Cost UniformGuidance Handbook Team

HHS Chair

Reporting Forms TeamNOAA Chair

Payment System IssuesNSF Chair

Post-Award Work GroupDOC/NOAA Chair

FAC Study (next steps)Energy Chair

Audit Policy IssuesNSF and Education

Co-Chairs

Audit Quality TeamEducation Chair

Compliance Supplement Team

HHS Chair

Audit Oversight Work GroupHHS Chair

Improper Payment IssuesDOT Chair

Database TeamChair

Certification TeamDOE Chair

Competencies TeamEducation and DOI

Co-Chairs

Training Curriculum Team

NSF Chair

Training and Oversight Work GroupHHS Chair

National Science andTechnology Policy Council

Research Business ModelsSubcommittee

Committee on Science


Organizational StructureKeyExisting entity

To be launched

Governing body

Execution team

OMB

Grants Policy

Committee

Grants Executive Board

Go

vern

ance

Grants.gov PMO

Grants.gov Find and

Apply

GMLOB PMO

ACF Consortium

P.L. 106-107 Work Groups

Wo

rk G

rou

ps

Ser

vice

P

rovi

der

s

Exe

cuti

on

Tea

ms

NSF Consortium

Future Consortium

Future Consortium

DoED Consortium


What is Grants.gov?

• A single source for finding grant opportunities

• A standardized manner of locating and learning more about funding opportunities

• A single, secure and reliable source for applying for Federal grants online

• A simplified grant application process with reduction of paperwork

• A unified interface for all agencies to announce their grant opportunities, and for all grant applicants to find and apply for those opportunities


Grants.gov Current Status and Next Steps

• All 26 grant-making agencies are required to post all discretionary grant programs in the Grants.gov Find

• OMB has directed agencies to post in Grants.gov Apply:

– 75% of their funding opportunities in FY 2006;

– 100% of their funding opportunities in FY 2007.


Grants.gov at NSF


NSF Grants.gov Experience

• Started Integration in June 2005– Proposal submitted via Grants.gov look the same as a proposal

submitted via FastLane to programs and reviewers

• FY 05– 100% Posted on FIND– 25% Posted on APPLY (25% goal)




NSF Grants.gov Experience (Cont.)

• NSF has received 597 application submissions through Grants.gov since June 2005.

• This count includes applications submitted to:– Four programs requiring submission through Grants.gov; and – 174 programs in FY 06 where submission through Grants.gov

was optional.

• When submission through Grants.gov was an option, 1% of the applicants chose to submit through Grants.gov.

• Of the 597 submissions, 325 applications were successfully inserted into FastLane (54% success rate).

• The 272 applications or 46 percent of applications that were not successful required the applicant to correct problems and resubmit.


Success Factors

• Outreach to the community

• NSF’s Grants.gov Application Guide includes step-by-step instructions

• Help Desk Support – received almost 100 calls/e-mails requesting assistance

• 35 training sessions to NSF staff given by DIS and Policy office


Lessons Learned

• Applicants submitting applications with attachments that are not in PDF.

• The PI or Co-PI typed their name differently in various portions of the application and the software could not tell if this was the same person or another individual.

• Problems with organizational registration if institution and its branches share the same DUNS

• Mac and UNIX issues – PureEdge solution being tested

• Applicants had varying success in submitting pro-posals, some taking as many as four attempts before successful insertion into FastLane.


7. NSF downloads submitted application packages and validates and inserts the information into FastLane

5. AOR submits application package to Grants.gov

* Applicant or Researcher

1. Applicant* navigates to Grants.gov Website

2. Applicant searches for program announcements

3. Applicant finds a program announcement and downloads application package (PureEdge forms) and instructions

4. Applicant completes application package

6. Grants.gov sends confirmation to AOR

= NSF Activity

8. NSF sends confirmation to AOR and PI

Grants.gov Implementation


NSF’s Grant Application Package

• SF 424 (R&R) Forms

• NSF Mandatory Forms– NSF Cover Page– NSF CheckList

• NSF Optional Forms– NSF Deviation Authorization– NSF Suggested Reviewers– NSF FastLane System Registration

• Coming Soon…– Biological Sciences Classification Form– Division of Undergraduate Education


NSF Implementation in 2007

• Those programs designated required in 06 will remain required in 07

• Unless otherwise specified, optional submission for the vast majority of NSF programs

• Will not be used until a Grants.gov solution has been developed for:– Separately submitted collaborative proposals– Fellowship programs that require submission

of reference letters


Required to be submitted through

Grants.gov in 2007

• Antarctic Artists and Writers (OPP)

• Scientific Computing Research Environments for the Mathematical Sciences (MPS)

• Living Stock Collections (BIO)

• Advanced Learning Technologies (CISE)

• CEDAR, GEM, and SHINE Postdoctoral Research (GEO)

• Research in Disability Education (EHR)

• Infrastructure Materials Applications and Structural Mechanics (ENG)

• Geography and Regional Science (SBE)


Not Accepted Through Grants.gov

• NSF also does not accept applications through Grants.gov for:

– Submission of Letters of Intent and Preliminary Proposals– Changed/Corrected Applications– Revisions– Continuations– Supplemental Funding Requests


What is GMLOB?

• A government-wide solution to support end-to-end grants management activities that promote citizen access, customer service, and agency financial and technical stewardship.

• System consolidation

• Interoperability

– Streamlined processes

– Standardized nomenclature

– Common interface touchpoints


Why GMLOB?

• Transparency and efficiency in the grants decision making process

• Improved access to grants-related programmatic and financial information

• Enhanced ability to report on award-related accomplishments

• Improved post award monitoring and oversight


How?

• Grants management community will process grants in a decentralized way using common business processes supported by shared technical support services.


Roles and Responsibilities - Implementation

GMLOB PMO Consortia Leads Consortia Member Agencies

• Program planning, management and reporting

• Consortia activity coordination and support

• Consortia activity direction and management

• Common solution development

• Consortia participation

• Common solution development

• Consolidate GMLOB reporting and capital planning

• Conduct PMO activities – communication, governance support, planning

• Coordinate and support Consortia activities, service center implementation, and agency migration

• Facilitate work groups for government wide standardization and streamlining

• Gather and share lessons learned, best practices, and templates across Consortia

• Conduct research and analysis

• Provide planning, leadership, business, and program direction

• Establish and execute Consortium governance structure

• Manage Consortium resources

• Define requirements

• Provide acquisitions, implementation, and migration planning and support

• Identify risks and issues for resolution or escalation

• Define agency business and technical requirements

• Contribute to the development and delivery of work products

• Contribute resources (funding and/or FTEs) for program/project management, planning, development, and implementation

• Represent agency needs to the Consortia Leads and working groups

Ro

les

Res

po

nsi

bili

ties


FY 2006 Activities


Current Status

• Department of Education (ED)

– ED’s core competency is administering and managing thousands of grants that provide educational and vocational opportunities for all citizens.

– ED’s approach is unique in that consortium members will have the opportunity to participate in the design of a new, full lifecycle, end-to-end grants management system from the ground up.

– ED’s system will be built to work with a large volume of information and transactions suitable for larger grant-making agencies.


Current Status (Cont.)

• Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Administration for Children and Families (ACF)

– Seven agencies and over 80 grant programs already use HHS ACF’s Center of Excellence (COE), including USDA FSIS, HHS HRSA, and Treasury CDFI.

– HHS ACF’s systems incorporate all 14 GMLOB grant award processes both for awarding agencies and recipients as well as extensive and flexible post-award reporting mechanisms.

– HHS ACF’s systems can manage all types of grants and cooperative agreements, including “earmarks” and non-competitive projects.


Current Status (Cont.)

• National Science Foundation (NSF)

– NSF will offer the Research.gov web portal that leverages its experience with Grants.gov and the Research and Related (R&R) initiative to provide access to functionality that benefits the research community.

– Research.gov focuses on the needs of the grantees by providing them with greater access to the government, streamlined functionality, and flexibility to account for differing agency research missions.


Research.gov at NSF


Grants Management Line of Business (GMLoB)

2005 2006 2007 2008

• NSF submits declaration of intent

• will study being a consortium lead

• 1st round: NSF picked, along with HHS/ACF, and Dept of Ed.

• NSF does

market research, submits business case

• charter consortium

• recruit agency partners

• sign MOUs • deploy services

NSF GMLoB CONSORTIUM TIMELINE


NSF GMLoB Consortium:

Why Lead?

NSF Benefits Research Community Benefits


NSF Environmental Considerations

Research Grants

Management and

AdministrationMission Impact

Funding and Other

Resource Constraints

Government-wide Policy

and Standards

Agency Needs and Priorities

Community Needs and

Expectations

Increasing Complexity

Political Pressures


NSF GMLoB Consortium Guiding Principles

Research community must directly benefit from this initiative.

The approach will be deliberate, modular, conservative, and research community focused.

Low cost, high impact offerings that deliver value to grantees will be implemented first.

Capital investments in IT infrastructure will be minimized; intellectual investment in FastLane will be fully leveraged.

Services offered must provide a measurable benefit to NSF.

The initiative must focus on improvement; cost avoidance, not just cost savings.

Whatever we do, we are going to do it well.


Research.gov Concept

NSF will lead a research-oriented consortium based upon GMLoB goals and the business needs of both partnering agencies and the grantee community.

• a collaborative agency partnership will govern the consortium and its resources

• Research.gov portal to provide a menu of services for conducting electronic grants business with Federal research agencies

• focuses on the needs of grantees while providing maximum flexibility to agencies

• recover O&M costs using a fee-for-service arrangement


Research.gov Portal is A new Web portal for research institutions to conduct business with Federal research agencies

Initial capabilities may include:• Proposal status

• Project reports

• Federal financial reporting and payments

• PI profiles

• Research Focused “Find and Apply” services

Research.gov Portal


TIMELINE

Research.gov Timeline

2006 2007 2008

• GMLoB Pilot with USDA/CSREES deployed

• Pilot demonstrates joint grant application status

• Gained both technical and business lessons-learned

• Establish hosting environment

• Pilot portal and initial set of services

• Portal and initial set of services deployed as production system

Conceptual service rollout plan


Research.gov

Research.gov is important• Continues our leadership in advancing eGrants management initiatives

• Allows us to continue to evolve our grants management systems and work processes

• Tremendous support in community for improved “e-services” tailored to research community

Current Status• CSREES Pilot• OMB 300 Business Case

Future Initiatives• Develop Research.gov portal

• Release of grant application status module involving 2 or more research agencies


• Leverages next generation of FastLane and GMLoB to fulfill vision of a single Web portal

• Provides grantee community greater access to the government and streamlined functionality

• Allows federal research agencies to sign up and offer services to their grantees using Research.gov tools

• Uses portal approach for maximum flexibility (helps account for differing agency strategies)

• Allows the best tools to be offered from any agency in the consortia

• Leverages proven functionality and expertise with minimal capital investment

Research.gov (Cont.)


FY 2007 Goals


Next Steps

• Institutionalize GMLOB initiative government-wide

• Deliver quality service to the grantee community

• Establish and maintain strong service provider/customer partnerships


FY 2007 Priorities

• Standards and Streamlining– Develop standard roles and taxonomy– Define FM/GM interface standards– Define functions and subfunctions– Develop strategy for common post-award reporting services

• Communications and Outreach– Execute communication strategy to communicate GMLOB status

and direction to grant-making agencies

• Migrating Agency Support– Provide migrating agency guidance

• Identify Full Landscape of Consortia Leads


FY 2007 Consortia Recommendation

Scope

Outcomes

Key Dates

• To name additional Consortia Leads that will provide grant managementtechnical services to the 26 grant-making agencies.

• To give the 26 grant-making agencies a voice in recommending additional Consortia Leads that will provide grant management technical services to them.

• Transparent process for recommending consortia

• Recommendation based on ability of recommended consortia to fill existing gaps in the consortium landscape

• Viable consortia with named partner(s)

February 2007

OMB announces new Consortia Leads

9/22/06

Recommendation submitted to OMB


Backup Slides


Federal Grants Milestones

Milestone NSF Role

PL106-107 passed to streamline and standardize grants process (1999)

NSF led and participated in multiple PL106-107 workgroups

Grants.gov initiated with a focus on Find and Apply (2002)

NSF provides leadership and resources to the effort

Standard funding opportunity developed and approved by OMB (2003)

NSF helped lead effort to develop standard format – used NSF Format as basis

SF 424 (Research and Related) developed and approved by OMB (2005)

NSF led effort to develop and coordinate among research agencies

CFO Council creates Grants Policy Committee (2005)

NSF Chairs Grants Policy Committee

Research project reports standard format launched under NSTC/RBM (2004)

NSF had significant role in format development, and now leads the effort

GMLoB establishes grants process flow and Consortia approach (2005)

NSF is co-managing partner for the GMLoB

OMB selects Consortia Leads (2006) NSF, HHS ACF, and DoED selected


Current Status

Milestone Due Date

NSF develops grants strategy and business case for implementing GMLoB Consortia Lead role

June-August, 2006

Agencies submit GMLoB survey that provides detailed information on their grants management systems

August, 2006

NSF submits OMB 300 and FY08 budget submission September, 2006

2nd round of Consortia Selection commences September, 2006

NSF completes CSREES pilot September, 2006

Agencies declare intent to be a Consortia Lead or Member FY2006 Q4

OMB announces selection of 2nd round Consortia Leads February, 2007

Migrating agencies execute an MOU with Consortia Lead FY2007 Q1

Grants and Research at NSF & Government-wide Grants Initiatives

Documents

Transcript of Grants and Research at NSF & Government-wide Grants Initiatives