The Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP)

David W. Robinson, PhD Executive Vice Provost

Oregon Health & Science University

What is the FDP?

• The FDP is a cooperative effort among federal research agencies, universities and other research organizations aimed at streamlining and improving the federal/university research support relationship and reducing administrative burden

• The National Academy of Science’s Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR) serves as the neutral convener and secretariat of the FDP

• The FDP began in 1988 as the Florida Demonstration Project and is now in Phase VI which will extend through 2020

Mission Statement The mission of the FDP is to examine, improve and streamline the administrative processes involved in the competitive appointment, allocation and management of federal funds which support research activities at institutions of higher education throughout the country. This supports the primary goal of streamlining with accountability to decrease researcher time focused on administrative requirements and so maximize the time available for research

2

Who is a member?

• 154 Institutional Members Large, Medium & Small Research Universities Emerging Research Institutions (ERI) - 26 Hospitals Independent Research Organizations

• 10 Federal Agencies National Institutes of Health National Science Foundation Office of Naval Research US Department of Agriculture National Aeronautics and Space Administration Army Research Office Air Force Office of Scientific Research Environmental Protection Agency Army Medical Research and Material Command Department of Homeland Security

• 8 Affiliate Organizations National Council of University Research Administrators (NCURA) Society of Research Administrators (SRA) Council on Governmental Relations (COGR) Association of Independent Research Institutes (AIRI) American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) Association of American Universities (AAU) National Organization of Research Development Professionals (NORDP) American Association for the Advancement of Science

3

What makes the FDP special?

Participation !!

• Being a member of the FDP is all about participation

• All members are encouraged to join and be active participants in standing committees and task forces

• Participation from the floor during general sessions is always encouraged and ample time is provided for questions and comments. All sessions are designed to be interactive sessions where the committees and tasks forces do their work

• The membership, by design, is diverse so as to represent all parties affected by new research funding and administrative requirements

Active Faculty Participation

• Faculty representation at FDP was introduced in Phase III and this group is still evolving although its influence and participation has grown significantly over the last two phases

• The faculty representatives elect a Co-Chair of their standing committee who also sits on the Executive Committee along with the Chair

• The Faculty Chair serves as the Vice-Chair of the Executive Committee 4

What has the FDP been engaged in?

Highlights of Phase I and II 1986-1996 • Implemented mostly common, streamlined terms and conditions for research grants • Increased budget flexibility (expanded authority) • No cost time extensions • Pre-award costs • Carry-forward across continuation years • Technical progress reports/minimal continuation proposals • OMB A-110 Revisions

Phase III (Federal Demonstration Partnership) 1996-2002

• Renewing the Government-University Partnership • Introduction of Faculty and Program Officers as FDP members • Electronic Research Administration • Cost Sharing and Effort Reporting • Award Terms and Conditions • Subaward Agreements & Templates

5

What has the FDP been engaged in?

Phase IV (Federal Demonstration Partnership) 2002-2008 • Increased Participation of Emerging Research Institutions • Conducted Faculty Burden Survey • Introduced A-133 Audit Information System • Increased Faculty Participation • FDP Terms & Conditions Promoted to Federal Research Terms & Conditions

Phase V (Federal Demonstration Partnership) 2008-2014

• Conducted 2nd Faculty Workload Survey • Conducted survey to estimate the effects of ARRA legislation • Project Certification Demonstration • FDP/Grants.gov Joint Application Design (JAD) Team • STAR METRICS • Introduced Research Compliance Committee and subcommittees • Report on family and parental benefits available to research trainees • FDP FCOI Clearinghouse • SciENcv Demonstration • Congressional Testimony on Administrative Burdens

6

How is the FDP Currently Organized?

7

Executive Committee

• The Executive Committee provides the overall direction of the FDP and currently consists of at least:

• Two elected institutional members (one faculty, one research administrator) • Two federal agency representatives • A representative from the National Academies GUIRR • The FDP Executive Director • A senior federal science official (appointed by OSTP) • The Co-Chairs of each of the FDP operational committees • The Co-Chairs of each of the FDP programmatic committees • Two members appointed by the Chair (one faculty, one research administrator)

• The elected research administrator representative on the Executive Committee

assumes the role of Chair for a three year period.

• The elected faculty representative on the Executive Committee assumes the role of Vice Chair for a three year period.

8

Operational Committees

The Membership Committee is responsible for membership issues affecting the FDP: • Conducts new attendee activities at meetings • Evaluates/recommends requests for affiliate membership • Encourages increased federal participation • Facilitates transition process for new phases • Oversees nomination/election procedures • Supports ERI participation • Manages annual reporting process

The Finance Committee is responsible for all financial issues:

• Proposes and monitors annual budgets • Sets and monitors financial-related polices and procedures

The Communications Committee is responsible for the FDP public image:

• Approves FDP Publications (printed or electronic) • Oversees the structure and content of the FDP website • Oversees the FDP Biannual Report • Compiles & disseminates meeting proceedings • Develops & distributes outreach materials

9

How is the FDP Currently Organized?

10

What is the Faculty Committee Working on?

• Faculty Workload Survey III The FDP completed its second Faculty Workload Survey in 2012, the results of which have been cited widely. A third survey is now in the preparation phase, with the goal of monitoring progress and honing in on areas with substantial potential for alleviating unnecessary administrative burden related to federally funded research projects.

• Family Work-Life Balance Project A collaboration with NIH & NSF, this project is looking into best practices, policies and guidance on a federal and institutional level to help researchers achieve a good balance between their home life and work life.

• Faculty Engagement Explore methods to increase the retention of FDP Faculty representatives through faster onboarding and greater engagement in FDP initiatives.

• Enhancing Faculty – Institutional Research Administration Interactions

Examining ways to enhance the interaction between Faculty and their Research Administrators so that both groups better understand each others challenges, can communicate more effectively and can work closer together to solve institutionally created research administrative burden.

11

What is the ERA Committee Working on?

• Grants.gov – Joint Application Design (JAD) Team The Joint Application Design (JAD) Team is a group of individuals with different roles in the grants application process that work with Grants.gov to address issues in the system and streamline the process of using Grants.gov to submit grant applications. They look at both the PDF forms submission process and the system-to-system submission process.

• SciENcv Demonstration

In collaboration with NIH & NSF, the FDP is exploring how a central repository of researcher profiles might be implemented in the United States. They are looking at systems that have been implemented on other countries as well as gathering input from stakeholders in the community.

• Digital Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA Act)

The purpose of the working group is to monitor and engage in the activities of OMB and Department of Treasury as they implement the DATA Act. In addition, FDP will provide feedback, guidance, and offer testing/ validation assistance as the DATA ACT phases progress

• Streamlining Proposal Submissions

The goal of the Streamlining Proposal Submission group is to identify opportunities for improvement, propose strategies for mitigating/ resolving the pain points and work with the FDP eRA Committee, FDP member institutions and federal agencies to implement effective improvements.

• FDP 21st Century

The 21st Century Tools group explores and pilots the use of collaboration tools to enhance and facilitate FDP’s communication and planning.

12

What is the Research Administration Committee Working on?

• PHS FCOI Clearinghouse A website that provides a central location for educational institutions and other entities to document that they are in compliance with the PHS Financial Conflict of Interest (FCOI) rules and regulations.

• Expanded Clearing House / Sub-recipient Monitoring The goal of the Expanded Clearinghouse/Subrecipient Monitoring Workgroup is to develop one single web based repository for all FDP entities (and potentially others) to enter, upload, maintain and update all entity related information about their organization. This centralized online repository of entity information can then be utilized to enable Pass-Through Entities to obtain and review all necessary subrecipient entity information and conduct subrecipient entity monitoring and risk assessment activities in a timely and streamlined fashion without requiring time and resources to send and collect various forms to obtain information.

• Subaward Form The subaward form is an ongoing project that has produced several subaward templates for institutions to use when processing subawards. The objective of the project is the adoption of a common agreement that all parties can use without changing the language. This reduces the time needed to review each agreement and streamlines the subaward process. Additional model agreements have been developed for use with foreign subrecipients, clinical trials and with contract prime awards.

• Troublesome Clauses System An online database where FDP members can enter and access information about terms & conditions placed in research grants and contracts that are difficult to accept. The database tracks the negotiation of the clause, the resolution and any alternate language that was agreed upon. FDP members can use this tool to see how specific agencies have negotiated specific clauses previously and use that information in their negotiations.

13

What is the Finance/Costing/Audit Committee Working on?

• Project Certification Examine ways to simplify the regulations and find effective and efficient means to assure that the distribution of salaries and wages to sponsored agreements is appropriate. With Payroll Certification, PIs do not certify “effort” rather they certify that salaries and wages “are reasonable in relation to work performed.” While such an approach is allowed under Uniform Guidance, institutions are reticent to change from standard effort reporting.

• Uniform Guidance Procurement Requirements

This working group is committed to the pursuit of effective and efficient procurement systems which provide a balanced approach to stewardship of federal funds. The working group will share best practices and brainstorm innovative concepts that can be demonstrated through pilots.

• Administrative Costs The administrative cost working group is focused on identifying ways to recover more of the administrative costs related to individual sponsored project activities. The primary interest in doing so is to address the faculty concern that too much of their time is spent dealing with administrative tasks rather than research.

14

What is the Research Compliance Committee Working on?

• IRB Exempt Wizard The IRB Exempt Wizard is a proof of concept pilot that will allow investigators to enter information about the human subjects protocol into an online decision support system in order to determine if their protocol needs to be reviewed by a full IRB committee or if it exempt from such review.

• IRB Practical Guide The goal is to provide a set of tools that will allow institutions to reduce administrative burdens and maintain superior standards of human subject protection while adhering to federal regulations. These tools are based on the suggestions of our forward-thinking colleagues, particularly the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (SACHRP), and on our own experiences with successful demonstration projects.

• Export Controls Reviews existing and new administrative requirements imposed by federal regulations and program officers related to export controls. The emphasis should be on harmonization of requirements across federal agencies, reduction of redundancies and identifying good practices.

• Data Stewardship Reviews existing and new administrative requirements imposed by federal regulations and program officers related to research data security, retention, sharing and integrity. The emphasis should be on harmonization of requirements across federal agencies, reduction of redundancies and identifying good practices.

15

In Closing…

• The success of the FDP over the past 30 years can be attributed to a number of important factors:

• Its unique relation with the National Academy of Sciences that has allowed it to work collaboratively with Federal Agencies in the evaluation of current and proposed policies and procedures related to the administration of federally funded research programs.

• The very collaborative relationship that has been developed with Federal Agencies

• The rigor with which the FDP has conducted its evaluations and demonstrations

• The tireless work of its members

• The full integration of research active faculty in FDP agenda setting, demonstrations, evaluations and data gathering

• Ongoing Strong support from the highest levels of the federal government

• It has not always been easy, but the work of the FDP has had a significant positive impact on the federally funded research landscape.

Could the Canadian chapter of CASRAI play a similar role??

16

Questions

17

Joint Application Design (JAD) Team

• Since 2009, the JAD has worked with Grants.gov in a collaborative manner advocating for consistency across agencies, streamlining for application packages and S2S users

• The JAD team meets 8-9 times throughout the year with Grants.gov

• Three in person meetings a year in conjunction with the in person FDP meetings

Vision • Represent the stakeholders, working with advice from federal agencies as a forum for

change and improvement • Provide a mechanism for two way communication between stakeholders and federal

agencies, and provide summaries to OMB • Explore broader and deeper solutions for both grantors and grantees as defined by the

grant life cycle Mission • To be a strong voice of the applicants • Help Grants.gov meet expectations of the users and understand their perspective

18

Recent JAD Activities

• Worked to raise awareness of Adobe “bug” in newer version of Adobe Acrobat DC. Grants.gov then works with Adobe to ensure these versions work correctly with application packages

• JAD participated in pilot testing with the new Workspaces. JAD also worked to solicited additional testers from the larger FDP membership

• Advocated with Grants.gov to try and reduce the number of “special cases” in Grants.gov applications. For example, DoD dropped their request to have a text field and attached PDF for the Project Abstract template

• Working on UTF-8 issues. This would allow special characters in application packages.

• Provided input on the 5-year plan and will continue to work with them

• At future FDP meetings, Grants.gov should be providing updates during the federal agency update portion

19

SciENcv

Vision- Let investigators harvest their data from multiple systems to support funding applications, reporting and collaboration with less burden and complexity Goals

Reduce burden of applying for federal funds and maintaining federal profiles Track impact of federal investments in science and scientist careers through scientist-curated data Support collaboration and networking services to find reviewers, collaborators, mentors, etc.

Products to date

NIH biosketches, NSF biosketch Embedded XML Integration with ORCID, Fastlane Internal refinements: user testing, adopting agile software principles

Oversight

SciENcv interagency working group: DOD, DOE, EPA, NIH, NSF, USDA Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP) request

20 Slide content courtesy of Bart Trawick, PhD, National Library of Medicine

SciENcv

21 Slide content courtesy of Bart Trawick, PhD, National Library of Medicine

SciENcv – Getting Started

22 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/account/nih-sciencv/?back_url=%2Fsciencv%2Fuse%2F

Slide content courtesy of Bart Trawick, PhD, National Library of Medicine

SciENcv – First Step

23

First time using this sign in pathway?

Accounts are now linked!

Slide content courtesy of Bart Trawick, PhD, National Library of Medicine

SciENcv – Other sign in methods

24 Slide content courtesy of Bart Trawick, PhD, National Library of Medicine

SciENcv – Linked Accounts

25 Slide content courtesy of Bart Trawick, PhD, National Library of Medicine

SciENcv – My NCBI Home Page

26 Slide content courtesy of Bart Trawick, PhD, National Library of Medicine

SciENcv – Home page

27 Slide content courtesy of Bart Trawick, PhD, National Library of Medicine