SPONSORED RESEARCH 1. Agenda Federal Regulations – Uniform Guidance National Science Foundation...

SPONSORED RESEARCH

1

Agenda

Federal Regulations – Uniform Guidance

National Science Foundation (NSF) Audit Update

2

Federal Regulations:Uniform Guidance

Official Name is the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards

It is the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) consolidation of their circulars for costing, administration and audit of Federal awardsIt replaces 8 circulars and applies to

universities, state and local governments, nonprofits, native tribes

It was issued on December 26, 2013It was effective on December 26, 2014

3

4

Overriding Goal of Guidance

Implement the President’s directives to:streamline guidance for Federal awards

to ease administrative burden, andstrengthen oversight to reduce risks of

waste, fraud, and abuse

Council on Financial Assistance Reform (COFAR) - https://cfo.gov/cofar/

Council on Governmental Relations (COGR) –http://cogr.edu/

https://cfo.gov/cofar/



http://cogr.edu/

What is the Impact?

Biggest change in Federal regulations for sponsored research in 50 years

Some good news, some new administrative burdens

The Federal Agencies implementation of the UG was released December 17, 2014

UG is still being interpreted and clarified5

6

Known Effective Dates Uniform Guidance will apply to:

All new and renewal awards issued on or after 12/26/14 (even if submitted under the old rules)

Single (A-133) Audit for FSU’s FY16 (July 2015 – June 2016)

Old Rules (A-21, A-110, A-133) will apply to: All active awards that do not get incremental

funding or another award action (until they expire)

Uniform Guidance may apply to: All non-competing awards

(agencies may decide on a case-by-case basis)

7

2 CFR 200 – Basic Layout

6 Subparts A through F Subpart A, 200.XX –Acronyms &

Definitions Subpart B, 200.1XX –General Subpart C, 200.2XX –Pre Award - Federal Subpart D, 200.3XX –Post Award –

Recipients Subpart E, 200.4XX –Cost Principles Subpart F, 200.5XX –Audit 11 Appendices -I through XI

8

Acronyms & Definitions §200.XX

200.0, Acronyms200.1 through 200-99, Definitions

99 separate sections and indexesApplicable to all requirements

(administrative, cost and audit) and all types of grantees

Use of “should” and “must”Should = best practices/recommended Must = required

9

General §200. 1XX

200.112, Conflict of interest – NEWFederal agencies must establish COI

policiesNSF and NIH already meet the new

standard; no changes anticipatedEPA’s COI is problematic for IHEsGrantees must disclose in writing any

potential COI

10

Post Award Grantees§200.3XX

200.301, Performance Management –Use standard forms (e.g., RPPR for research

awards)Must relate financial data to performanceFeds are to provide clear performance goals,

indicators and milestones 200.303, Internal Controls

Should follow GAO’s Green Book and COSO standards

200.309, Period of performanceNo-cost extension may be allowed –agency’s

option

11


200.313, EquipmentProperty standards (States versus other

grantees) 200.314, Supplies Computing devices (<$5K) are included as

“supplies”-NEW 200.320, Procurement Standards – NEW for

universities and Non ProfitsModeled after A-102: State uses own policiesOthers uses procurement standards in sections

200.317 -326

12


200.331, Requirements for pass-through entities (PTE) – NEW

Includes audit responsibilities (formerly in A-133)Pass-through entities responsibilities:

Provide subaward informationProvide indirect cost ratePerform risk assessment for subrecipent

monitoringVerify compliance to audit requirementsReport in accordance to FFATA

13

Procurement – General Standards

A. Documented PoliciesB. NecessaryC. Full & Open CompetitionD. Conflict of InterestE. Documentation

i. Cost & Price Analysis ii. Vendor Selection

14

Procurement§200.320

1. Micro Purchases◦ up to $3K; no quotations; equitable distribution

2. Small Purchases◦ Up to $150K; rate quotations; no cost/price analysis

3. Sealed Bids◦ $150K; construction projects; price is a major factor

4. Competitive Proposals◦ > $150K; fixed price or cost reimbursement◦ RFP with evaluation methods

5. Sole Source◦ Unique; public emergency; no competition◦ authorized by agency or Pass through entity (PTE)

15

Overview of Cost Principles§200.4XX

For any cost to be allowable under a federal award, it must:Be necessary and reasonable for the

performance of the award and allocable thereto;

Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in applicable regulations or in the award itself;

Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other FSU activities; and

Be accorded consistent treatment.

16

Prior Approvals New emphasis on agency prior approvals

can slow down research activitiesNot clear that Federal agencies have

adequate staffing to respond quickly Examples where prior approval is

required:Unrecovered F&A as cost sharingFixed price subawardsCharging administrative salariesParticipant support costs on research

awardsUnusual cost items

17

Cost Principles§200.4XX

200.414, Indirect (F&A) CostsMust accept approved negotiated rates, except

Allowed by Federal statute or regulationApproved by agency head or delegate and

OMB notified of deviations10% de minimis IDC rate (MTDC)

First timers and new grantees onlyCan be used indefinitely

One time four-year extension of current approved rate (final and pre-determined rates only)

18


200.430, Compensation –personal services – NEWRemoved A-21 examplesInternal controls are KEY

200.430(i) –9 standards for documenting personnel

E.g., supported by system of IC, budget estimates may be used

Substitute systems are allowed (430 (i) (5))Blended and braided funds allowed, with Fed

approval (430 (i) (7))Use of institutional base salary for Institutions

of Higher Education (IHEs)

19


200.431, Compensation – Fringe Benefits

200.432, Conferences◦Costs are appropriate, necessary and

minimized to the Federal award

20


200.449, InterestSection (b)(2), allows financing costs

associated with patents and computer software effective January 1, 2016

200.453, Materials and SuppliesSection (c) –may be charged as

direct costsInclude computing devices (defined

in 200.20)

21

Administrative/Clerical Salaries §200.413/430

The salaries of administrative & clerical staff should normally be treated as indirect costs.

Direct charging of these costs may be appropriate only if all of the following conditions are met: Administrative/clerical services are integral* to a project; Individuals involved can be specifically identified with

the project or activity; and Such costs are explicitly included in the budget or have

the prior written approval of the federal awarding agency

*Integral is defined as essential to the project’s goals and objectives, rather than necessary for the overall operation of the institution.

22

Impact on Budget

If all requirements are met, include justification statement in proposals to facilitate the required agency approval

If not included in the proposal budget, agency approval will be required at the post-award stage

23

Computing Devices §200.453

Computing devices costing less than $5,000 that are essential and allocable may be direct charged

They may be charged 100% to an award (in rare circumstances), may be allocated to several awards or split between sponsored/non-sponsored funds

While no prior agency approval is required, computing devices should be itemized in the proposal budget

In addition, the project must not have reasonable access to other devices or equipment that can achieve the same purpose

Devices may not be purchased for reasons of convenience or preference

24

Impact on BudgetProposal Stage: Include the request for computing devices in the

proposal budget and justification. The detailed justification should include an

explanation of why and how the device is essential for and beneficial to the performance of the project, and that no existing resources are reasonably available.

Award Stage: If the need for a computing device was not known

and included in the proposal budget, then SRA approval must be obtained.

25

Participant Support Costs §200.75 / 200.456

Participant support costs are direct costs for items such as stipends or subsistence allowances, travel allowances, and registration fees paid to or on behalf of participants or trainees (but not employees) in connection with conferences or training projects.

These costs must now be accepted by agencies as allowable costs, but still require prior agency approval.

These costs are excluded when calculating the Modified Total Direct Costs (MTDC) to determine the overall project’s F&A costs.

26

Impact on Budget

Proposal Stage: Include the request in the budget and justification Exclude the costs from the MTDC baseAward Stage: If the request for participant support was included

in the proposal, then a subproject will be set up to separate these funds from the other project funds.

If there is a need to rebudget and move any of the participant support funds out of the category into another budget category, then prior approval from the sponsor must be received

27

Subawards §200.330-332

More prescriptive requirementsPerform a risk assessment of the subrecipientAdd a lengthy list of elements to the subaward

termsEstablish a monitoring plan for the subrecipient

Financial review (SRA responsibility)Programmatic review (PI responsibility)Maintain documentation of monitoring efforts!

Must use subrecipient’s negotiated F&A rate or provide a 10% “de minimis” rate

Possibility of delays in issuing subawards

28

Latest Developments

SRA working through the agency implementation of UG

NSF Guidelines

NIH Interim Grant Conditions

COGR recommendations to COFAR

29

NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG)

Section B, Forward, contains the implementation statement for 2 CFR § 200, Uniform Guidance

If the AAG is silent on a specific area covered by 2 CFR § 200, the requirements specified in 2 CFR § 200 must be followed

NSF 2 month rule for Senior Personnel

http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf15001/sigchanges.jsp



30

NSF PAPPGAdministrative and Clerical Salaries: May be direct charged if the following conditions are met:

(1) Administrative or clerical services are integral to a project;(2) Individuals involved can be specifically identified with the

project;(3) Such costs are explicitly included in the approved budget or have the prior written approval of the cognizant NSF Grants Officer; and(4) The costs are not also recovered as indirect costs.

Computing Devices: Computing devices are considered supply items and may be

included as direct costs for devices that are essential and allocable, but not solely dedicated, to the performance of the NSF award.

Subawards: Inclusion of a subaward or contract in the proposal budget or submission of

a request after issuance of an NSF award to add a subaward or contract will document the organizational determination required.

31

NIH Interim General Grant Conditions

Terms & Conditions for grant awards until new RTCs are available

Effective for NoAs issued on or after 12/26/14 that obligate new or supplemental funds

32

Cost Related Prior Approvals

NIH prior approval is not required for areas below unless there is a change in the scope of work: Incur pre-award cost Initiate a one-time no-cost extension Carryforward Unobligated balances Rebudget among budget categories Rebudget between direct and F&A costs Provide subawards based on fixed amounts Direct charge the salaries of administrative

and clerical staff if conditions in 45 CFR § 75.413 are met

COFAR FAQsResolved Some IssuesProcurement rules to be delayed 1 year COI rules determined to be conflicts in

procurement only Program income rule about including

royalties in the definition of what has to be tracked conflicts federal law –Bayh Dole Act

Profit definition clarified to exclude legitimate unexpended balances under fixed price awards/subawards

DS-2 statements submitted after 12/26/14 to true-up charging practices to new rules

33

NSF Audit Update

Phase One conducted in September 2014◦Transaction selection included travel,

equipment, cost transfers, other chargesOnsite fieldwork conducted 9/22 –

10/1/14; internal control interviews with management

Follow up questions in November 2014; more data provided

Phase Two conducted in March 2015◦Transaction selection focused primarily on

computers and foreign travel34

35

NSF Audit Update

Phase Three – Current request received last week

More follow up questions from previous data provided

NSF senior personnel data request involving 277 employees

36

NSF Audit: Questions Asked by Auditors

General◦ Explain why this purchase was necessary for

and how it benefited the awardLate purchases

◦ How did this transaction benefit the award given the limited time remaining on the award?

◦ Explain why the purchase was necessary.Cost Transfers

◦ Provide an explanation of the award/fund this transaction was transferred to or from. Include the identity of the award and whether it was another federal award.

37


Cost Transfers (cont’d)◦Provide the reason for the transfer

and why it was necessary.◦Provide the reason for why the

transfer was necessary so late in the award (if applicable).

◦What was the budget amount and the remaining balance at the time of the transfer?

◦Was there a cost overrun on the award transferred to or from?

38


Travel◦ Explain why this travel was not included in

the NSF proposal budget, if applicable.◦ How did this travel benefit the award given

the limited time remaining on the award?◦ Why was this travel necessary for the

award?◦ If allocated, provide the allocation

methodology and a list of the other projects in the allocation

◦ If applicable, why was this trip taken when it was specifically removed from the original budget?

39


Equipment◦Explain why this equipment was not

included in the NSF proposal budget, if applicable.

◦How did this equipment purchase benefit the award given the limited time remaining on the award?

◦Was this equipment used exclusively on this NSF award?

◦If allocated, provide the allocation methodology and a list of the other projects in the allocation.

40


Equipment (cont’d)◦If applicable, why was this purchase

required when you indicated that you had all the necessary equipment and/or facilities?

◦If applicable, why was the equipment purchased when it was specifically removed from the original budget?

41

NSF Audit: Potential IssuesEquipment purchased late in the

award; not adequately justified or allocated.

Computers, computers, computers!◦Not included in budget and lacking

robust justification for purchase◦Not allocated

Sponsored Research Administration

SRA Post AwardAngie RoweEmail: [email protected]

42

SPONSORED RESEARCH 1. Agenda Federal Regulations – Uniform Guidance National Science Foundation...

Documents

Transcript of SPONSORED RESEARCH 1. Agenda Federal Regulations – Uniform Guidance National Science Foundation...