Improvements to the Chartstring Setup and Restricted Funds Billing Processes

1. Improvements to the Chartstring Setup and Restricted Funds Billing Processes December 15, 2008

2. Restricted Funds Task Force • Began in May 2008 • Tasked with making improvements to the: • Sponsored chartstring set up process • Sponsored billing process

3. Restricted Funds Steering Committee • Jim Hill, VP for Administration and Finance • Jim Hughes, VP for Research and Development • Peter Murray, VP and CIO • Greg Handlir, Senior Associate Dean for Resource Management, SOM • Bill Cooper, Associate Dean Administration and Finance, COO, SOP

4. Restricted Funds Task Force • Central Office Representatives • John Geiman, Budget and Finance • Marc Wasserman, Financial Services • Dennis Paffrath, ORD • Kevin Curley, Financial Systems • Lynn Kingsley, Cost Analysis • Susan Beckerman, Financial Systems • Cheryl Williams-Smith, Restricted Funds • Jim Rose, ORD • Mike Smith, CITS

5. Restricted Funds Task Force • Divisional/Departmental Representatives • Louisa Peartree, SOM Dean’s Office • Wendy Cohan, SOP Dean’s Office • Donna Bower, Microbiology • Tony Bibbo, Psychiatry • Vanessa Foreman, CVID

6. Questions the Task Force Asked • What is the business process around chartstring setup? • Are there steps/approvals that could be eliminated/streamlined? • Where are the bottlenecks in the process? How can they be reduced? • How can communication around this process be improved? • Are there appropriate resources dedicated to this process?

7. Questions the Task Force Asked • Are there information technology solutions for improving this process? • What role could additional training (for all offices involved) play in improving this process? • Are we billing timely? • Do departments have access to billing information?

8. Key Recommendations of the Task Force • Reduce the need for departmental involvement in the set-up process • Additional, dedicated resources in ORD and Restricted Funds • Investigate interfaces between COEUS and eUMB • Develop definitions of chartstring attributes • Improve training • Continue with the improvements already being developed with regards to the billing process

9. Today’s Agenda • Review steps the central offices have already taken to improve these processes • Review steps departments can take now to improve these processes • Review changes that will be effective January 1 • Change in routing procedures • Change in the level of budget detail entered into eUMB • Review changes that will be effective July 1 • On-line access to award information through COEUS • Change in budget modification policies and procedures

10. Steps Already Taken

11. ALREADY IMPLEMENTED Project ID Setup in ORD • Dedicated hours for project id setup • 10 am - noon, Monday through Friday, for all Contract and Grant Administrators. • ORD staff will not be answering telephone calls or emails during this time. • Emergency Contacts: • Dennis J. Paffrath 6-1101 • Janet Simons 6-5632 • Jeanne Galvin Clarke 6-3615 • Goal • To prioritize project id setup in ORD • To provide a more even stream of work to Restricted Funds

12. Improvements to the Pre-Award Spending Request Process ALREADY IMPLEMENTED • Access the new form at: http://www.ord.umaryland.edu/awards_management/forms.html • Route the proposal or appropriate award change through COEUS. Exception: NIH noncompeting continuation do not need to be routed. • Complete the entire form and obtain all necessary signatures. • The form may be submitted either through campus mail, faxed to 706-6630, or scanned and sent by email to Team A (team-a@ordmail.umaryland.edu). • ORD will complete this form within 24 hours and submit to Restricted Funds • Restricted Funds will complete the project id set up in eUMB within 3 business days.

13. Improvements to the Pre-Award Spending Request Process • Pre Award training to be provided in the Spring • How and when is it appropriate to request a pre-award spending project • What are the benefits of using pre-award projects? • How do you monitor pre award spending projects in RAVEN • What happens when award is funded/not funded?

14. ALREADY IMPLEMENTED Additional Resources in ORD • ORD was authorized to recruit 2 new positions • Interviewing and selection has been made • Roxanne Charles has joined ORD (Team B) as of 12/8/2008 • A second position has been posted. • Expected start date - 1/5/2009 • The position will be assigned to Team C

15. ALREADY IMPLEMENTED Additional Resources in Restricted Funds • Restricted Funds Task Force recommended four full time positions and one part time position • Campus approved all requested positions. • Approved positions were reduced to two after the campus received budget reductions from the State. • Rosetta Elicerio has been hired for Project ID set up, etc. She started 11/25/08. Goal is to reduce processing time by one half. • One to be hired as a Billing Specialist.

16. Restricted Funds Invoicing/Billing EnhancementsStandard Grants and Contracts PCBUs - 00184, 00187, 00191

17. Standard Grants and Contracts – PCBU’s 00184, 00187, 00191 Prior to April 1, 2008: • Since going live with eUMB, Restricted Funds could only process one invoice at a time. Only one biller at a time could be in the system. • No automated way to track unbilled receivables to create timely invoices • Over 1,600 invoices current and past due to be produced

18. ALREADY IMPLEMENTED Standard Grants and Contracts – PCBU’s 00184, 00187, 00191 As of April 1, 2008: • CITS and the Department of Financial Systems developed and implemented enhancements to eUMB billing module. • Multiple invoices can be produced by all billers at the same time. • Queries are used to monitor unbilled receivables to ensure timely invoice production. • Current for all standard grants and contract invoicing.

19. ALREADY IMPLEMENTED Deliverable Contracts and Grants – PCBU’s 00185, 00188, 00192 • Invoicing is dependent on milestones and information provided by departments. • In order to ensure proper billing and reporting, departments must use the Clinical Trials/Receivable Request Form located on the Department of Financial Services Web Page.

20. ALREADY IMPLEMENTED Accounts Receivable Aging Report • The Department of Financial Systems developed an aging of billed receivables. • Departments can run this report along with the Restricted Funds Payment Report to get a current status of their receivables. • Issues/questions about these reports should be sent to the distribution list: DL-BFRFHELP@umaryland.edu

21. What can departments do to facilitate the process?

22. Three Steps • Re-dedicate ourselves to partnering with the central offices • Improve Communication • Revisit internal business processes

23. Departments need to… • Encourage staff to attend COEUS and other chartstring set up trainings • Establish departmental distributions lists • One list to be used by all central offices involved in sponsored project management • Multiple people can be notified at once to ensure coverage during absences • Departments are able to easily maintain who is notified • Request pre-award spending chartstrings • Use billing invoice on Restricted Funds’ website for deliverable awards • Enter accurate information during proposal development

24. Three Key Attributes in Proposal Processing That Will Affect Chartstring Setup • Activity Type - Understanding what the faculty (PI) is doing • What is your owner department code • The sponsor must be identified correctly in COEUS

25. Definitions of Chartstring Attributes - Program • This is to determine the type of activity occurring on the award • Research • Training • Fellowship • Instrumentation • IPA • Other/Service • Clinical Trial

26. Definitions of Chartstring Attributes – Standard vs. Deliverable • Standard • Payments are based on actual expenses incurred and allocable to the performance of the project. This is the most common cost basis used in grants (but not used for all grants). These are generally referred to as cost-reimbursable grants. • Deliverable • Payments are based on an agreed, set amount (price or fee) for the specified work to be performed rather than actual costs incurred in doing the work. UMB is required to provide the work for that amount, whether the actual costs incurred are greater than or less than the amount of the agreed fee. Most common cost-basis for clinical trials and services agreements.

27. Definitions of Chartstring Attributes - PCBU • This is determined by the sponsor type and the fund • Federal/Standard • Federal/Deliverable • State & Local Gov’t/Standard • State & Local Gov’t/Deliverable • All Other/Standard • All Other/Deliverable

28. Changes to the Current Process – January 1, 2009

29. Changes to Award Routing JANUARY 1 • Departments and Restricted Funds will receive email notifications simultaneously • Restricted Funds will review data and notice of awards in COEUS Awards Module • i.e. the Award Transaction Form will no longer be used • Departments will continue to receive COEUS Award Information Sheets

30. JANUARY 1 Changes to Award Routing • Restricted Funds will proceed with project id setup without department approval • Departments should review the chartstring attributes before spending occurs • Notify ORD and Restricted Funds, if there are errors • Chartstrings that are incorrectly established will require an entirely new project id to be established • If any spending has occurred on the incorrect chartstring, the department must perform cost transfers and other administrative activities to move the costs to the new chartstring

31. JANUARY 1 Is this Adding Risk? • Clear definitions of the chartstring attributes have been written and ORD staff have been trained on these definitions • Most attributes will be based on information provided by the department during proposal development and stored in COEUS • Owner department • Activity type determines program • Sponsor helps determine PCBU and Fund • ORD is implementing a second quality review of the information before dissemination to Restricted Funds and departments

32. Budgets (COEUS Proposal Development Module) JANUARY 1 • OPTION1 – Enter only summary budgets in proposal development • If the Sponsor does not require a budget at the time of proposal submission, department may enter in one cost element: direct costs • If awarded, only two cost elements will be submitted to Restricted Funds at project id set up (Direct and F&A Costs) • Budget modifications in eUMB can be done by the department after project id setup

33. JANUARY 1 Budgets (COEUS Proposal Development Module) • OPTION 2 – Enter detailed budgets in proposal development • If the Sponsor requires a specific budget at the time of proposal submission, department must enter in all categories as required by sponsor • Or the department may choose to enter in this type of budget even if the sponsor does not require the budget • If awarded, all higher level elements will be submitted to Restricted Funds at project id setup (Salary, Fringe, Travel, Equipment, Other Expenses, etc)

34. JANUARY 1 Was a detailed budgeted provided in proposal development? Yes No Does the proposal budget equal the award amount? Load high level budget in eUMB Yes No Yes Load detailed budget into eUMB Was the change >10%? ORD reduces budget line items and a detailed budget is loaded into eUMB No

35. JANUARY 1 Departments need to… • Decide what option to use in proposal development • May choice different options for different awards • Determine procedures for chartstring review before spending occurs

36. JANUARY 1 CVID Decisions • Use proposal development • Enter high level budgets unless required by sponsors • Incorporate Quality Assurance Check before project ID is disseminated for use. • Request pre-award spending accounts when routing non-competing proposal

37. Changes to the Current Process – July 1, 2009

38. JULY 1 Access to COEUS Award for Departmental Administrators • COEUS Award Information Sheet is no longer attached to the email sent to the departments • Departments will be able to view award information directly in COEUS • Award documents will be scanned into COEUS and available to departments as well • Training will be provided in the Spring

39. JULY 1 Changes to the Budget Modification Process • ORD will no longer approve budget modifications • Budget modification forms will be sent directly to Restricted Funds, who will process without a review • This only includes rebudgeting between expenditure categories • A policy and procedure will be issued this Spring.

40. JULY 1 Changes to the Budget Modification Process • Is sponsor approval required? • ORD will make this determination at award setup and sponsor restrictions will be indicated in COEUS • Department will continue to be responsible for determining whether communication with the sponsor is necessary, will draft that communication, and will forward this on to ORD for negotiation with the sponsor.

41. JULY 1 Is This Adding Risk? • The vast majority of our awards do not require sponsor approval for budget modifications

42. Next Steps – Task Force • Continue to investigate options for interfaces between COEUS and eUMB • Investigate options for decentralized, automated budget modifications • Continue to evaluate the training available on campus

43. Next Steps - Departments • Look for pre award and COEUS award trainings this Spring • Set up distribution lists to improve communication • Evaluate the effect these changes will have on your departmental processes and adjust, as necessary