Modular Applications and Awards

1. Modular Applications and Awards

2. FY 1999 - Modular Grants • Modular Research Grants • Goal of initiative is to redefine the Research Project Grant as an assistance mechanism and to simplify the process. • Disengage from complex negotiations of budgets

3. Modular Grants • Initiative designed to focus the efforts of investigators, institutional officials, and NIH staff on the science NIH supports. • Clarifies use of Just-in-Time procedures and incorporates SNAP to reduce administrative burden and accommodate the investigator’s need for flexibility. • Proposal pilot tested during the past 4 years in over 34 separate solicitations (29 RFAs and 5 PAs).

4. Modular Grants • Initiative would apply to all competing research project grant mechanisms (R01, R03, R15, R21, R41, & R43) and RFAs up to no more than $250,000 requested direct costs in any year.

5. Features at a Glance • Applies to research grant applications requesting up to $250,000 direct costs per year. • Request total direct costs in modules of $25,000, reflecting appropriate support for the project. There will be no future year escalations. • A typical modular grant application will request the same number of modules in each year. • Provide budget narrative regarding Key Personnel by position, role, and level of effort. • Include a total cost estimate for any Consortium/Contractual arrangements.

6. Features at a Glance • Additional narrative budget justification will be required in the application only if there is a variation in the number of modules requested. • Describe specific aims of research projects ongoing or completed during the last three years as part of the Biographical Sketch. The Biographical Sketch will be limited to three pages. • SRG Recommended adjustments of the budget in modules. • Request Other Support information “just-in-time” to determine overlap for likely award candidates.

7. Features at a Glance • Request (prior to award) additional budget justification “just-in-time” only in exceptional circumstances. • Award at SRG recommended or IC cost management plan level, taking other support into account. • Make non-categorical, total direct cost awards. • Eliminate the 25% rebudgeting requirement. • Permit all types of administrative supplemental awards. • Checklist to be submitted with the application.

8. Modular Grants • First year of implementation will be a period for comment. • Formal two-year assessment of the process will follow the first year of implementation. • E-mail to grantsinfo@nih.gov

9. Discussion and Decision-making • Input from NIH staff and advisory groups • (RPC, POPOF, GMAC, EPMC, PROG, Advisory Councils) • Input from investigators and institutions • individual investigators and institutions • professional associations • (FDP, FASEB, AAMC, COGR, NCURA, SRA) • Other Federal staff • HHS, OIG, OMB

10. The Current Paradigm of Itemized Costs • The current process overemphasizes the apparent precision of itemized costs to a degree that is neither warranted nor feasible (in small to modest-size research assistance awards).

11. The Current Paradigm of Itemized Costs • Requires ever increasing attention to cost analysis and refereeing allowability of costs, e.g., fringe benefits, secretaries, graduate students, etc. • Suggests a procurement relationship • Gives deceptive impression of the precision of costs and calculations • Creates inconsistent pre-and postaward administration. (Itemized costs, categorical awards, rebudgeting, total cost noncompeting awards, etc.)

12. “Case for Action” • Support Science not Administrative Effort • Estimate Resources not Itemize Costs • Emphasize Assistance Mechanism not Inconsistent Patchwork of Administrative Features • Achieve Stewardship through Management of Projects, Institutions, and Programs

13. Objectives • To offer investigators a mechanism of project support that facilitates science and simplifies administration. • To offer NIH staff the opportunity to focus professional expertise where it’s most required.

14. Modular Research GrantsNew Paradigm - Total Direct Costs • Reinforce grant-in-aid philosophy of supporting research • Facilitates attention to science, rather than itemized cost • Support reasonable total direct costs of a research project • Provide project support based on scientific scope and total direct costs • Offer a competitive research grant mechanism that is the corollary to the postaward Expanded Authorities

15. Implications Applicant Perspective(investigator and institution) • Reaffirms the Principles of Assistance • Improves the Assistance Relationship • Eliminates Itemization and Cost Detail by Categories • Eliminates Cost Analysis

16. Implications Applicant Perspective(investigator and institution) • Provides institutional incentives to optimize allocation and use of funds • Eliminates postaward categorical rebudgeting requirements

17. Implications NIH Perspective • Emphasizes Programmatic Features of Mechanisms • Increases Focus on Portfolio Management • Decreases Emphasis on Administrative Features of Mechanisms • Saves Administrative Effort

18. Implications NIH Perspective • Focuses on total direct cost requirements of the approved aims and scope of project • Reduces inappropriate attention to budget detail

19. Implications NIH Perspective • Provides oversight based on total costs • Eliminates preaward cost analysis • Eliminates postaward categorical budget oversight

20. Modular Research GrantSummary - Application and Postaward Features • Total Direct Cost Applications and Awards • Expanded Authorities • SNAP Noncompeting Award Process • Final Financial Status Report Only • Outcomes Based on Scientific Progress • Institutional Compliance with Administrative and Cost Principles • Project Monitoring Based on Total Costs and Scientific Scope

21. Modular Research GrantsSummary - Compliance and Oversight • Cost Principles and “CAS” apply • Costs must be allowable, allocable, reasonable, and consistently treated • Total costs monitored based on scope, scientific aims, rate of expenditure • Institution monitored on basis of administrative and financial systems