Although Stephen is usually right, I disagree with him on several counts on this issue.

As for PIs and coPIs having equal responsiblity:  not according to the GPG, Appendix B, definition of categories of personnel.  ".....If more than one [individual named as PI/coPI], the first one listed will have primary responsiblity for the project and the submission of reports."

As for it having nothing to do with collaboration, I couldn't disagree more.  It is very much about collaboration.  The strategic use of coPIs can make or break a complex, multidisciplinary proposal, especially one of high risk.  It has been my experience that many collaborators would not accept anything BUT coPI status.  Maybe I have been dealing with more obstinant collaborators than Stephen has.

I, too, would like to use the collaborative proposal mechanism, but it is not always within my purview to make that decision.  I have had two NSF program persons say that they didn't want to deal with the collaborative mechanism, and told PIs to use a sub.  (And, NSF is the only agency that I have dealt with that would even allow the collaborative proposal).

Rock and a hard place, to be sure.

Sally

Sally Eckert-Tilotta, Ph.D., Associate Director
Office of Research & Program Development
University of North Dakota
PO Box 7134
Grand Forks, ND  58202
Tel:  701-777-2049
Fax:  701-777-2504
Email:  xxxxxx@mail.und.nodak.edu

======================================================================
 Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
 subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
 via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================