Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

Re: new rouge system for grants submission. Small, Janice 01 Dec 2000 12:46 EST

I have just run into this same problem with an application to the
Alzheimer's Association, which is done completely online through the
"Foundation Commons" and requires no institutional approval.  Their
instructions state "We do not require any signatures on your application.
However, you must follow the regulations established in your institution and
any necessary parties should be aware that you are applying with the
Alzheimer's Association."  However, as you are all aware, not all faculty
will pay attention to this and it's very disturbing that this practice of
individual faculty grant submission seems to be coming more common.

Jan Small
Office of Research & Graduate Education
University of South Dakota

-----Original Message-----
From: Jane Prudhomme [mailto:xxxxxx@UNO.EDU]
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 11:02 AM
To: xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG
Subject: Re: new rouge system for grants submission.

Whether we call it  "rouge" or "rogue"  I guess I'm just generally concerned
about a fundamental misunderstanding which seems to be symbolically
developing between those who control the purse strings.................and
the proposed recipients of those dollars.

The premise that an award is actually made to an "institution" (and not an
"individual") is there for a reason:

1. the funding source wants the recipient institution to monitor standard
OMB regulations and standard accounting practices
2. To do so, the money is actually placed in the institution's accounting
3. The institution's chain of command is responsible for the high quality,
ethical, legal and (I guess) moral application of the project
4. Obviously, to accomplish all above an approval mechanism is set up within
the institution and followed.

If certain funding sources choose to eliminate all those responsibilities
and place the award in the hands of the individual, that is their
perogative.  I see this happening occasionally with individual faculty
fellowships for a limited set of scholarly activities, for instance, but
never in instances where major research initiatives are being proposed.
However, I REALLY have a problem with a system like e-GAPs (at U.S.
Department of ED) for instance, where presumably they've either
inadvertantly or intentionally chosen  to ignore the tenets above.    This
greatly puzzles me.

Ultimately, since any institution has the right to refuse an award for a
proposal it has not approved, a proposal which commits  it to performance
requirements and cost sharing it has not agreed to, then the harm is this.
The person who submits the proposal this way suffers.  The agency suffers
because they've wasted everyone's time.  The institution suffers because
this results in a public relations nightmare.  And ultimately the public
suffers because our country's research  "system" is operating so
inefficiently.  Can't we do better?  It seems everyone's best interests
would be served, if the funding source recognizes  the institution as a
partner rather than an outsider in the whole process, and thus considers
their valuable input when developing their electronic submission process.
ERA is a wonderful innovation .........................if devised by
professionals who understand the both the process and the requirements.
- Jane Prudhomme

 Jane E. Prudhomme, M.A., M.S.
 Asst. Vice Chancellor,
 Research and Sponsored Programs
 University of New Orleans
 2000 Lakeshore Drive
 New Orleans, LA 70148
 Phone: 504 - 280-7154
 FAX:       504-280- 3896
 E-Mail: <>

Charlie Hathaway wrote:

I think a "Rouge" system for submitting grants sounds even more subversive.

At 05:24 PM 11/30/00 -0500, you wrote:
>How can the University of New Hampshire Center for Non-Lethal TechnoIogy
>Innovation Center possibly be asking this group for help with a on-line
>application system that allows people to send proposals directly to it and
>BYPASS their local grants office???
>I cannot find any reference to obtaining approval from one's own
>university.  Yet the system asks for explicit dollars and project duration.

>The proposal is uploaded to the site directly by the submitter.
>For the past two years people on this listserv have been complaining about
>private and federal agencies who are bypassing local authorization with
>electronic submissions.
>Is it the policy of UNH to allow faculty to submit proposals to outside
>agencies with out local approval?
>At a recent meeting of the FDP, Julie Norris,  Director of Sponsored
>Programs at MIT suggested the term "Rogue Systems" for those that did not
>involve local grants office approval.  I use that term here.
>Robert Beattie
>Manager,  Electronic Research Administration and
>     Senior Project Representative
>The University of Michigan
>--On Thursday, November 30, 2000 2:59 PM -0500 Andy Shepard
><xxxxxx@UNH.EDU> wrote:
>> Hi Fellow Resadmin's,
>> Please pass this message along to any faculty that may be interested in
>> submitting a proposal to the RFP below.
>> The University of New Hampshire is one of a few Universities with a
>> for Non-Lethal TechnoIogy Innovation Center funded by DOD. As such we
>> been asked to solicit proposals nation-wide.
>> If anyone knows of a better way to disseminate an RFP nationally, we
>> certainly would be open to suggestions.
>> Thanks for your help in distributing this information.
> 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 <>  (click
on "Listserv Lists")

 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 <>  (click
on "Listserv Lists")


 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 (click on "Listserv Lists")