Well, Mike, it really depends on your point of view, I think. We do not consider our policy to be silly at all. While it is probably true that occasionally a poorly prepared proposal receives funding, it is palpable nonsense that this is the way it should be, or the message we should be conveying to faculty. Get yourself on a review panel and then tell me there are not enough proposals in the system already. Tell me that your success rate would not go up, if you spent more quality time with each proposal. Tell me that your faculty have so much time available to them that they are willing to waste it and ours on proposals with self-imposed, significantly reduced chances of success. The answer to Michigan's question is yes, we have declined to process a surprise proposal that landed in the midst of those scheduled to be processed. We did it this week and once last month using a policy only 2 and a half months old. Let me emphasize: We were not bureaucratic or insensitive about it. We worked out a plan to meet the next deadline in both cases. We involved the college offices. The point is that the scheduled proposals for the deadline situation last month and this week required that our meager staff work well into the evening. There was literally no time for the unscheduled, surprise proposal. Once the faculty members understood our situation they are chastened, but not angry or upset. Once the faculty understand that we will work long hours when we receive this minimum courtesy of planning information, they change their behavior. Try it, you might like it. Jim Mike McCallister wrote: > Thanks. I couldn't let that silliness hang out there. > > spanky > > >Spanky, I'm with you. > > > >At Illinois, we have a required lead time for proposals to be in our office > >before they have to be submitted to the sponsor. But this requirements is > >"honored more in the breach than the observance." The proposal that > >doesn't get funded is the one that doesn't get submitted. I have seen ugly, > >typo-ridden, poorly-paginated, badly-formatted proposals get funded. If > >it's humanly possible, we will get the proposal out in time to meet the > >deadline. Yet, most days, most of the staff who process proposals leave at > >5:00. > > > >Sarah W. Wasserman > >Associate Director > >Grants and Contracts Office > >University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign > >801 South Wright Street > >Champaign, IL 61820 > >(v) 217-244-7637 > >(f) 217-333-2189 > >xxxxxx@uillinois.edu > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Mike McCallister [mailto:xxxxxx@UALR.EDU] > >Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 1:00 PM > >To: xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG > >Subject: [RESADM-L] Electronic proposals > > > > > >I've been stewing over this since the original post. Leveler (and > >balder, Jim) heads have spoken and the important points have been > >made. I am deeply troubled, however, by the whole idea of this late > >fee charge. I'm as against this concept as one can get. In fact, I > >find most policies about deadlines to get proposals into the research > >office for any kind of submission laughable. "Some "exceptions will > >be made." Yes, because exceptions are our job and unless the > >proposal is still "loose junk in a box" we all tend to get them > >submitted, if we can. > > > >One of the unpretty aspects of research administration culture is the > >idea that we are administering anything particularly researchers. We > >are helpers and helpers don't punish. They train, teach, encourage, > >and occasionally just put up with researchers. Being late can be > >discouraged, but human nature is what it is-- folks will often be > >late. Having policies and punitive steps is bad, bad PR, makes us > >look like controlling clerks and cops, rather than peers within the > >proposal process. It looks anything but professional. > > > >For sure, I threaten the very lives of those who are chronically > >late, try to abuse our folks, and are generally sloppy. there are > >some I would cheerfully bop in the head if they stepped in my door > >right now. But I can do change their behavior more effectively as a > >peer and a member of the academic community than by charging > >someone's budget. That will have little effect on the PI, anyway. > >Fees are punishments, punishments are for kids, and even when our > >PI's act like kids, they really aren't. And they hold grudges, > >gossip to whiners, and make our challenging job less fun when we > >embarrass them. > > > >I'd rethink this whole deal. It's going to reap more ill will than > >behavior change. I don't know of a research office that has good > >will to burn. > > > >And if I'm dead wrong, that's fine, too. Won't be the first time. > > > >Spanky > > > >>At Utah State University, we have instituted a new policy which requires > >>all proposed applications be submitted to my office 2 full working days > >>before the Sponsor due date. If they are not submitted as per the > >>policy, USU will no longer be signing the applications or transmitting > >>them electronically. We have determined that there will most likely be > >>some exceptions to this rule, but there will be a fee attached to the > >>lateness of the proposal. Thankfully, the Vice President for Research, > >>the Research Council and our President are in full support of this. The > >>policy becomes effective as of May 1. > >> > >>Dennis J. Paffrath, Director > >>Utah State University > >>Sponsored Programs Office > >>1415 Old Main Hill - Room 64 > >>Logan, UT 84322-1415 > >> > >>xxxxxx@usu.edu > >>(435) 797-8302 > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG] On > >>Behalf Of Charlie Hathaway > >>Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 7:50 AM > >>To: xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG > > >Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] Electronic proposal lead time > >> > >>I tell researchers that electronic research administration will speed up > >>application review and award but those benefits will require sacrifice > >>on the > >>pre-submission side. When full implementation occurs and electronic > >>routing > >>for all approvals/signatures is part of the game, 4:58 proposals will be > >>a > >>thing of the past. > >> > >>Charlie Hathaway > >> > >>Quoting Steven Etheredge <xxxxxx@GWM.SC.EDU>: > >> > >>> Dear Colleagues: > >>> > >>> While all of us have preferred lead times (in our case, 3 days) for > >>> receiving proposals in our office, we have been experiencing more > >>angst > >>> than usual as more and more agencies have gone to electronic > >>submission. > >>> (And we thought eRA would make our jobs easier!) We are a large > >>> institution and will submit approximately 1,700 proposals this year. > >>We > >>> are finding that our PI's normal behavior of getting many proposals to > >>> us on the actual day of required electronic submission is creating > >>> significant issues with non-user friendly e-grant systems, such as > >>DOE, > >>> along with slow agency server response on due dates. We are being > >>> pushed to the limits in getting these e-proposals submitted before the > >>> deadline. > >>> > >>> My questions relate to whether your institution has developed > >>> guidelines to deal specifically with proposals that require electronic > >>> submission. We are contemplating putting such a policy in place. > >>Your > >>> input will be appreciated. > >>> > >>> Steve Etheredge > >>> Associate Director > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> R. Steven Etheredge, Associate Director > >>> Sponsored Programs & Research > >>> University of South Carolina > >>> (803) 777-7093 > >>> (803) 777-4136 fax > >>> xxxxxx@gwm.sc.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") > >>> ====================================================================== > >>> > >> > >> > >>====================================================================== > >> 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") > >>====================================================================== > >> > >> > >>====================================================================== > >> 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") > >>====================================================================== > > > > > >-- > >Mike McCallister, Ph. D. > > Director, Research and Sponsored Programs > >University of Arkansas at Little Rock > >2801 South University > >Little Rock, AR 72204-1099 > >(v) 501-569-8474 > >(f) 501-371-7614 > >(c) 501-590-5609 > > > >"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new > >discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' (I've found it!), but 'That's funny...'" > > ~ Isaac Asimov > > > > > >====================================================================== > > 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") > >====================================================================== > > > > > >====================================================================== > > 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") > >====================================================================== > > -- > Mike McCallister, Ph. D. > Director, Research and Sponsored Programs > University of Arkansas at Little Rock > 2801 South University > Little Rock, AR 72204-1099 > (v) 501-569-8474 > (f) 501-371-7614 > (c) 501-590-5609 > > "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new > discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' (I've found it!), but 'That's funny...'" > ~ Isaac Asimov > > ====================================================================== > 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") > ====================================================================== -- James R. Brett, Ph.D., Director, Office of University Research California State University, Long Beach 562-985-5314 562-985-8665 fax http://www.csulb.edu/~research/ ====================================================================== 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") ======================================================================
