Hi again resadmr's, per my original post I was asking: "Let's discuss what
kinds of emails, and to which decision-makers in the government, resadmr's
should be sending..."
The responses are interesting so far, and so is the discussion. Thank you
Steve and others for your posts. I do agree 100% with several folks: we want
to be positive and constructive. But again, who are the decision makers we
need to reach? to let them know about the serious problems some of us are
having, and to offer our constructive feedback?
-Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG]On Behalf
Of Shapiro, Steve
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 4:27 PM
To: xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG
Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] Let's mobilize to fight electronic proposal
submission SNAFU
There is a lot of misconception, rumors and inaccuracies concerning
grants.gov out there.
Personally, as an IT professional supporting a research office, I think
it is a major SNAFU.
I've also learned a little bit about what is going on inside grants.gov
offices, and believe that the people there are doing the best they can
with the situation they are in.
That said, I feel obligated to point out that protests set up an
adversarial situation. Simply pointing out that something is a SNAFU and
not offering to help improve it and invest some effort is a 'cop-out.'
I've explained the particular points that give me concern with
Grants.gov personnel, and offered possible solutions. From my
perspective, NSF has created the 'gold standard' of online proposal
submission and award management systems. I have been vocal in suggesting
that grants.gov move toward a system that is more like NSF.
I also understand that the people at grants.gov are dealing with
(currently) 26 different agencies. Some of these agencies do not have
any online grant capabilities at all, in addition to their cultures
being very different. There is not going to be an easy solution to this
problem, and it probably will get worse before it gets better.
When making a complaint to grants.gov, let's be specific about what we
like and what we don't like. If we perceive that it's going to increase
our administrative burden, be specific about which facets will cause
problems.
(As an example, when using the PureEdge software, the user must re-enter
standard data-elements - such as their name - by hand typing it into
each application. This increases the amount of time necessary to submit
each application by over 1 hour per application. Now that they are aware
of the problem, a solution is being worked on and is expected in the
next release of PureEdge Viewer).
Their ability to manage grant submissions, and our ability to submit
grants will be built on collaboration, not divisiveness. Be loud, be
vocal - and be part of the solution.
Steve Shapiro
Office of Research Services and Administration
University of Oregon
5219 University of Oregon
Eugene, OR 97403
o) 541-346-0720
f) 541-346-5138
main) 541-346-5131
xxxxxx@orsa.uoregon.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")
======================================================================
