Re: Let's mobilize to fight electronic proposal submission SNAFU Glenn Krell 03 May 2005 09:28 EST
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") ======================================================================