Bob- Thanks! Your FedEx analogy is apt. We are trying to consider the best way to give depts and investigators flexibility, get error notifications back to the people who will need to make the corrections, and maintain institutional control. Obviously, this all looks ahead to those deadlines when we would prefer to not monitor and micro-manage every single proposal getting bounced around in the xml ether. Who wants a POed SO? You mention that NIH says it sends messages to the person in section 19. This is the AOR (not SO). IF this is true, it means that a department administrator authorized as an AOR can (following internal approvals) submit a proposal, learn of errors, handle the resubmission, etc. Then the SO can do the final verification. Charlie At 03:08 PM 2/28/2006, you wrote: >Who's Who and Can Do What is a crucial question people using >Grants.gov need to consider. > >SO = signing official, a NIH Commons term for the person who signs >the PHS 398 in the lower right side and who, in the Commons, has >highest authority and can do anything except see PI reviews. > >AOR = authorized organizational representative, a Grants.gov term for >a person authorized by the EbizPOC to submit proposals. > >One person can have both roles and the roles can have the same or >different people. That is to say, an institution can assign both >jobs to a person and to many people. University business rules >should dictate who can do the tasks allotted to each role. For >example a person can be given SO rights for the Commons but not be >authorized by the university to approve proposals. So the person can >work on Commons projects as an SO but not do approvals because that >is not the person's job at the institution. > >Likewise, you can consider actually pushing the button to "submit" >an application via Grants.gov to be akin to putting it in the FedEx >box if the application has been APPROVED by an institutionally >authorized person. Thus a person who does not have the institutional >right to approve a proposal can still "submit" it, once it is >approved. I have spoken to folks at some universities who seem to >think that the government agencies understand the roles and rights of >people in universities and have assigned system roles and rights >based on this knowledge. Thus, a Vice Provost for Research who is >authorized by the Governing Board to approve proposals seems to be >the only one who can "submit" them through a system. Consider >differentiating between University business rules and submission >system business rules. > >Grants.gov recognizes as the submitter, the person whose sign-on and >password is used to make the submission. There is an email address >for this person in the system and that person gets the 4 Grants.gov >messages. > >NIH says it sends messages to the "Person to be contacted" (section >6) and to the SO, the person listed in section 19. If this person >is not an SO then I do not know, because our "official" AOR is also >an SO. Sending to both people may explain why some people got two >messages, as both the contact person and the SO/AOR. The contact >person for us is the person who would have been in the lower left >section of of the PHS 398 and she did not get NIH messages. > >So Grants.gov notifies the submitter only. We have a group email >address for this "person" and so all people who have AOR status get >the message. NIH notifies the person in section 19 and maybe the >person in section 6. In any event, any one with the SO rights in the >Commons can verify, whether that person "submitted" the application >or not. It would really be nice if NIH sent their messages to all >SO's. In so far as the PI is concerned, folks might consider using a >group email if the PI is difficult to contact. All people in the >research team, or the department management staff could be in this >group. > >Charlie, am I getting to an answer to your question? > >Bob Beattie >UM Grants.gov Liaison >xxxxxx@umich.edu 936-1283 >Learn more about Grants.gov @ UMICH >http://www.research.umich.edu/era/grants_gov/ > > > >On Feb 28, 2006, at 1:07 PM, Charlie Hathaway wrote: > >Just when I think I am understanding Grants.gov/NIH eRA, my brain >stumbles. > >Question: What is the relationship between a Grants.gov "AOR" and an >NIH "SO"? > >My assumption was that AORs submit to Gg and deal with Gg issues, >that SOs deal with NIH Commons issues, and that an AOR may or may not >be an SO. > >Now I come across Gg tutorials mentioning SOs and some NIH tutorials >talking about AORs. > >And if you have multiple SOs and AORs, who gets notified about errors >and who needs to do the verification? > >Help? Thanks. > >Charlie > > >====================================================================== > 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") ======================================================================
