Re: grants.gov AOR and faculty Charlie Hathaway 17 Mar 2006 11:56 EST
Cmon Bob. Anyone designated as an official approver has been given that authority by someone higher in the administration. I'm sure the agencies know that. And since AOR (i.e. Gg submitter) is not the same as SO ( NIH verifier), no NIH application is going to go thru without someone above the faculty agreeing. Doesn't all this come down to trust in the context of the realities within each institution? Several years ago we all shared our different views on whether central admin should actually mail the application and how much of an application needs to be reviewed to grant submission approval. Clearly, the potential existed in many institutions for faculty members to get face pages signed and then alter previously approved content prior to putting in the FedEx box. If this really became a problem, and the institutions found themselves penalized often as a result of these post-approval changes, one would assume they would change their rules. As you say, each school can determine its own business policy. And when well-funded scholarly research is the primary goal, I think the distinction between liberty and license needs to be carefully examined. CH At 09:42 PM 3/16/2006, you wrote: >It is not up to NIH/Grants.gov to establish business rules for each university. At the University of Michigan faculty do not authorize the submission of proposals. If a university wants to make that its business policy it can. Usually it is university policy that a grants office is designated its governing body or executive officers to authorize proposal submission. > >It might be possible to treat the actual submission of a grants.gov application as merely the same as putting it in a fedex box, once the grants office has actually signed off on the application. This would require the faculty to provide the grants office with a copy of the pureedge file in final format for review. Once that is done, it seems counter productive to return the file for the faculty member to do the actual submission. Moreover, the application in submitted format appears to the agency with the faculty member's name as the official approver, not someone in the grants office. This makes it difficult for the agency to know the application was in fact so approved. Also, the grants office gets out of the verification loop. Especially with NIH where the AOR/SO get notified of any errors. It is thus dangerous to the PI to have no backup person also getting the error messages. > >Currently only NIH is doing online verification but perhaps other agencies will see the advantage of this. Any know how NSF will do checking? > >All in all, it seems inappropriate for faculty to be submitting their own applications, but that is a decision for each university to make. > >Bob >xxxxxx@umich.edu > >On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:13:51 -0500 > "Mortali, Jill M." <xxxxxx@HMS.HARVARD.EDU> wrote: >>I asked NIH policy this question and was told that it is not appropriate >>for faculty to perform the AOR role. >> _____ >>From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG] On >>Behalf Of Eleanor Cicinsky >>Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 10:28 AM >>To: xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG >>Subject: [RESADM-L] grants.gov AOR and faculty >> >>Hello: >> >>I've been having a lot of faculty who wish to submit proposals through >>grants.gov sign up for AOR privileges. At our institution we have >>designated AORs and they are not faculty. Are any of you having >>similar problems with faculty? What is your strategy to stop them >>from requesting this permission? >> >>Eleanor M. Cicinsky >>Director, PreAward Sponsored Projects Administration >>Temple University, 406 USB, 083-45 >>1601 N. Broad Street >>Philadelphia, PA 19122 >>(Ph) 215.204.8691 >>(Fx) 215.204.7486 >>(Em) xxxxxx@temple.edu <mailto:xxxxxx@temple.edu> >>(Web) http://www.research.temple.edu <http://www.research.temple.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") >====================================================================== ====================================================================== 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") ======================================================================