Email list hosting service & mailing list manager


Re: incredibly irritated was FedConnect Bloomberg, Robert 21 Apr 2009 16:21 EST

At the risk of being thrown off this list, there are other ways to look at this.

Robert P. Bloomberg
Director, Office of Grants & Contracts
Tufts Medical Center
800 Washington Street (Tupper 10)
Boston, MA  02111
Tel.   617.636.1142
Fax.  617.636.8568

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf
> Of Lesley Zajac
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 5:13 PM
> To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org
> Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] incredibly irritated was FedConnect
>
> Bob:
>
> Feel free to rant any time you want!!  You make excellent points but
> until we start making a lot of noise, no-one will listen.  We need to go
> to the top - if President Obama wants this to be open and transparent to
> all, then they have to make it work for those on the front lines.
>
> Lesley S. Zajac
> Director, Research Administration
> Jaeb Center for Health Research
> 15310 Amberly Drive, Ste 350
> Tampa, FL 33647
> Tel: 813.975.8690
> Fax: 813.975.8761
> email: xxxxxx@jaeb.org
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On
> Behalf Of Bob Beattie
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 4:42 PM
> To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org
> Subject: [RESADM-L] incredibly irritated was FedConnect
>
> Thanks Tina, now you have got me going:  rant on --
>
> I have just been watching the GPC webcast about all of this and it is
> distressing.
>
> I think the recent decision by the Director of the Office of
> Management and Budget to allow all agencies to ignore Grants.gov and
> use any system they want to receive applications is the worst example
> of government waste I have seen.  Universities have put millions of
> dollars -- maybe all of us together, a hundred million -- into
> systems and procedures for dealing with Grants.gov.  Yes, the system
> has programming problems and needs more capacity, but we know it and
> we know how to deal with it.
>
> A bit more capacity and it might work just fine, and a little program
> fix.  Many agencies have not been supportive of Grants.gov.  Compare
> NIH receiving 86,000 applications through Grants.gov to NASA's paltry
> 121, or even NSF taking in only 600 of the tens of thousands they
> get.  All agencies were required to contribute to Grants.gov, even if
> they wanted it to fail.  Now maybe they will seek to not  support
> it.  Tom Cooley, head of GPC, and CFO at NSF said on the webcast that
> agencies could allow people to use systems other than Grants.gov but
> that was optional.  We know this is not true, as Tina says, Energy is
> requiring FedConnect or IIPS.  FedConnect was installed as the Energy
> Department's GMLOB system, not to be converted into a submission system.
>
> So using the ARRA as an excuse, and instead of fixing Grants.gov for
> all of us, the Director of OMB says it is ok to move away from
> Grants.gov.  So Energy, which just made a huge investment in
> FedConnect as their exception to the Grants Management Line of
> Business process, decides to now use it to replace Grants.gov, and
> worse, they are still using IIPS -- two bad systems.   We might
> accept FastLane or even INSPIRES as they don't work too badly.  But
> the Energy  choices are clearly worse than Grants.gov, once you can
> even figure out how to use them.  Don't we really want just one
> system, for all grants, anyway.  I do not like many aspects of
> Grants.gov but I want it to succeed.
>
> So what to do?  You could write your congress people to complain that
> you want one portal for grants submissions, and you have made a large
> investment already in Grants.gov.  Write too, to support Senate Bill
> 303  now in the House, to renew Grants.gov with some stronger
> components.  One being required user input.   We must complain about
> the roller coaster ride we are being put on -- Grants.gov problems,
> not fixed, new systems to learn, what next  - 26 systems, or  PAPER!?
>
> Do we think that all agencies must accept Grants.gov, or their own
> but the latter must  optional.  We should not be required to use
> FedConnect.
>
> Consider writing to the OMB person who seems to be in charge of the
> Grants.gov reduction,  xxxxxx@omb.eop.gov
>
> If you are upset with Grants.gov reductions in use, and with any
> aspect,  maybe he will listen.
>
> If you want to go higher,
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
> As the site says, President Obama is committed to creating the most
> open and accessible administration in American history.  Open but
> will anybody listen to us?
>
> The FDP and COGR are working on this problem of lack of Grants.gov
> support and attempts to move away from it.  I have heard that the
> administration thinks of Grants.gov as a Bush Initiative, so
> something to change.  What they do not realize is that it is a
> College/University Initiative that was started during the Clinton
> administration as the Federal Commons.  Be sure to let your reps to
> FDP and COGR know what you want (if you are not them) and keep those
> organizations pushing.  Consider contacting your state Grants people,
> as they are also impacted.  They work through the National Grants
> Partnership.
>
> Are we  as mad as h*** and not going to take it anymore, yet?  Tina
> is mild in her comment:
>
> "We are incredibly irritated here that we and our PIs have to learn
> yet another system."
>
> That does makes a good slogan, doesn't.  Tell Mr. Werfel, "We are
> incredibly irritated to have to learn another system."
>
> rant off
>
> keep the applications flowing :)
>
>
> Bob
> ------------------------------
> Robert Beattie
> University of Michigan
> xxxxxx@umich.edu   (734) 936-1283
>
> On Apr 21, 2009, at 2:30 PM, Tina L. Cunningham wrote:
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> We are now seeing proposals submissions being required to go through
> FedConnect (our first one is due the end of the month) and so I
> searched the list serv to see what had been discussed and found this
> thread (hard to believe it is over a year ago!).  I know that we are
> stuck with what the RFP tells us to do, but is it truly proper to
> require us to use a new system over Grants.gov?  We are incredibly
> irritated here that we and our PIs have to learn yet another system.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Tina
>
> ********************************
> Tina L. Cunningham, J.D., CRA
> Administrator
> Sponsored Programs Administration
> Mississippi State University
> 133 Etheredge Hall
> 449 Hardy Road
> P.O. Box 6156
> Mississippi State, MS 39762
>
> Phone: 662-325-7395
> Fax: 662-325-3803
> Email: xxxxxx@spa.msstate.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>
> From: 	Bob Beattie <xxxxxx@UMICH.EDU>
> To:	<xxxxxx@hrinet.org>
> Date: 	2/18/2008 1:46 PM
> Subject: 	Re: [RESADM-L] FedConnect
>
> FedConnect is a change from IIPS.
>
> It will be a post submission management
> system, like Reserch.gov, NIH eRA Commons and other such operations.
> As folks
> may know there is a move within granting agencies to come up with a
> limited number
> of post submission management systems.  This is under auspices of
> OMB.  The general
> project is called "Grants Management Line of Business - GMLOB. There
> are now three but
> agencies can get an exemption, NIH has, for example. Also DoEnergy
>
>
> Here is an overview of the whole process from 2005 at FDP site
> http://thefdp.org/Meeting_Sep2005.html
>
> Read about NSF's project - Research.gov
> http://thefdp.org/Jan_2008_meeting.html
>
> For some details on FedConnect itself, go here
> http://e-center.doe.gov/doebiz.nsf/Special+Notices?OpenView
> and then here
> DOE Transitioning To Electronic Procurement System
>
>    So FedConnect is not a grants submission system, maybe will be for
> contract applications.
> Below is a comment I got when I asked someone in DOE what this is about.
>
> "DOE is not going to use one of the GMLOB consortia.  We received an
> exception from OMB early last calendar year to add the financial
> assistance module to our new acquisition mgmt system.  This decision had
> many facets to it (and no it was not mine.)  The short story is none of
> the other three gave us what we needed.
>
> This system will be standardized across DOE and offices will have
> limited abilities to do things their own way.  Most of the changes with
> this new system will be internal and not will affect applicants and
> recipients.  We will continue to use Grants.gov to post FOAs and receive
> applications.  All pre-award, admin, and post award communications will
> be through the fedconnect portal.  This includes making the award,
> amendments and letters from DOE and reports submission and
> communications from you.
>
> We are still working out some of the details and the implementation
> schedule, transition is scheduled to begin in April and last for 6-9
> months.  Right now the biggest change is for you to register at
> FEDConnect.  I believe NASA and parts of DHS and DOT are also going to
> use this system for grants.  For acquisition, there are lots of agencies
> going with Compusearch."
>
> Hope this is helpful.  Maybe more than most people wanted to know :)
>
> Bob
> xxxxxx@umich.edu
> 734 936-1283
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 18, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Giarrusso, Gary wrote:
>
> A few weeks ago, we received an email from the Department of Energy
> requiring us to register on FedConnect for the purposes of submitting
> proposals and general award administration.  I was wondering if
> anyone had information as to why DOE is not using Grants.gov.  It
> would seem to me that this application is in competition with
> Grants.gov.  Thanks.
>
> Gary Giarrusso, CPA
> Manager of Sponsored Programs Accounting and Financial Compliance
> University of New Hampshire
> Office of Sponsored Research
> Service Building, 51 College Road
> Durham, NH  03824
> Tel (603) 862-0609
> Fax (603) 862-3564
> xxxxxx@unh.edu
>
> ====================================================================== I
> nstructions 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")
> ======================================================================
>
>
> ======================================================================
>  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")
======================================================================