-----Original Message-----
From: Grants.gov list for System-to-System Info [mailto:xxxxxx@LIST.NIH.GOV] On Behalf Of Debbi Nixon
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 10:16 AM
To: xxxxxx@LIST.NIH.GOV
Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] Grants.gov vs Fastlane

Roger did a great job of emphasizing the importance of S2S - which is the
big win for Grants.gov over FastLane.  One other thing that should be noted
is that one of the biggest disadvantages of FastLane (and other
agency-specific systems) is the duplicate data entry that has to occur for
any institution that has their own grant management system.  We have our
own system which we have been using since 1998 to capture all of our
proposal data.  Data has to be entered once into our system and then a
second time into Fast Lane (or any other agency-specifc system).  As nice
as FastLane is, we get a lot more 'bang for the buck' out of our
system-to-system interface with Grants.gov.

Debbi Nixon
Senior Analyst, IT - Administrative Development Group (ADG)
Duke Health Technology Solutions (DHTS)

xxxxxx@mc.duke.edu
919-668-3453

 Roger Wood
 <xxxxxx@INFOED.ORG
 >                                                          To
 Sent by:                  xxxxxx@LIST.NIH.GOV
 "Grants.gov list                                           cc
 for
 System-to-System                                      Subject
 Info"                     Re: [RESADM-L] Grants.gov vs
 <xxxxxx@L         Fastlane
 IST.NIH.GOV>

 06/04/2009 01:02
 PM

 Please respond to
 "Grants.gov list
 for
 System-to-System
 Info"
 <xxxxxx@L
 IST.NIH.GOV>

Support for System-to-System submissions is a key element that Grants.gov
supports that is not supported by FastLane.

(1) institutions can achieve very similar functionality to that provided by
FastLane if they choose to use a system-to-system (S2S) approach rather
than
the Adobe forms solution provided directly by Grants.gov. This includes
virtually everything that has been mentioned as an advantage of FastLane in
the recent emails. (Note that this still does NOT include support for
linked
proposals as mentioned by Terri previously - that is a known gap in the
Grants.gov data model.)

(2) institutions "own their own data" - proposal data are entered into
institutional systems and therefore are available for institutional
reporting without having to re-key data entered into FastLane into an
internal tracking & reporting system.

There is nothing inherent that would limit the ability for a FastLane-like
system to also allow for S2S functionality, but that doesn't exist now for
FastLane.

Thanks,
Roger

On 6/4/09 12:40 PM, "Nancy Anderson" <xxxxxx@CLICKCOMMERCE.COM>
wrote:

> Can we please have some Grants.gov supporters chime in on this?
>
> Thanks,
> Nancy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf
Of
> Nadler, Elsa
> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 9:20 AM
> To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org
> Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] Grants.gov vs Fastlane
>
> Just some historic perspective... several years ago I specifically asked
why
> the feds couldn't either use FastLane itself or adapt it and was told (1)
it
> belongs to NSF and other agencies could not use it and (2) it was not set
up
> for other agency requirements. In short, what I asked for was not
possible. I
> have used FastLane since its first required proposal submission (EPSCoR)
and
> have always liked it.
> Reasons:
> 1. content schema is visible on a single screen
> 2. navigation and use are intuitive, simple and straightforward
> 3. different forms are always a click away
> 4. never any worry about corrupting the file
> 5. never duplicate data entry
> 6. forms are all available even if they are not mandatory (of course, one
has
> to read the solicitation requirements)
> 7.  others that don't immediately come to me.
>
>
> Elsa Nadler
> 419.383.6967
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf
Of
> Terri Hall
> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 11:58 AM
> To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org
> Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] Grants.gov vs Fastlane
>
> Charlie,
> Here are a few features of FastLane that come to mind that are not
currently
> in Grants.gov:
>
> 1) you can copy a budget from year to year and new budget is eligible if
only
> salaries change; Personnel info is also copied so need not be re-entered
> 2) adding collaborators is a matter of selecting their institution from a
> drop-down list - no DUNS needed
> 3) ability to link collaborative proposals - they enter their info and
you do
> yours - each submits and FastLane "magically" links them into one
proposal for
> reviewers
> 4) one-click opens form needed ... no moving it anywhere first
> 5) Helpdesk staff actually has experience with system
>
> If others occur to me, I'll forward them.
> Terri
>
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
> If printing, consider the double-sided option.
>
> Terri M. Hall, CRA
> Director, Electronic Research Administration Associate Director,
Pre-Award
> Administration Office of Research University of Notre Dame
> (574) 631-7378
> xxxxxx@nd.edu
> There is nothing like a dream to create the future. - Victor Hugo
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf
Of
> Charlie Hathaway
> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 11:19 AM
> To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org
> Subject: [RESADM-L] Grants.gov vs Fastlane
>
> I am giving a talk next week and anticipate being asked the question that
was
> so common several years ago:
> "Why didn't they just use a system like Fastlane?"
>
> I know some of the reasons why Fastlane was not a good model for doing
ALL
> federal grants.  However, being less familiar with Fastlane than I am
with
> Grants.gov and NIH Commons, could someone tell me some reasons why
Fastlane is
> currently better or worse to use than S2S to Gg to NIH Commons?
>
> 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")
> ======================================================================

======================================================================
 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")
======================================================================