Makes you feel for the flute players, first getting beat up on the way to school, now this! I won't attempt to say anything humorous about the menopause list. :) On 3/18/2010 9:51 AM, Carolyn Elliott-Farino wrote: > Thanks for the reminder. He's still in the lead, though, 79. something% to > 19.something% to 1.something%. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf > Of Aull, Robert Matthew > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 8:58 AM > To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org > Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] NIH considering eliminating correction window, > seeking comments > > Candyce makes an excellent point--but let's not forget the very forum that > allows us to air our own and consider other opinions before finalizing > those institutional comments. > > Have you voted for this listserv today? Are you aware that Mike Varney's > approval rating has slipped below the 80th percentile? :) > > If you would like to vote, the URL is: > http://www.lsoft.com/news/choicevote.asp > > Robert Aull > Indiana University > > -----Original Message----- > From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf > Of Candyce Lindsay > Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 9:35 PM > To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org > Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] NIH considering eliminating correction window, > seeking comments > > All, > > Be sure to submit your/your institutions comments to > http://grants.nih.gov/cfdocs/era_process_changes_rfi/add.htm by April > 19th. This will have the most affect. > > Candyce > > Candyce C. Lindsay, CRA > Research Policy and Assurance > Office of VP Research and Economic Affairs > Arizona State University > 480 965 8016-phone > 480 965 2455-fax > xxxxxx@asu.edu > > "Living a life is like constructing a building: if you start wrong, you'll > end wrong." --Maya Angelou > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf > Of Jonathan A Samelak > Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 1:07 PM > To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org > Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] NIH considering eliminating correction window, > seeking comments > > I was all set to support elimination of the correction window,& then I > went into Commons and viewed the reasons why ERROR messages (items that > would have prevented an application from progressing to the next stage) > were received. What I found is that there were few, and there was no > pattern. > A sampling: Missed answering the Clinical Trial Question when Human > Subjects was selected...A subaward budget was included with a Modular > budget...A single file within a package was not in PDF format...etc. > > Yes, someone should have caught these. But this demonstrates a point made > previously that these are not identified with Grants.gov validation prior > to transmitting, but with NIH validation post-transmission. > I didn't look to see if the corrections would have been submitted before > or after the deadlines. But if originally submitted close to the deadline > without any correction window, the applications would have had to wait for > the next cycle (at a minimum, 4 months). > Not that anyone is asking, but a one business day ERROR correction window > shouldn't be asking too much. > > As for the topic of submission deadlines separate from whether there is > any correction window: > Experience to this point of my career is that those who put off composing > or supplying materials to complete a package until very close to a > deadline,& missing a deadline, have done so only once. > > -J > > Jonathan A. (Jay) Samelak, MPA > Grant& Contract Specialist > Bowling Green State University > Office of Sponsored Programs& Research (OSPR) > 106 University Hall > Bowling Green, OH 43403 > PH: 419.372.2481 > Fax: 419.372.0304 > xxxxxx@bgsu.edu > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf > Of Charlie Hathaway > Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 2:00 PM > To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org > Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] NIH considering eliminating correction window, > seeking comments > > Hi- > > While it seems that most people responding seem > to like NIH's idea of abolishing the > post-deadline correction window, there have been > some good points presented arguing why the change > is ill-conceived, or at least fraught with danger. > > I think NIH is proposing this primarily to 1) > save time and money generally but also 2) create > a "fair and consistent submission deadline" > WITHOUT having to spend tons of money enforcing > the rules about what gets changed > post-deadline. The latter would require way too > many human hours for NIH to do the police > work. Their argument that this will reduce time > to process applications etc etc isn't so convincing. > > Some have suggested alternatives (add-ons) to the > complete abolishment of the correction > window. Some of these sounded good but I think > many were based on the particular view of > internal submission procedures from one > institution's perspective. We differ a lot in > how we navigate the NIH submission > process. Consider the variations in internal > deadlines, how much of an application we review > in order to approve it, if the PIs can submit > their own proposals after internal approval, time > zones (does Commons handle questions at 7:45 EST > for people in Oregon as well as handle my New > York questions at 4:45?), the knowledge and skill > of the PIs and administrators assembling and > checking proposals, and related, as Bob > mentioned, if applicants have really good > pre-proposal error checking. The latter is > important. S2S gadgets are great but don't cover > 100% of problems. As Steve has just mentioned, > Adobe forms may need much much better error pick-up. > > I think this argues for NIH not trying to second > guess our internal processes and just applying a > simple, but very "tough love" approach. > > As for the conceptualization of "deadlines"...the > term originates from prisons where inmates were > shot (dead) if they crossed a line. For the > warden, it was clear and simple (and > economical?). For the prisoners, it also had to > be understood clearly but the issues were more > complex: how close does one get to that > line? Sorry for this analogy but I think the > challenge for us is to create internal processes > that keep people from crossing the line or at > least becoming very aware of the consequences if they slip. > > 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") > ====================================================================== > > > -- Tom Drinane 8 Douglas Ridge Norwich, VT 05055 802-356-7843 (M) 802-649-5525 (H) 603-646-3008 (W) 802-526-2459 (Google Voice) THE LANGUAGE OF THE TELEPHONE COMPANY "The trouble you reported recently is now working properly." - Lydia Davis, from the 2010 issue of NOON (reproduced in the March 2010 issue of Harper's) ====================================================================== 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") ======================================================================
