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