I've enjoyed this discussion because, once again, it appears we all deal =
with they same issues.  I think the key points made were that the =
Research Office wants to make sure the proposal submitted is a quality =
proposal.  We do both pre-award and post-award and I'm glad because I =
can answer most of the post-award questions at the proposal stage.   =
When the award comes in, we can hit the ground running. The best faculty =
I work with are the ones that allow me to do what I have to do on a =
proposal in good time with the needed discussion, authorizations, etc.  =
Then they work on the technical portion right up to the last minutes, we =
assemble it and send it off.  (Usually we copy and send it, sometimes =
they take the extra time to tweek it and then mail it themselves.)   =
These are the same faculty that are consistently funded.

If we could just convince faculty that doing the work up front not only =
gives them a better looking, better organized (i.e., easier to review) =
proposal, that it sets the stage for a good program if it is awarded.

Finally, I just wish our faculty who love to do those last minute =
proposals would realize how those rushes impede our ability to do our =
routine work.  What are we doing all day that we can't get those =
rebudgets done?  Well, three of us are glued to our PC's inputting a =
FastLane proposal because some faculty member thinks FastLane is FAST!!

I don't think "rewards" would work around here.  Maybe highlighting a =
success story in the research newsletter or asking the good PI's to =
mentor the new PI's or take up the cause in departmental faculty =
meetings.

Good luck!

Ruth Tallman
Office of Research=20
Lehigh University
xxxxxx@lehigh.edu