Sally,

From my experience, if you do a collaborative, linked proposal, the administrative burden is less daunting on the post-award side.  Each entity prepares their own proposal & provides the lead institution their temporary proposal # & PIN, then the lead links to the other collaborating entities proposal.  As the lead, you would still need to review each proposal materials, to assure compliance with the NSF guidelines, as well as making sure a consistent font style & size is used.

Bobbie Ursin
Semi-retired
________________________________________
From: xxxxxx@lists.healthresearch.org <xxxxxx@lists.healthresearch.org> on behalf of Sally Everson <xxxxxx@foundationpr.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2023 11:03:37 AM
To: xxxxxx@lists.healthresearch.org
Subject: [RESADM-L] Info on Managing subawardees for NSF awards (NSF CIVIC)

My nonprofit organization currently has a Stage 1 NSF CIVIC award  - which is a small Planning Grant ($50K) – and while we had collaborative partners it was too small for subawardees.
We are preparing the Stage 2 application which is a much bigger award ($1 million), which will have at least 2 subawardee institutions (established universities with prior NSF funding).
I am looking for insight on the difference in post-award management requirements  for a Collaborative (single applicant) type of award – with subawardees versus a non-collaborative proposal with subawardees? We think we can submit either – though I am still trying to get clarity on that as well.

Since we are not a IHE and do not have a SPO with specialists on managing these awards – we are looking to understand what is the overall effort for our finance team in terms of managing subawardees. The language in the PAPPG sounds daunting to our Finance team . And if we can, we would like to have the type that would require the least amount of oversight / work from us – such that the university collaborators do more (most) of that. I had thought that subawardees can actually draw down the funds directly from the NSF financial system and do their own reporting – but perhaps I am mistaken on that – or perhaps it depends on the type?
Any insights or refences to resources is appreciated.

We are reaching out to the program Officer on this (and perhaps he will refer us the Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management folks) but so far they have had trouble answering us in detail because they are used to dealing with SPOs and post-awards experts – and so do not always know from a grantee perspective what the management entails. In the last Info sessions we were recommended to talk to our SPOs!

Thanks so much in advance!

Sally Everson ● Grant Designer & Writer ● Foundation for Puerto Rico
Office (787) 773-1100 ● Cel. (787) 383-6968 ● xxxxxx@foundationpr.org<mailto:xxxxxx@foundationpr.org>
 [image001.png]
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by replying to this email and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited.

- = - = - = - = - = - = -

This email was sent to xxxxxx@NAU.EDU via the Research Administrator's mailing list.

To unsubscribe from RESADM-L, go to https://lists.healthresearch.org and go into the Account Settings area.

List archives are available at: https://lists.healthresearch.org/resadm-l

To change your settings (such as Digest Mode or to temporarily suspend list emails): https://lists.healthresearch.org