• SPO Launches Two Web Applications for Grants.gov Proposals
• F&A Cost Rate Agreement Revised for $5,000 Equipment Threshold
• New Conflict of Interest Committee Web Site
• VC for Research Develops New Export Contol Website for the Berkeley Campus
• DoD Eases Up on Proposed Export Control Regulations
• SPO/OPHS/COI Drop Box
• NIH Issues Final Policy for Funding of Tuition, Fees, and Health Insurance on NRSA Training Grants
• Reminder: Charging Certain Employee Benefits on NIH NRSA Grants
• NIH Updates Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications
• NIH Seeks Comments on Genome-Wide Association Studies Policy
• FASEB Report for Scientists on Financial Conflicts of Interest
• Whistleblower Policy for Campus
• NSF Combining Grants Policy Guide and Grants Policy Manual
• Campus Training Resources
• Missing NSF Progress Reports Can Delay Future Awards
• NSF Rules for Proposal Format

The Sponsored Projects Office is pleased to announce two new web applications designed to assist principal investigators and campus departments with preparation and validation of Grants.gov electronic proposals.

The first is FormFiller, http://www.spo.berkeley.edu:8080/ggfiller/. Using a Google-like search interface and a simple three-step process, FormFiller automatically loads program-specific information, PI information, and standard UC Berkeley information (such as "The Regents" corporate name, EIN and DUNS numbers, and SPO institutional representative contact information) into the form package. FormFiller is intended to reduce the effort required to complete PureEdge form packages, and to reduce the potential for rejected proposals due to incorrectly filled-in forms.

The second is FormChecker, https://www.spo.berkeley.edu:8443/ggchecker/, which error-checks PureEdge forms before submission and produces a list of errors and warnings for easy correction. The nature, source, and location of the error are displayed to the user. FormChecker can be used as often as you wish as the form package is filled in.

SPO also provides Macintosh support for Grants.gov proposals. Please see the updated Grants.gov page on the SPO Web site, http://www.spo.berkeley.edu/Procedures/grantsgov.html, for complete information on SPO's Grants.gov support.

For assistance with these new applications, or with any questions, please contact Ken Geis (kgeis@berkeley.edu, 2-2246) or Nancy Han (nthan@berkeley.edu, 2-8121) in SPO Information Systems.

The revised F&A (or indirect cost) rate agreement is available in PDF format at http://www.spo.berkeley.edu/Policy/fa.html.

The campus Conflict of Interest Committee has a new web site address: http://researchcoi.berkeley.edu. The site has also been redesigned to make information easier to find. The site is organized in four main sections: UC Policies and Guidance, Review Process; State of California; Federal Financial Disclosure; and Human Subjects.

A conflict of interest is a situation in which an investigator's outside financial interest(s) or obligation(s) (real or perceived) have the potential to bias a research project or cause harm to human subjects participating in a research project. Investigators at UC Berkeley are subject to University of California systemwide policies, as well as specific State of California law and federal regulations.

To aid the campus community in understanding and complying with the body of regulations related to export controls, the Vice Chancellor for Research Office has developed a new export controls web site, http://research.chance.berkeley.edu/echome.cfm.

The site provides background information, a guide to the regulations, FAQs, a "decision tree," as well as names and contact information for people on campus who can answer questions and provide assistance on export control issues.

Vice Chancellor for Research Burnside announced the new site in a July 11 memo to campus, available at https://mossberg.berkeley.edu/CALmessages/display_message.asp?d=7/11/2006&s=103. The memo states that, "as UC Berkeley's tradition of academic freedom and openness in research may bring it into conflict with these regulations, it is important that all faculty and staff involved in research on our campus understand export control regulations and implementation requirements." Faculty and staff are strongly urged to review the site carefully and call the VC for Research Office, or those individuals designated on the site, with any questions.

The Defense Department published a proposed rule in the August 14 Federal Register that will require contractors to "comply with existing Department of Commerce and Department of State regulations," in place of the previous proposed rule that would have increased DoD export-control regulatory requirements, including badging, training, and segregated work areas for foreign nationals.

The revision is good news for university researchers. According to the Federal Register notice, the DoD received 113 negative responses that recommended against adopting the first proposed rule, primarily from the educational research community.

The Sponsored Projects Office, the Office for the Protection of Human Subjects, and the Conflict of Interest Committee have a new document drop box. The drop box, located outside the office door of Suite 313, 2150 Shattuck Avenue, may be used when the offices are closed but the building is open: 7 a.m. to 8 a.m., noon to 1 p.m., and 5 p.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday. During regular office hours, please come in and leave your documents at the front reception desk.

The National Institutes of Health published the final policy that limits reimbursement for tuition, fees, health insurance, training related expenses, and institutional allowance on Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) programs in the August 4 NIH Guide (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-06-090.html).

The final policy is very similar to the proposed policy published by NIH in May 2006. The NIH announcement states that the new policy is a pilot that will be evaluated after data have been collected for two years.

The policy applies to new and competing-continuation (renewal) NRSA institutional research training grants (T32, T34, and T35) beginning in fiscal year (FY) 2007, and competing individual fellowships (F30, F31, F32, and F33) awarded beginning in FY 2007. It also applies to institutional research training grants that received competing awards in FY 2006. FY 2007 non-competing awards will be issued recalculating budget categories to reflect this new policy. NIH will provide options for rebudgeting institutional awards, including the number of trainee positions.

The policy changes are summarized below. See the NIH Guide announcement for more detailed information.

Institutional Training Grants

Tuition and fees: For T32, T34, and T35 grants, NIH will provide an amount per predoctoral trainee equal to 60% of the level requested by the applicant institution, up to $16,000 per year. If the program supports formally combined dual-degree training (e.g., M.D.-Ph.D, D.D.S.-Ph.D.), the amount provided per trainee will be up to $21,000 per year. For T32 and T35 grants, NIH will provide an amount per postdoctoral trainee equal to 60% of the level requested by the applicant institution, up to $4,500 per year. If the program supports postdoctoral individuals in formal degree-granting training, the amount provided per trainee enrolled in a degree-granting program will be up to $16,000 per year.

Training related expenses: For T32, T34, and T35 grants, the training related expenses category will be modified to include health insurance as an allowable expense. NIH will provide an additional $2,000 per predoctoral trainee, per year, and an additional $4,000 per postdoctoral trainee, per year, in this category. This category will continue to be referred to as training related expenses but will now include health insurance as an allowable cost.

Individual Fellowships

Predoctoral Institutional Allowance: For F30 and F31 fellowships, the institutional allowance category will be modified to include health insurance as an allowable expense. NIH will provide an additional $1,450 per predoctoral fellow per year in this category.

Postdoctoral Institutional Allowance: For F32 and F33 fellowships, the current institutional allowance category already includes health insurance as an allowable cost. The NIH proposes to adjust the funding provided under this category so that it is comparable to that provided via the new health insurance and training related expenses category of postdoctoral institutional training grants. Specifically, an additional $850 per postdoctoral fellow, per year, will be provided in this category which will be referred to as health insurance and institutional allowance.

The National Institutes of Health does not allow certain charges to Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards.

NRSA recipients receive a stipend—a subsistence allowance to help defray living expenses during the research training experience. The stipend is not provided as a condition of employment with either the federal government or the institution. Since NRSA awards are not provided as a condition of employment, it is inappropriate and unallowable for institutions to seek funds for or to charge individual fellowships and institutional training grant awards for costs that would normally be associated with employee benefits (for example FICA, workman's compensation and unemployment insurance).

NIH published a reminder on this policy in the NIH Guide in 2003 at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-003.html. For more information, see:

• NRSA Research Training Grants and Fellowships web site: http://grants.nih.gov/training/nrsa.htm
• NRSA Institutional Research Training Grants (T32) (June 16, 2006): http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-06-468.html
  NIH Grants Policy Statement on NRSA supplementation and compensation: http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part11.htm
• NRSA for Individual Postdoctoral Fellows (F32) (April 27, 2006): http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-06-373.html
  NIH Grants Policy Statement on NRSA supplementation and compensation: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part10.htm

The National Institutes of Health has revised the policy on late grant applications, primarily to add language on electronic submission. The revision updates and provides further clarification of the policy published on January 27, 2005 (Notice OD-05-030). The revision notice is published in the August 11 NIH Guide at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-06-086.html. Excerpts from the notice are provided below.

Late applications are generally not accepted by NIH. Permission for a late submission is not granted in advance. In rare cases, late applications will be accepted but only when accompanied by a cover letter that details compelling reasons for the delay. Specific information about the timing and nature of the cause of the delay is necessary so that a decision can be made.

NIH will consider accepting late applications based on the acceptability of the explanation and the processing time required for two different kinds of submission dates:

• Regular Standing Submission Dates: January 10, February 1, February 25, March 1, May 10, June 1, June 25, July 1, September 10, October 1, October 25, November 1. Applications must be received at the NIH within two weeks of the standing submission date.
• Expedited Standing Submission Dates: April 1, April 5, April 15, May 1, August 1, August 5, August 15, September 1, December 1, December 5, December 15, and January 2. Applications must be received at the NIH within one week of the standing submission date.

The windows of time for consideration of late applications have been carefully chosen so that the late applications can be processed with the cohort of on-time applications. In all cases, when the regular standing submission date or expedited submission date falls on a weekend or federal holiday and is extended to the next business day, the window of consideration for late applications will be calculated from that business day. Note that the late window always ends in a receipt (not submission) date for both paper and electronic applications.

NIH will not consider accepting late applications for the Special Receipt Dates for RFAs and PARs. This includes the special receipt dates (March 20, July 20, and November 20) for resubmission/amended applications that are part of the New Investigator Pilot (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-06-060.html).

The National Institutes of Heatlh is seeking comments by October 31, 2006 on the draft policy for Genome-Wide Association Studies. More information is available at http://www.reffectcomments.org/GWAS/.

The Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, or FASEB, recently published a report on financial conflicts of interest, "Shared Responsibility, Individual Integrity: Scientists Addressing Conflicts of Interest in Biomedical Research." The report is available online at http://opa.faseb.org/pdf/FASEB_COI_paper.pdf.

The FASEB report "represents a consensus statement on overarching principles and voluntary standards for the conduct and management of academia-industry interactions from the scientists' perspective." The report suggests a set of voluntary "guiding principles" to help scientists identify and manage conflicts.

A July 11, 2006, memo from Chancellor Birgeneau to the campus community provides messages from both the UC Office of the President and the State Auditor about whistleblowing. The messages describe where to report, how to report, the resolution processes, and the protection that will be provided. The memo is available at https://mossberg.berkeley.edu/CALmessages/display_message.asp?d=7/11/2006&s=100. The UCOP whistleblower web site is http://ucwhistleblower.ucop.edu/.

NSF announced in the August 8, 2006, Federal Register that it plans to combine the NSF Grant Proposal Guide and Grant Policy Manual in one document, an NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Manual. NSF is asking for comments by October 10, and expects to publish the new document before January 2007.

SPO has DVDs of the following past NCURA workshops available. To borrow a DVD, contact Betty Roberts (2-8112, bkrobert@berkeley.edu).

• Technology Transfer for the Research Administrator
• National Securities Issues Video Workshop
• Grants.gov: Working Towards a Common Vision
• Post-award Issues for the Pre-award and Depart- mental Administrator
• Principles of Federal Research and Development Contracting
• Best Practices in Research Compliance: Update on Policies and Regulations and Implementation at Institutions

Sponsored Projects Office staff have noticed that, in some circumstances, the National Science Foundation has been withholding new award funding for principal investigators who have not submitted a final project report on an earlier award.

Final technical reports are due to NSF within 90 days of the grant expiration date and must be prepared and submitted to NSF with Fastlane. As stated in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/nsf04_23/6.jsp#VIH), “Failure to provide final technical reports delays NSF review and processing of pending proposals for that PI.”

One National Science Foundation division has announced that proposals that do not follow formatting guidelines will be returned. The Division of Information and Intelligent Systems (IIS), in the NSF Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering, has been including the following notice on email:

“Beginning October 1, 2006, font and spacing requirements as stated in the Grant Proposal Guide will be strictly enforced by the IIS Division. Non-compliant proposals, when detected, will be returned without review! Use of 11 point fonts may avoid most problems.”

Other NSF divisions have not made similar announcements. However, in some instances, NSF officers have asked that applicants correct format issues using the ‘file update’ option in FastLane.

The NSF Grant Proposal Guide section on Proposal Margin and Spacing Requirements is available at http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/nsf04_23/2.jsp#IIB. The Guide states that:.

• The height of the letters must not be smaller than 10 point, unless otherwise specified in the program solicitation to which the proposal is being submitted;
• Type density, including characters and spaces, must be no more than 15 characters per 2.5 cm. For proportional spacing, the average for any representative section of text must not exceed 15 characters per 2.5 cm;
• No more than 6 lines of type within a vertical space of 2.5 cm.; and
• Margins, in all directions, must be at least 2.5 cm.
• While line spacing (e.g., single-spaced, double-spaced) is at the applicant's discretion, established page limits must be followed. Individual program solicitations, however, may require other type size, margin, or line spacing requirements.