Grants gov and Research gov at NSF Governmentwide

Grants. gov and Research. gov at NSF & Government-wide Grants Initiatives Andrea Norris Division Director IRM/DIS Mary Santonastasso Division Director BFA/DIAS November 9, 2006 NSF and Government-wide Initiatives

Government-wide Grants Initiatives NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 2

Background • Grants. gov – Government wide Policy and Implementation Governing Structures for e-Grants Initiatives – Grants. gov’s Purpose and Goals – Current and Future Status – How NSF has Implemented Grants. gov NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 3

Background (Cont. ) • Grants Management Line of Business (GMLOB) – What is the Grants Management Line of Business? – GMLOB Purpose and Goals – Current and Future Status – NSF’s Diverse Roles in the GMLOB: Leading and Implementing NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 4

The Federal Grant Streamlining Program National Science and Technology Policy Council The Chief Financial Officers Council Committee on Science Grants Policy Committee National Science Foundation and Energy Co-Chairs Research Business Models Subcommittee Pre-Award Work Group Department of Defense Chair Interagency Committee on Debarment and Suspension EPA Chair CCR Team EPA Chair Mandatory Work Group Vacant Chair P. L. 106 -107 PMO HHS Audit Oversight Work Group HHS Chair Training and Oversight Work Group HHS Chair Payment System Issues NSF Chair Compliance Supplement Team HHS Chair Training Curriculum Team NSF Chair Reporting Forms Team NOAA Chair Audit Quality Team Education Chair Competencies Team Education and DOI Co-Chairs Cost Principles Team OMB Chair Audit Policy Issues NSF and Education Co-Chairs Post-Award Work Group DOC/NOAA Chair Indirect Cost Uniform Guidance Handbook Team HHS Chair FAC Study (next steps) Energy Chair Certification Team DOE Chair Database Team Chair Improper Payment Issues DOT Chair NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 5

Organizational Structure Key Governance OMB To be launched Governing body P. L. 106 -107 Work Groups GMLOB PMO ACF Consortium Do. ED Consortium Future Consortium NSF and Government-wide Initiatives Work Groups Grants. gov PMO Grants. gov Find and Apply Grants Policy Committee Grants Executive Board Service Providers Execution team Execution Teams Existing entity 6

What is Grants. gov? • A single source for finding grant opportunities • A standardized manner of locating and learning more about funding opportunities • A single, secure and reliable source for applying for Federal grants online • A simplified grant application process with reduction of paperwork • A unified interface for all agencies to announce their grant opportunities, and for all grant applicants to find apply for those opportunities NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 7

Grants. gov Current Status and Next Steps • All 26 grant-making agencies are required to post all discretionary grant programs in the Grants. gov Find • OMB has directed agencies to post in Grants. gov Apply: – 75% of their funding opportunities in FY 2006; – 100% of their funding opportunities in FY 2007. NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 8

Grants. gov at NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 9

NSF Grants. gov Experience • Started Integration in June 2005 – Proposal submitted via Grants. gov look the same as a proposal submitted via Fast. Lane to programs and reviewers • FY 05 – 100% Posted on FIND – 25% Posted on APPLY (25% goal) • FY 06 – 100% Posted on FIND – 80% Posted on APPLY (75% goal) • FY 07 – 100% Posted on FIND – 100% Posted on APPLY (100% goal) NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 10

NSF Grants. gov Experience (Cont. ) • NSF has received 597 application submissions through Grants. gov since June 2005. • This count includes applications submitted to: – Four programs requiring submission through Grants. gov; and – 174 programs in FY 06 where submission through Grants. gov was optional. • When submission through Grants. gov was an option, 1% of the applicants chose to submit through Grants. gov. • Of the 597 submissions, 325 applications were successfully inserted into Fast. Lane (54% success rate). • The 272 applications or 46 percent of applications that were not successful required the applicant to correct problems and resubmit. NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 11

Success Factors • Outreach to the community • NSF’s Grants. gov Application Guide includes step-by-step instructions • Help Desk Support – received almost 100 calls/e-mails requesting assistance • 35 training sessions to NSF staff given by DIS and Policy office NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 12

Lessons Learned • Applicants submitting applications with attachments that are not in PDF. • The PI or Co-PI typed their name differently in various portions of the application and the software could not tell if this was the same person or another individual. • Problems with organizational registration if institution and its branches share the same DUNS • Mac and UNIX issues – Pure. Edge solution being tested • Applicants had varying success in submitting proposals, some taking as many as four attempts before successful insertion into Fast. Lane. NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 13

Grants. gov Implementation 7. NSF downloads submitted application packages and validates and inserts the information into Fast. Lane 1. Applicant* navigates to Grants. gov Website 2. Applicant searches for program announcements 3. Applicant finds a program announcement and downloads application package (Pure. Edge forms) and instructions 5. AOR submits application package to Grants. gov 4. Applicant completes application package * Applicant or Researcher = NSF Activity NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 6. Grants. gov sends confirmation to AOR 8. NSF sends confirmation to AOR and PI 14

NSF’s Grant Application Package • SF 424 (R&R) Forms • NSF Mandatory Forms – NSF Cover Page – NSF Check. List • NSF Optional Forms – NSF Deviation Authorization – NSF Suggested Reviewers – NSF Fast. Lane System Registration • Coming Soon… – Biological Sciences Classification Form – Division of Undergraduate Education NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 15

NSF Implementation in 2007 • Those programs designated required in 06 will remain required in 07 • Unless otherwise specified, optional submission for the vast majority of NSF programs • Will not be used until a Grants. gov solution has been developed for: – Separately submitted collaborative proposals – Fellowship programs that require submission of reference letters NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 16

Required to be submitted through Grants. gov in 2007 • Antarctic Artists and Writers (OPP) • Scientific Computing Research Environments for the Mathematical Sciences (MPS) • Living Stock Collections (BIO) • Advanced Learning Technologies (CISE) • CEDAR, GEM, and SHINE Postdoctoral Research (GEO) • Research in Disability Education (EHR) • Infrastructure Materials Applications and Structural Mechanics (ENG) • Geography and Regional Science (SBE) NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 17

Not Accepted Through Grants. gov • NSF also does not accept applications through Grants. gov for: – – – Submission of Letters of Intent and Preliminary Proposals Changed/Corrected Applications Revisions Continuations Supplemental Funding Requests NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 18

What is GMLOB? • A government-wide solution to support end-to-end grants management activities that promote citizen access, customer service, and agency financial and technical stewardship. • System consolidation • Interoperability – Streamlined processes – Standardized nomenclature – Common interface touchpoints NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 19

Why GMLOB? • Transparency and efficiency in the grants decision making process • Improved access to grants-related programmatic and financial information • Enhanced ability to report on award-related accomplishments • Improved post award monitoring and oversight NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 20

How? • Grants management community will process grants in a decentralized way using common business processes supported by shared technical support services. NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 21

Roles and Responsibilities - GMLOB PMO Roles • Program planning, management and reporting • Consortia activity coordination and Implementation Consortia Leads Consortia Member Agencies • Consortia activity direction and • Consortia participation management • Common solution development support • Consolidate GMLOB reporting and Responsibilities capital planning • Conduct PMO activities – communication, governance support, planning • Coordinate and support Consortia activities, service center implementation, and agency migration • Facilitate work groups for government wide standardization and streamlining • Gather and share lessons learned, best practices, and templates across Consortia • Conduct research and analysis • Provide planning, leadership, business, and program direction • Establish and execute Consortium governance structure • Manage Consortium resources • Define requirements • Provide acquisitions, implementation, and migration planning and support • Define agency business and technical requirements • Contribute to the development and delivery of work products • Contribute resources (funding and/ or FTEs) for program/project management, planning, development, and implementation • Represent agency needs to the Consortia Leads and working groups • Identify risks and issues for resolution or escalation NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 22

FY 2006 Activities NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 23

Current Status • Department of Education (ED) – ED’s core competency is administering and managing thousands of grants that provide educational and vocational opportunities for all citizens. – ED’s approach is unique in that consortium members will have the opportunity to participate in the design of a new, full lifecycle, end-to-end grants management system from the ground up. – ED’s system will be built to work with a large volume of information and transactions suitable for larger grant-making agencies. NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 24

Current Status (Cont. ) • Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Administration for Children and Families (ACF) – Seven agencies and over 80 grant programs already use HHS ACF’s Center of Excellence (COE), including USDA FSIS, HHS HRSA, and Treasury CDFI. – HHS ACF’s systems incorporate all 14 GMLOB grant award processes both for awarding agencies and recipients as well as extensive and flexible post-award reporting mechanisms. – HHS ACF’s systems can manage all types of grants and cooperative agreements, including “earmarks” and noncompetitive projects. NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 25

Current Status (Cont. ) • National Science Foundation (NSF) – NSF will offer the Research. gov web portal that leverages its experience with Grants. gov and the Research and Related (R&R) initiative to provide access to functionality that benefits the research community. – Research. gov focuses on the needs of the grantees by providing them with greater access to the government, streamlined functionality, and flexibility to account for differing agency research missions. NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 26

Research. gov at NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 27

Grants Management Line of Business (GMLo. B) NSF GMLo. B CONSORTIUM TIMELINE • NSF submits declaration of intent • will study being a consortium lead 2005 • 1 st round: NSF picked, along with HHS/ACF, and Dept of Ed. • charter consortium • NSF does market research, submits business case • recruit agency partners • deploy services • sign MOUs 2006 2007 2008 NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 28

NSF GMLo. B Consortium: Why Lead? NSF Benefits Research Community Benefits NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 29

NSF Environmental Considerations Community Needs and Expectations Funding and Other Resource Constraints Mission Impact Political Pressures Research Grants Management and Administration Governmentwide Policy and Standards Agency Needs and Priorities Increasing Complexity NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 30

NSF GMLo. B Consortium Guiding Principles ü Research community must directly benefit from this initiative. ü Services offered must provide a measurable benefit to NSF. ü The approach will be deliberate, modular, conservative, and research community focused. ü The initiative must focus on improvement; cost avoidance, not just cost savings. ü Low cost, high impact offerings that deliver value to grantees will be implemented first. ü Whatever we do, we are going to do it well. ü Capital investments in IT infrastructure will be minimized; intellectual investment in Fast. Lane will be fully leveraged. NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 31

Research. gov Concept NSF will lead a research-oriented consortium based upon GMLo. B goals and the business needs of both partnering agencies and the grantee community. • a collaborative agency partnership will govern the consortium and its resources • Research. gov portal to provide a menu of services for conducting electronic grants business with Federal research agencies • focuses on the needs of grantees while providing maximum flexibility to agencies • recover O&M costs using a feefor-service arrangement NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 32

Research. gov Portal is A new Web portal for research institutions to conduct business with Federal research agencies Initial capabilities may include: • Proposal status • Project reports • Federal financial reporting and payments • PI profiles • Research Focused “Find and Apply” services NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 33

Research. gov Timeline TIMELINE • GMLo. B Pilot with USDA/CSREES deployed • Pilot demonstrates joint grant application status Conceptual service rollout plan • Establish hosting environment • Gained both technical and business lessonslearned 2006 • Pilot portal and initial set of services 2007 • Portal and initial set of services deployed as production system 2008 NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 34

Research. gov is important • Continues our leadership in advancing e. Grants management initiatives • Allows us to continue to evolve our grants management systems and work processes • Tremendous support in community for improved “e-services” tailored to research community Current Status • CSREES Pilot • OMB 300 Business Case Future Initiatives • Develop Research. gov portal • Release of grant application status module involving 2 or more research agencies NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 35

Research. gov (Cont. ) • Leverages next generation of Fast. Lane and GMLo. B to fulfill vision of a single Web portal • Provides grantee community greater access to the government and streamlined functionality • Allows federal research agencies to sign up and offer services to their grantees using Research. gov tools • Uses portal approach for maximum flexibility (helps account for differing agency strategies) • Allows the best tools to be offered from any agency in the consortia • Leverages proven functionality and expertise with minimal capital investment NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 36

FY 2007 Goals NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 37

Next Steps • Institutionalize GMLOB initiative government-wide • Deliver quality service to the grantee community • Establish and maintain strong service provider/customer partnerships NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 38

FY 2007 Priorities • Standards and Streamlining – – Develop standard roles and taxonomy Define FM/GM interface standards Define functions and subfunctions Develop strategy for common post-award reporting services • Communications and Outreach – Execute communication strategy to communicate GMLOB status and direction to grant-making agencies • Migrating Agency Support – Provide migrating agency guidance • Identify Full Landscape of Consortia Leads NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 39

FY 2007 Consortia Recommendation • To name additional Consortia Leads that will provide grant management technical services to the 26 grant-making agencies. Scope • To give the 26 grant-making agencies a voice in recommending additional Consortia Leads that will provide grant management technical services to them. • Transparent process for recommending consortia Outcomes • Recommendation based on ability of recommended consortia to fill existing gaps in the consortium landscape • Viable consortia with named partner(s) Key Dates 9/22/06 February 2007 Recommendation submitted to OMB announces new Consortia Leads NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 40

Backup Slides NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 41

Federal Grants Milestone NSF Role PL 106 -107 passed to streamline and standardize grants process (1999) NSF led and participated in multiple PL 106 -107 workgroups Grants. gov initiated with a focus on Find and Apply (2002) NSF provides leadership and resources to the effort Standard funding opportunity developed and approved by OMB (2003) NSF helped lead effort to develop standard format – used NSF Format as basis SF 424 (Research and Related) developed and approved by OMB (2005) NSF led effort to develop and coordinate among research agencies CFO Council creates Grants Policy Committee (2005) NSF Chairs Grants Policy Committee Research project reports standard format launched under NSTC/RBM (2004) NSF had significant role in format development, and now leads the effort GMLo. B establishes grants process flow and Consortia approach (2005) NSF is co-managing partner for the GMLo. B OMB selects Consortia Leads (2006) NSF, HHS ACF, and Do. ED selected NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 42

Current Status Milestone Due Date NSF develops grants strategy and business case for implementing GMLo. B Consortia Lead role June-August, 2006 Agencies submit GMLo. B survey that provides detailed information on their grants management systems August, 2006 NSF submits OMB 300 and FY 08 budget submission September, 2006 2 nd round of Consortia Selection commences September, 2006 NSF completes CSREES pilot September, 2006 Agencies declare intent to be a Consortia Lead or Member FY 2006 Q 4 OMB announces selection of 2 nd round Consortia Leads February, 2007 Migrating agencies execute an MOU with Consortia Lead FY 2007 Q 1 NSF and Government-wide Initiatives 43