Concurrent Sessions and Deep Dives

Are you interested in being part of a global and active community of like-minded individuals who are aiming to transform the due diligence practices into a single one stop shop for funders and grantees. The issues being solved are: a) grantees are subject to many disparate and unclear funder due diligence questionnaires and audits and/or have to implement their own due diligence exercise for their sub contractors/ implementing agents. b) there is an inherent lack of trust and transparency between funders and grantees c) grantees are often unsure of what is required to capacity build their own good grant practices. The solution is an international quality standard called Good Financial Grant Practice (“GFGP”) which defines what is best practice in financial management of grants. It has been developed by an equal north-south partnership, to fit all sizes and complexity of organisation. It is supported by a unique Certification Scheme where independent, external auditors certify an organization is working in compliance to the requirements of the standard. The standard has been in place since 2018 and is used in 55 countries across the globe - where it is getting rave reviews. The next phase is to take this standard to ISO level. Join this session to learn more about the GFGP journey, how it was developed, how it can help you and your sub contractors and how you can join in this journey and help shape the next phase.

This session will provide a comprehensive review of the key issues faced by academic institutions when negotiating clinical trial agreements with pharmaceutical and biotech companies, with specific in-depth focus on the following provisions: publication rights, ownership of intellectual property, confidentiality, indemnification and study subject injury. 

In this session, two key opinion and thought leaders from the research industry will discuss their very distinctive, yet successful career pathways. Careers in research administration do not sit solely into two baskets, pre-award, or post-award. As the research industry continues to evolve, so does the work needed to support these new methods. The skills gained in and throughout varied positions, help pave one’s career pathway. The ability to leverage those experiences and parlay them into the next opportunity is key. Multiple business functions provide exposure to processes throughout the research administration enterprise and enable a diversified set of skills. Each steppingstone, though it may not seem like a direct route, provides the building blocks for success. Research administration professionals by design, pay attention to details, follow the rules, and have a common goal to improve organizational funding. Identifying steps for navigating career silos and assessing opportunities are proven tools for career growth. Presenters will provide insights on how research administration professionals can leverage their experience and expertise to impact their careers.

For successful grant applications it is important to understand how the agency review process works and how to tailor the application to make best use of that process. This session will present detailed information about the similarities and differences in the review process at major federal and selected private funding agencies. Participants will learn the stages of the review process, how reviewers are chosen, the role of the program officer, what reviewers look for in successful proposals, how to become a reviewer, and why research administrators can benefit professionally and personally from serving as a reviewer. Questions from the audience will be welcomed.

You were once among the employees you are now trying to supervise. This session will look at the increased pressure for administrative and clerical efficiency and the most problematic areas for first-time supervisors: human relations and technical knowledge. A supervisor must be able to think and act in terms of the total system of operation, which includes defining and assigning priorities, planning and organizing, and programming and coordinating the operational tasks of a department so that the objectives of both the department and the institution as a whole are achieved. Furthermore, the first-level supervisor must excel in interpersonal skills.

This elementary guide will cover all the basic principles and concepts of networking, including the power of gifts, as well as instruments and (very) practical tips on how to establish and maintain contact, build trust, create an abundance mindset, focus on mutual value and relevance, and finishes with a Do and Don’t list.

This presentation will focus on providing participants with the skills and knowledge required to be able to interpret an external audit opinion that is prepared in accordance with international auditing standards. The presentation will include: • Brief introduction to international auditing standards • Different types of audits • Definition of external audit • Responsibilities of the external auditor • Engagement letter • Difference between external and internal audit • Interpretation of the external audit report: The unmodified (unqualified) audit opinion vs modified (qualified) audit opinion • Going concern • Subsequent events • Brief introduction to internal controls • Management reports (letter) • Management representation letter

This session provides an opportunity to learn what is new and what is being developed within the National Institute of Health's (NIH) programs, policies, and budgets. In this comprehensive review, participants will learn about the newest policy updates and how their respective institutions may be impacted. Participants will also have the opportunity to ask questions about new and existing policies and procedures. Topics include recent and upcoming changes to NIH policy, compliance requirements, and much more. 

Most university auditors are familiar with Effort Reporting systems that account for salary charges on federal grants. However, the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR, 200) focuses on the system of internal controls to support compensation compliance which allows grantees to streamline compensation controls that may reduce administrative burden placed on faculty and institutions receiving federal funds. Accounting for salaries and fringe benefits continues to be a major area of concern for the research enterprise at the federal and university level. A national cohort of Institutions created a control framework for compensation compliance that allows for alternatives to traditional effort reporting. This panel session will focus on the activities of a national cohort of Institutions. including the creation of the internal control framework that efficiently meets the requirements of Uniform Guidance 200.430 Compensation – Personal Services an overview of the framework, examples of institutional implementations, Phase I research survey results, feedback from the audit community, current environment of institutions that have transitioned as well as the benefits of having a national standard will be highlighted. The panel will also address the audit and compliance perspectives for the internal control framework. This presentation will provide attendees with the needed information about alternative methods of compensation compliance that are growing within the university community.

This session will explore the issues raised by an ACTUAL international collaboration between a US institution, a foreign university, and multiple for-profit entities that wanted to commercialize IP arising from the collaboration. The “Bayhl-Dole” Act, covering rights in intellectual property developed with US government support, requires very specific provisions in the licenses and other documents related to commercialization of the IP developed under the grant or other agreement. Additionally, there are limitations on the scope of any license granted related to the place of production and to the organizations that can be involved. This session will delineate just what each university and each company must do to reach agreements that comply with US and other laws.

Many research funders require a statement on how your research will change the world beyond producing research outputs. Researchers are increasingly asked to describe the short and long term societal impacts and how they are going to get there. If our researchers are required to do it then this is emerging as a new requirement for pre-award grants administrations. This session will feature theory and a take-away tool we published in the Journal of Research Administration to help you help your researchers who are drafting impact strategies in grant applications.

A Data Management Plan is a document that details the data expected to be acquired or that is generated during the timeline of a research project. Details should include collection, management, storage and other carefully detailed information that many federal sponsors require. Changes are coming soon to DMPs submitted to one major federal sponsor: the National Institutes of Health's Final Policy for Data Management and Sharing will become effective January 25, 2023. Will your institution be ready?

This session will cover new developments related to proposal and award policy at NSF. NSF staff will provide a comprehensive review of upcoming changes to the Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (23-1), as well as information about the January 2023 migration from FastLane to Research.gov. 
 

In this session, attendees will learn specific thought processes for achieving extraordinary results in every walk of life AND be challenged to unlearn self-canceling ideas by implementing the following 5 principles: 1. "To each, according to their abilities" 2. "A talent buried is a talent lost" 3. "The time is now!" 4. "Do not concern yourself with your neighbor's wages" 5. "Those who work will receive more, those who rest will lose everything"

We’ve all been there. We have our own stories of Post-Award antics that can’t possibly be true, yet they really happened. Anecdotes aside, what was the lesson learned? What was the new policy or procedure that came as a result of that ‘too crazy to be true’ scenario. This session is meant to illuminate some of the blind spots we may have not known existed, until that one Principal Investigator pushed the envelope. Let’s unpack some of our own experiences in Post-Award and share outcomes that can be utilized as best practices for others in need of new ideas.

It is easy to become lost and burdened with regulations which were originally designed to protect us from repeating research abuses of the past. We can easily forget that history and why the system of research protections in place today exists in the form that it does. In this session we will take a tour through the history of research, the foundations of the Belmont Report, and explore the ethical underpinning of our research ethics review systems. We will also explore contemporary research ethics issues. For those new to research, a good history lesson goes a long way to a greater understanding of why the research oversight process exists and how it came to be structured the way it is.

Researchers at all levels must secure external funding to conduct their research projects, and well-written grant applications are required to be competitive. However, not all researchers are skilled writers or have prior experience developing a grant application. This session will describe a research administrator-led one-on-one grant writing partnership developed in a school of nursing focused on supporting pre- and post-doctoral trainees and present 10 years of outcomes. Four key elements to a grant writing partnership that will be discussed include regular meetings, setting a timeline with milestones, writing and editing support, and attention to administrative documents. Participants were nearly twice as likely to be funded as compared to non-participants (p=.02). Partnerships can be adapted to the skills of research administrators and needs of researchers. While writing workshops in academia are common, leading a one-on-one grant writing partnership is an innovative way for research administrators to expand their contributions to their institution's research enterprise.

What is servant leadership in regards to research administration? Why is it important? Three experienced research administrators will discuss how their definition of servant leadership has developed over time—and how they have come to define themselves as servant leaders. This session will focus on how servant leaders can be highly effective and foster a good team culture with a special focus on development, as well as discuss how the COVID-19 pandemic changed what servant leadership means and looks like in practice.

Human capital is the most important asset in today’s organization. Proper management of these resources is vital to promote health and growth in today’s disruptive, ever-changing environment of research administration and beyond. Being a leader now calls for a different mindset and a new approach to drive organizational performance and enhance team development. How do you support your team? Do you need to shift, reassess and tweak your approach based on the situation at hand or teams you work with? This session will review the major difference in management styles, provide examples of skills needed to manage and lead teams and help you understand what approach would work best to achieve a positive outcome for your strategic plan.

This presentation will provide the new research administrator or those less experienced with cost share, the basic knowledge necessary for its understanding and use. Participants can expect to learn the types of cost sharing, how it should be calculated, and the essential elements of any cost share contribution to be in compliance with the Uniform Guidance.

Colleges and universities receiving direct federal awards are typically required to have a federally negotiated facilities and administrative (“F&A”) cost rate in order to receive reimbursement for indirect costs. For most people, however, the process of preparing, submitting, and negotiating the F&A rate proposal under the Uniform Guidance can appear overly technical and painfully detailed. This session is intended for anyone who is new to the F&A process or would simply like to better understand the basic requirements, inputs and objectives that make up this calculation. Discussion session will include a high-level perspective regarding how the regulations, financial and other data inputs, and submission and negotiation processes work together and will provide practical insight into the application of the F&A rate to the organization’s awards. Participants are encouraged to share their role in as well as their experience with the indirect rate process at their institution.

All good things must come to an end, including sponsored research awards. While not quite as complex as starting an award, compliant closeouts are just as important as the beginning and the middle of the grants process. There are many things to know about the proper procedures for award closeout in order to stay in sponsor's (and auditor's) good graces. This session will provide a guide to regulations, policies, procedures, timelines and best practices for closing awards.

Problematic PI's: It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. At some point in your career as a Research Administrator, you will need to know how handle a difficult Principal Investigator (PI), and this course can give you some best practices on how to do so. Learn about the typical expectations/responsibilities of PIs, the consequences of an underperforming PI, how to guide your investigators to become the best they can be, and what to do when you have an underperforming PI. This course will touch on pre- and post-award management, Human Resources/Personnel issues (including hiring/firing, staff supervision, skill-building, coaching for performance, and resolving conflict), financial/auditing concerns, and real-world examples.

This session will share strategies to research administration professionals on how to conduct a self-professional assessment to contribute to their longevity in the profession, professional growth, and career advancement in any sector.

Given many organizations are now recruiting with the intention of allowing a fully remote environment, the process of leading a research administration team just became much harder. This talk will examine the pitfalls, success stories, and ongoing challenges of managing research administration operations in business world lacking our traditional brick and mortar structure.

Whether you are pre-award or post-award, the grant life cycle involves a set of interrelated and connected actions. This is true regardless of a unit-level or central-level perspective. Actions taken in the pre-award stage, impact and can determine actions in the post-award stage. Attendees will learn how to pro-actively ensure post-award success by identifying and implementing small actions during proposal preparation, submission, and award acceptance. This interactive session will provide concrete examples of gaps in the award lifecycle and specifically discuss the small but important pre-award actions that could improve post-award processing and avoid costly headaches in the long run. Attendees will leave this session with action items they can share with colleagues for improved processes at the unit level or central level.

Projects with multiple tasks or components can be a beast to set up at the proposal stage and then manage at the award stage. In addition to needing a clear statement of work describing each individual part of the project, budgets should be carefully considered to support the stated scope and to allocate resources to the areas that will need them. At proposal stage DOD or DOE often request multi-task budgets, which require additional details by task such as labor hours, hourly wages, and a detailed bill of materials. These additional details add to the complexity of the budget and how research administrators manage the budget development process. Once awarded, excellent project management skills are needed to then ensure that costs are correctly assigned. This concurrent session will focus on how research administrators can approach budgeting by task with their PIs, how to use Excel to your advantage (without being an Excel ninja), and how to help your PIs manage the budget and allocate costs appropriately. We will also discuss common pitfalls of task-level budgeting and special considerations when budgets are cut during negotiation or revised during the period of performance.

Research development is an emerging, integrated and strategic approach to increase research activity and success in the U.S. and globally in all types of institutions. This session will describe components of successful research development structures, staffing, services and best practices to enhance the quality of proposals, develop investigator capacity, strengthen internal and external collaborations, and establish metrics of success.

This session will discuss contract negotiation skills. The session will present and examine the various critical skills and knowledge needed to successfully complete a “win-win” negotiation, where all parties leave happy to have entered into the contract. It will look at negotiation skills not only from the university perspective but also from the industry perspective.

Research administration is an important role that covers all aspects of grants management, from application to managing the funds, monitoring goals and milestones, and tracking funder regulations. However, the funding environment of US agencies, Federal government, and most major European funders are becoming more demanding with several regulations and procedures. These administrative regulations and procedures meant to bring clarity and fairness to the application processes have had the unintended effect of making foreign-based investigators less likely to apply. This is especially so because most institutions lack the administrative structures and capacities to comply with issues regarding the administrative and implementation processes. To ensure that African research institutions attain the highest standards in research administration to enhance successes in grant applications, overcoming these challenges is necessary. To assist other African institutions to build up their research support structures, the Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research, Ghana successfully applied for an NIH/G11 grant for capacity building. The presentation will highlight the grant’s achievements in setting up offices of research support and training of staff in tertiary institutions in Ghana, Sierra Leone and Liberia in West Africa to emphasize the importance of capacity-building grants for research administration in the developing countries that lack the wherewithal to succeed with grant applications.

A review of notable federal grant compliance cases involving fraud, financial mismanagement, violation of agency regulations, and remedies for noncompliance will be described. Examples of both proper and inadequate systems of internal controls will be identified and discussed. Several multifaceted social and ethical issues that arise in federal grant governance will be analyzed and their resulting effect on the public trust will be explored. Participants will gain practical insight and discern best practices from this highly interactive presentation.

This session will provide an overview of federal guidelines for protection of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). It will specifically focus on the evolution of the Department of Defense guidelines, from inception through the present day and discuss compliance issues about how institutions of higher education can achieve the level of Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) required for work on research projects containing CUI.

This session will cover situations when multiple reviews (e.g. IRB, IACUC, COI, IBC, RSC) are needed, the recommended order of reviews and the information each group needs from the others. It will also discuss communication best practices when certain reviews are outsourced.

This interactive session will help participants develop a greater sensitivity on when to stop (red light), when to go forward (green light) and when to slow down (yellow light) when faced with a variety of compliance issues in research administration. A series of work scenarios will be presented in a game format and participants will analyze and discuss the "best" next step. 

Researchers seeking federally-funded grant awards from the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation and Department of Defense must disclose their significant financial interests, as well as "other support" that relates to foreign interests, affiliations and awards. The regulations governing these potential conflicts of interest are complex and ever-changing, and also vary as to which senior personnel designated in an application must offer such disclosures. It is important for research institutions and researchers to have knowledge of the National Institutes of Health's Conflicts of Interest policy, the rules governing NIH "commitment" conflicts, and the guidance clarifying "just in time" reporting. The purpose of this session is to discuss critical guidance that distinguishes financial conflict of interest reporting requirements among the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation and Department of Defense. The session also will offer best practices and insight on how researchers (and universities) should proceed when facing allegations that they neglected to report necessary disclosures.

Participants will identify methods for better communications to aid in the negotiation process and develop tools and techniques. Areas of focus will include, level setting at project kickoff meetings, effectively redlining agreements, streamlining communicating internally and understanding risks and barriers. We will also evaluate why these barriers exist and what solutions can be implemented to expedite the negotiation process.

Recent federal attention to research security and integrity has placed a spotlight on the efficacy of organizations' export compliance programs--or lack thereof. As a result, many research organizations are searching to hire experts in the export compliance field in order to centralize its compliance program. This presentation, however, provides analysis, tools and resources to identify areas of an organization's export compliance risk and a framework to decentralize its export compliance program into central research administrative offices, which work together to ensure a formidable and compliant export controls program.

The Department of Defense (DoD) funds almost half of all federally sponsored basic science research at US academic institutions, but new principal investigators (PIs) can be intimidated. This concurrent session will help research administrators feel confident about coaching PIs to engage with DoD program officers and find potential research opportunities. We will discuss how DoD mission agencies review proposals and how that should affect the way in which proposals are developed for success with DoD. Finally, we'll discuss some common compliance issues that research administrators should be familiar with and how they affect proposal development.

Participants in this session will learn best practices for putting internal controls and guidance as organizations have transitioned to working remotely during the pandemic. With changes in UG and our workspaces, there has been an increased focus on internal controls, award performance, and CARES Act funds treatment. This session will discuss how to deal with the additional pressure institutions and organizations have been placed under to manage their sponsored awards appropriately.

Faculty at primarily undergraduate institutions typically have a high teaching load, low time-allocation for sponsored research, and may have relatively few colleagues in their research area of interest. When requests for proposals are considered, the institution may not have the capacity to pursue a research project or theme. One potential solution for research capacity is to identify and develop capacity around research center themes. At Research 1 high capacity institutions, this process is relatively short, results in allocating funds for 8 to 10 new faculty lines, and research capacity may be built within a year. At primarily undergraduate institutions, this process is slower, needs a multi-year commitment by department heads, deans, and others to fund the new faculty hires, and will eventually build a more stable capacity around a well-chosen research center theme. Identifying research themes that align with the mission and physical capacity of the campus is a critical process to facilitate long-term success. The process may include the Provost Council, Department Head Council, and other guiding administrative teams.

This session will provide best practices for grant management. It will help identify high risk areas and help grant managers better prepare for an audit. It will provide an overview of what an Auditor is looking for when performing an audit.

Research development offices are continuously being tasked to do more with less resources. This session will demonstrate how forming simple communication strategies and leveraging tools of a funding discovery service can enable a small office or one-person department to scale their efforts to proactively promote and efficiently share information about funding opportunities across a large (or small) institution. Real-world examples from multiple institutions will be provided with ideas for how to deliver targeted communications to specific groups that maximize exposure to the most relevant funding opportunities for their research interests and, in turn, increase proposal activity. Discover how to broaden the scope and scale of your funding communications capabilities, while actually lessening your workload.

This session will update attendees on the latest developments in federal policy, enforcement actions and good compliance practices related to improper influence concerns arising from foreign, political and financial pressures. A university compliance official will provide a real world example of how one institution has implemented their program with insights on gaining buy-in and support from senior leadership.

The federal government has stepped up its civil and criminal enforcement directed at academic researchers and the institutions they represent. This session led by experienced criminal defense practitioners will help you learn how to identify and avoid high risk situations that could land your institution or its researchers in the cross hairs of a government investigation. Topics covered will include research misconduct, False Claims Act liability, and U.S. export control regulations and related civil and criminal penalties.

We regularly read about how the identification of unallowable costs may lead to requirements for reimbursement federal and other sponsors of research. Less known, however, are incidents of reimbursement to sponsors due to the identification of misconduct or non-compliance in the conduct of the research. This session will provide an overview of the ‘non-financial’ events that may lead an organization to having to reimburse a sponsor for some or all of the claimed research expenses. More specifically, the panelists will discuss the steps leading to the identification of research non-compliance and/or misconduct (from allegation to determination) and the procedures that an institution may have to undertake to process the reimbursement.

Research leaders understand that employee engagement is a key factor in an individual’s performance and in the creation of top-performing teams, but it is not always evident how to foster the type of environment where employees feel comfortable and can make meaningful contributions. How does a leader achieve this “engagement magic,” where the stars of personal fulfillment and team performance align? This session is an international case study from two research-intensive organizations, in the U.S. and Canada, which describes their experiences with employee engagement and the impacts on strengthened team performance. The session will provide an overview of employee engagement practices and tools that can be used to improve engagement and promote inclusive work environments. Participants will be provided an opportunity to consider the applicability of these tools to their settings and to share their own experiences with employee engagement and moments of engagement magic.

As the demand for transparency for the disclosure of financial interests and outside activities grows, and increasingly focuses on international activities, conflict of interest reviews begin to overlap with export control screening. This session will critically evaluate specific areas of overlap between the two fields, describe how the overlap can be leveraged to improve efficiency, and demonstrate how programs can expand risk identification and issue escalation. Particular attention will be paid to the growing trend of combining COI and export control functions into a single office focused on research security.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest funder of biomedical research in the world. The sheer volume and breadth of research, programs, forms, and associated policies covered by the agency is staggering, overwhelming many a research administrator. This session has a two-fold function: first, it serves as an overview of the NIH, including pre-award and post-award…a succinct introduction to the NIH for any researcher or research administrator. Second, the session includes a structure and discrete resources for introducing faculty and/or staff to the NIH (complete with presentation options for different audiences).

Prior to the widespread adoption of TV-streaming services (Disney Plus, Paramount Plus, CNN Plus, HBO Max), families across America were channel surfing with clickers and cable boxes, recording their favorite shows on VHS. But, similar to ‘land-line’ telephones, cable boxes have gone by the wayside. Now, at the tip of your fingers and smart phone, one can easily access any content, live or on-demand: sports, news, TV shows, and movies! Perhaps less ideally, while previously university export control officers were focused on applying for export control licenses when applicable, for shipment of technology or physical items, or were focused on screening Non-US persons and visitors on campus, in the current political, regulatory, and risk landscape, export control officers have experienced their inboxes explode regarding proposal submissions, outside affiliations, in-kind support, financial and non-financial contract negotiations, and research security more broadly. Now, institutions are forced to think of solutions – is there a Google Chrome or an Apple TV that will consolidate the breadth of issues and decisions required securely and compliantly conducting research in an era of both increased global collaboration and heightened risk? Huron's research security resident expert Greg Smith and University of Illinois Export Compliance Officer Kathy Gentry will facilitate this conversation.

It is no secret that Research Institutions as well as individuals, PI's and others, have received considerable scrutiny by federal enforcement agencies in the past several years not to mention attention grabbing headlines about fraud and worse. This session will address the legal framework of the federal False Claims Act and similar statutes as applied to federal grant programs, warning signs of trouble and how to avoid issues. We will also address whistleblower protections and good practices.

With so many rules regulating sponsored research, it’s a wonder that anyone is able to get anything approved. Have you ever wondered how some institutions are able to work around certain restrictions or take on more challenging terms that are typically “no-no’s where you work? In most cases it just requires getting creative and nothing more than minimizing risks.

This session will discuss issues and tricks related to managing grants from within a department; not a central office. Whether your institution has a central office or not, there are certain things that are just different when you are working on submitting and managing grants from within a department. The session will cover finding funding sources, pre-award submissions and post-award management of grants. The session will also identify additional ways to provide ongoing support for investigators; including trainees, fellows, associates, staff and faculty researchers.

How do you feel when your voice isn’t heard? What can you do when your organization appears to be inclusive and diverse but you still feel sidelined? When you feel you have something to contribute, how do you get your voice heard? Part of this session will include pathways to help an individual work through similar situations when confronted. In addition, share tools for leaders on how to engage minority team members to ensure them a voice. This session encourages audience interaction to share experiences and suggest tools and tactics.

Covid 19 has resulted in a substantially larger increase in the need for talent in the field of Research Administration and most of us had no plan! We battled employee engagement and retention at the same time we were promoting research administrators because there was finally a spotlight on us and our career field. Now, we wonder will the circumstances change when the crisis has passed? We know our employers are making significant changes to their hiring practices to ensure the safety of potential and current employees, so we need to remain nimble to navigate the changes and elevate our own strategies to keep up. This session will look at the issue of Hiring Selection and Assessment, identifying trends such as candidate scarcity and candidate abundance, the priority of working conditions, and how to let people know you are hiring. I will use personal experience to discuss Internal Mobility at my own midwestern academic medical center that required a new look at internal (hiring) policies, personal development, equipment purchases, and space demands while navigating financial mitigation strategies and restrictions on spending during the pandemic panic. Finally, we as a group will reflect on the time spent Rethinking Strategy for managing, hiring, and training during a pandemic, requiring audit of processes and workflows, evaluation of talent acquisition tools and metrics, development of new training manuals, and a whole lot of empathy and compassion during interviewing and negotiations.

This is an interactive session in which case studies of actual problems encountered by NIH Grants Management are presented to the audience, and then the audience is invited to engage in problem-solving scenarios to find solutions. The case studies illustrate warning signs with research grants in trouble and suggest solutions to correct or at least mitigate problems as early as possible. After discussion, the NIH outcomes are provided to help recipient administrators understand how NIH Grants Management addresses unique situations to reach solutions.

The session will explain the findings of the study which was aimed at asking investigators how can we as research administrators improve the workings, AND how can we better facilitate them. Speaking to researchers have actually opened up a lot of critical ideas that as a research administrator I was not able to learn. Sharing those with fellow research administrators will enable them to see if they can some of the findings in improving their faculty satisfaction levels and hence augment their career advancements.

The European X-Ray Free-Electron Laser Facility (European XFEL) is a multinational non-profit company and research facility of superlatives: It generates ultrashort X-ray flashes—27 000 times per second and with a brilliance that is a billion times higher than that of the best conventional X-ray radiation sources. The world's largest X-ray laser is opening up completely new research opportunities for scientists and industrial users by producing X-rays of unique quality for studies in physics, chemistry, the life sciences, materials research, and other disciplines. Located in the Hamburg area of Germany, the facility comprises scientific instruments for a wide range of experimental techniques, supported by around 750 scientific, technical, and administrative staff members. After 10 years of construction and 1.54 billion euros of investment, user operation started in September 2017. Since then, administrative processes were continuously adjusted and improved, complicated by not having enough funds to finance the number of staff members needed to properly run the facility. In addition, this young company needed support in shaping its culture—including the development of vision and mission as well as the definition of its company values—to facilitate the identification of staff members and scientific users with this unique research location. Today, thanks to a set of coordinated managerial and administrative actions, the European XFEL facility is operating very well, satisfying users and staff members alike. The 12 international shareholders agreed on increasing their contributions to implement an overall restructuring that was successfully realized, leading to an increase in the number of staff members by 30%. Currently, the company is working on its “Strategy 2030+” plan, including a major extension to its administrative and scientific capabilities. Are you curious about how we dealt with this long list of challenges in the last four years—not to mention during a pandemic? I look forward to sharing with you how we combined the most important administrative and management tools to pave the way to a successful future. This, in particular, includes providing a working environment that encourages users and scientists to develop research approaches that contribute to solving societal challenges.

We will identify the basic components of a successful seed grant program, from pre-award application processes to post award, how to keep the recipients compliant, accountable, financial oversight and outcomes reporting. The Pop Centers at OSU and UM have each had Seed Grant Programs for over 15 years. Keeping track of multiple seed grants in various stages of development, with budgets ranging from $3,000 - $85,000 has its challenges. OSU and UM will team up to explore all of this plus expectations of various NIH funders and funding mechanisms.

The four speakers on this topic have all held, or currently hold, roles as leaders (President or Chair) of their respective national Research Administration Societies – USA, UK, Denmark, and Australia. Leadership of professional societies is undertaken on a voluntary basis usually for a defined time (one-two years). Leadership in an organisation is often much longer term. What are the leadership lessons learned from volunteer-based roles that can be translated into organisational roles (and vice versa)? This session will focus on leadership lessons and how the experiences in one role affect the way we personally operate in our day jobs. These include: • Bringing people with you (whether the Society’s Board or the membership) and the parallel that has to one’s staff and the wider academic or research community • Managing through change, e.g. organisational restructure, budget constraints, new initiatives • Balancing strategy and governance with operational delivery • Creating and using one’s networks to gather information and to have influence • Sharpening your leadership skills by using them simultaneously in two different settings A related point not often considered is the possible detrimental effect of a volunteer leadership role on one’s day to day job. To perform well in a volunteer leadership role takes time, understanding and creative effort! Examples will be shared of the effects this has had in some senior leader’s organisational roles.

The success of human research studies lies on the element of trust – trust in investigators and the process they conduct the studies. This session will review a variety of key points along a “research cycle” of a human subject study which include IRB review, post approval monitoring, reporting responsibilities and the most recent disclosure requirements. The conduct of human subject research should be facilitated and monitored through a study’s life cycle. The “active engagement of study participants” will be utilized to separate the 3 stages, i.e. Before, During, and After, in the discussion, in order to enhance the quality of human subjects studies.

We probably would all agree that our jobs as a research administrator come with lots of challenges and stressors including interpreting less than clear sponsor guidelines, meeting short deadlines for proposal submissions, staying informed of constantly shifting government regulations and agency requirements, and assisting investigators with high, and sometimes unrealistic, expectations. Would we, however, agree that after a long day at the office, we look back and remember laughing and having fun? Research has shown laughter reduces stress, strengthens social connections, and is at least one of the keys to success at work. Michael Kerr, author of The Humor Advantage: Why Some Businesses are Laughing all the Way to the Bank says “having a sense of humor is about adopting a spirit of playfulness and fun. It’s about appreciating the incongruous events and absurd moments that flitter by us every day.” Come and join me as we explore the benefits of humor in the workplace, share some of those moments that made us laugh and learn how to bring more lightheartedness and fun to our jobs as research administrators.

Research administration as a profession involved finances – whether it is budgeting during pre-award, setting up payroll during award set up, or monitoring, forecasting and closeout during post award. Many research administrators do not come from a finance background and learn “on the job.” The speakers for this talk will delve into routine accounting language and principles relevant to the research administrator with a non-finance background, present case studies and solutions, and lead discussion into best practices for the day to day financial aspects of research administration, including some Excel tips and tricks!

Research administrators are a different kind of investigator, often utilizing a range of resources to excel at our jobs and become a key knowledge source. As external funding remains highly competitive, we can help our institutions identify and obtain every competitive advantage possible. First, this session will discuss ways to identify and promote the strengths at your institution. Next, we will discuss strategies to gather intelligence on external sponsors to give your researchers insight on what sponsors are looking for, including current and future hot topics. We will walk through the wealth of information that can be found on databases like Federal Reporter. Finally, we will discuss other creative mechanisms to gather research intelligence. As an added benefit, all strategies discussed in this presentation can be implemented at your home institution for free!

Is the idea of implementing a new eRA system in addition to your current workload too daunting? Cayuse and Attain Partners have a solution for that! Implementation partners are the wave of the future for growing research administration offices. Cayuse and Attain Partners assisted the University of Wyoming with a successful Cayuse SP implementation. Cayuse provides the software platform and technical expertise, while Attain Partners wraps streamlined business processes around the new software functionality. The University of Wyoming championed the entire implementation process by providing solid leadership and decision making. Join us for an interactive discussion with representatives from the University of Wyoming, Cayuse, and Attain Partners as we discuss strategies for a successful eRA system implementation using a team approach.

At the end of the Trump Administration, a National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM-33) was issued to “strengthen protections of United States Government-supported R&D against foreign government interference and exploitation” while “maintaining an open environment to foster research discoveries and innovation that benefit our nation and the world.” This is part of the effort to combat foreign government efforts to “acquire, through both licit and illicit means, ... to induce American scientists to secretively conduct research programs on behalf of foreign governments or to inappropriately disclose non-public results from research funded by U.S. Government sources” The Office of Science and Technology Policy the National Security Council staff, fellow Cabinet agencies, and other Federal agencies developed guidance to implement NSPM-33 The Guidance covers: • Disclosure process. o information on potential conflicts of interest and commitment • consequences failing to disclose requested information—administrative, civil, or criminal penalties • disclosure forms and instructions • common standards for research security program requirements for use by Federal agencies, as well as a standard and centralized research security program certification process for use by research organizations. This session will cover the Guidance and the needed institutional response.

How can research administrators stimulate research cluster productivity? Institutional structures, processes, and environments can inadvertently limit team-based research clusters, interdisciplinary networks of researchers who organize to solve key challenges facing society. Conducting research is an essential goal of faculty around the world; it is also a significant aim of most academic medical centers. Scientific research cluster publications stimulate social development and technology innovation as well as faculty satisfaction. The study population included NIH recipients of the Collaborative Program Grant for Multidisciplinary Teams (RM1), which supports applications from a highly integrated team of investigators addressing a single-focused, ambitious, and challenging project that cannot be addressed by individual R01 applications. This presentation will identify significant factors that influence research cluster performance and will provide implications for practical research cluster administration and future academic research.

This session will cover lessons learned for the conduct of clinical research during the height of the pandemic and discuss different ways to think about the conduct of clinical research (e-visits, study design, telemedicine, outsourcing) moving forward.

Whether you are new to research administration, adjusting to new responsibilities (or sponsors), or an experienced grants manager leading your own team, developing practices that reflect our constantly changing environment can be a challenge. This session provides a detailed examination of pre-award processes from inception to submission, with suggestions for tools that support good communication, collaborative partnerships, and consistent work product. We’ll also address factors at the pre-award stage that may impact post-award management.

This session is geared towards providing Office of Sponsored Program staff an in depth look at NIH Prior Approvals. The COVID-19 pandemic has placed an insurmountable level of difficulty on the ability of researchers to achieve the goals and aims of their projects within the committed awarding periods. As a result, the amount of prior approval request received by the NIH has increased. While the NIH is committed to offering maximum flexibility to its grant recipients, there are policies and procedures to adhere to, to ensure such request are compliant with federal regulations. We plan to provide attendees with examples of accurate prior approval submissions as well as a behind the scenes perspective of what NIH Grants Management Specialist look for and how these prior approval requests are reviewed.

It is scientifically and ethically imperative for researchers to understand it is a key commitment to our research participants to report the results of the clinical trials, so that we can advance knowledge and make informed medical decisions about health care. This session will discuss the most recent federal mandates, requirements and enforcement of clinical trials disclosure and the best practice. The presenters will share the approach of Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, to establish an effective program for clinical trials registration and results reporting at their institution. Rutgers’ Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) has taken a proactive approach to identify key issues and facilitate investigator compliance within ClinicalTrials.gov records through the HSPP website and continued education and training.

Frequently circumstances arise on sponsored projects that cause the University to take a risk. Examples include pre-award costs, awaiting no cost extension decisions, budget re-alignment requests, and purchasing materials and supplies within the last 60 days of an award. We will discuss the University's method for evaluating and tracking these risks to help mitigate the level of risk taken in the conduct of research. Our procedures and protocols will be shared with the audience in a fun, lighthearted environment which will identify with the famous song “The Gambler,” written by David Schlitz and made famous by singer Kenny Rogers. We will focus on some notable lyrics: "Know When to Hold 'Em, Know When to Fold 'Em; You Never Count Your Money, When You're Sittin' at the Table; Every Hand's a Winner, and Every Hand's a Loser; and If You're Gonna Play the Game, Boy You Gotta Learn to Play it Right."

This presentation will provide an update on key legal cases, regulatory changes, and other legal events impacting federal research grants. The federal grant law area has been dynamic in recent years in both the federal courts and in the form of various agency actions. FTLF attorneys carefully track these developments and regularly present on such issues to industry audiences. This session will cover key legal events through the fall of 2022.

The financial research administration regulatory environment is under constant review. Many research administrators are tasked with addressing internal audits, annual Single Audits, sponsor audits or “reviews”, state audits and Office of Inspector General (OIG) audits. While there are similarities in how to prepare your organization for any type of audit, there are distinct and important differences regarding the type of audit to be conducted at your institution. During this session the presenters will lead discussions regarding preparation for an audit, expectations of different types of audits and how to work with auditors.

Retaining knowledge in the ever-changing world of research administration plays a vital role in achieving our day-to-day tasks. It takes creative strategic planning within the remote, hybrid, or in-person offices we are navigating in 2022. The goal is to achieve maximum efficiency without the sacrifice of quality so staff can hit the ground running. In this segment we will review various methods we use within our own teams to assist with this process including cross training, video recordings, workflows, and SOPs.

Due to the rapid increase of people living with Alzheimer’s Disease, the nation established the goal of curing the disease by 2025. To achieve this goal, many areas of science that were previously unrecognized or underutilized will be vital in contributing to the mission of the National Institute on Aging. NIA is working to partner with institutions and organizations from a broader spectrum of science and technology to make significant impacts and advancements towards this objective. This presentation will focus on the current and future global impacts for this area of research, funding available, as well as the challenges of leading an organization through rapid growth during a pandemic. Additionally, the challenges of trying to determine and establish a future state for a biomedical research organization will be discussed

This presentation will primarily focus on common NSF OIG audit findings that relate to award recipients, as well as the various controls recipients can implement to avoid those findings. To a lesser extent, the presentation will also introduce audience members to what the NSF OIG is, how the NSF OIG operates, and how the NSF OIG's mission relates to the award recipient community.

When responding to an OIG or other government investigation involving grant administration, fraud, or research misconduct, an institution needs to know when its researchers may need separate representation. This session will explore the different circumstances where that threshold arises, and discuss how the use of indemnity and arbitration clauses helps maintain a confidential, common interest and attendant legal privileges between and institutions and their research professionals.

In our case study session, we will talk about why we feel transformational leadership is an effective leadership style that when performed efficiently can help empower and motivate staff while increasing job satisfaction. As our institution's research portfolios continue to grow, we as leaders must also transform our leadership styles to grow with them, and continually pivot to address new pain points. We hope that by sharing our experiences from the last five years through a major reorganization pre-pandemic followed by the unforeseen challenges within the pandemic that we continue to identify and attempt to solve with limited resources, even 2 years later. We expect an open communication about leadership styles during this session will resonate with research administration leaders facing similar experiences and will encourage an open environment to share “lessons learned” about challenges and successes.

Confidentiality Agreements are often the first step in establishing a relationship with a pharmaceutical or biotech company for a research project. The company wants to ensure that any confidential or proprietary information that it discloses to an academic institution is kept confidential. It is critical that academic institutions understand the intent of the confidentiality agreement and negotiate terms that are clear, not overly broad and reasonable. This session will introduce basic information about negotiating confidentiality agreements, including what terms are appropriate and why, as well as instruction on how to effectively negotiate revisions in an efficient and professional manner.

This panel session will cover the responsibilities of the grants management specialist (GMS), Team Lead (TL) and grants management officer (GMO) from different Institutes/Centers within NIH. Participants will be able to gain better insight into how the different IC's within NIH operate. This is a great opportunity to get answers to the questions such as "Why are you denying this request when XYZ Institute approved the same request on another award?"

The National Science Foundation (NSF) Office of Inspector General (OIG) reviewed 134 plagiarism cases involving 137 researchers against whom NSF made findings of research misconduct to provide insight into plagiarism as it relates to NSF-funded research and to offer plagiarism prevention strategies to educational institutions based on our experience investigating plagiarism allegations. We found that these researchers often were employed in junior academic positions, recent degree recipients, educated in non-U.S. institutions, and/or committed plagiarism in multiple NSF proposals. We also found that the most common reasons these researchers gave for their plagiarism suggested they: did not know what constitutes appropriate citation; thought they used appropriate citation when they did not; did not understand what kinds of text require citation; considered appropriate citation less important in certain document sections; recklessly incorporated sources into drafts; and/or rushed through document preparation. Based on our analysis and investigative experience, we suggest institutions consider implementing the following strategies in the areas of institutional culture, training, support, and document submission: foster cultures of research integrity; publicize institutional research misconduct policies; establish targeted faculty and student training; emphasize the consequences of plagiarism; provide better support to proposal writers, especially those who are inexperienced or have been previously unsuccessful; make plagiarism detection software freely available; and consider more substantive pre-submission review for proposals.

The coronavirus pandemic forced government, university, and industry organizations alike to rapidly adapt to a fully-virtual posture. The Office of Naval Research instituted a fully virtual workforce program which will become the “new norm” beyond the pandemic. In this session, two current ONR employees will describe the pilot, its impact on their work performance, productivity, and changing communication with stakeholders both inside and external to the organization.

In the field of research administration we often rely on those around us to help spread budding knowledge, gain insight, and explain the refrain of “it depends.” Just like there are gray areas within our profession, we can experience similar issues when searching for professional development advice. Knowing that a person is skilled or has potential is not always enough and supervisors are not necessarily your best source of guidance. Denzel Washington once said, “Show me a successful individual and I’ll show you someone who had real positive influences in his or her life. I don’t care what you do for a living—if you do it well I’m sure there was someone cheering you on or showing the way. A mentor.” Whether you are or seek a mentee or mentor, both play a vital role in shaping their future and the future of research administration. These relationships can be found in many shapes, sizes, and places, including both inside and outside of your current institution. This dynamic presentation outlines how to prepare and approach a mentorship from four individuals who have experienced and benefited from different types of mentoring relationships. Whether you are new to being a mentee/mentor or are a seasoned pro, all are welcome to join! We learn best when we learn together!

The most common question people ask is What is the essential thing I need to excel in my career? The universal answer: Communication. We cannot take our communication skills lightly. No matter where you sit, pre-award, post-award, IT, Compliance, and everywhere in between, you must know how to interact positively and proactively with people at all levels. This session will highlight the importance of good communication skills in the workplace and how to develop them.

Successful proposal submission and award management requires effective communication across all of research administration. It begins between the investigator and their pre-award administrator. Pre-award administrators receive information about the project which is not only key to the submission of a compliant and competitive application, but also the timely receipt, review, and setup of an award. When pre- and post-award administration does not occur in the same office, it can be a challenge to determine what information will help ensure the smooth transition from an application to an award. What can we do as pre-award administrators to best utilize the institutional processes for the collection and transfer of data associated with research projects to post-award administrators, including compliance and congruency review? This session will take advantage of the pre- and post-award experience of its presenters to review and discuss challenges, pitfalls, and strategies for clear and timely communication within the pre- and post-award partnership.

This session will focus on the workflows surrounding PI transfers both into and out of institutions. There are many moving pieces that need to be tackled when PIs change institutions and often the PI transfer planning needs to begin well in advance. All angles of PI transfers will be considered. Diverse participation is encouraged from departmental, central and leadership administration. Topics to be considered: 1. PIs submitting proposals before they come into the new institution 2. PIs bringing students/research staff in when they transfer 3. Transferring grants in 4. Onboarding PIs 5. Off-boarding PIs 6. Departing PIs and spending institutional money 7. Transferring grants out 8. Transferring students/research staff out 9. Remaining students and other staff after PI departure 10. The politics of PI transfers

We will present on post-award grants and financial management policies and procedures. We will cover administrative requirements topics such as changes in project and budget related policies, change in scope, change in recipient organizations. We will cover public policy requirements on research misconducts and financial conflict of interest. We will give an overview on the new other support requirements. We will cover topics on allowable and unallowable costs with examples. We will also provide NIH updates that are relevant to international institutions. Also, present real world case studies in an interactive session to engage the audience and provide solutions on managing different scenarios.

Your institution is investing in a new, cloud-based ERP. Now what? A successful implementation requires significant planning and a high degree of coordination and communication across the institution. This session reviews best practices to achieve a successful implementation with a focus on addressing the following: • Business process transformation: how do I adapt my processes to my changing system? • Roles and responsibilities: which internal stakeholders do we need involved in the implementation, and how do we ensure there is no conflict with their day jobs? • Education and training: what does training look like and what resources do we have? • Data conversion methodologies: what if I have bad data, do I still convert it to the new system? • Report development: what will my new system be able to tell me? • GL and subledger reconciliations: which critical decisions need to be made to facilitate efficient and effective financial reconciliations in the new environment?

This session will provide an overview of current threats to academic research. It will specifically focus on attempts by third parties to illicitly acquire research through a variety of techniques, to include cyber exploitation, witting and unwitting recruitment, and insider threat. It will also discuss countermeasures that institutions can employ that will protect their research and assist in compliance with National Security Presidential Memorandum 33 (NSPM-33).

In this session, I will provide an overview of the preliminary results of my dissertation research. I will collect data through interviews with research integrity personnel and analysis of related documents.  I will provide a holistic description of RCR training goals, content, target audience, format, methods, resources, and challenges at R1 institutions. These data will help research integrity personnel understand the current RCR training landscape, provide valuable benchmarking data, and inspire training program improvement.

Panelists will share their experiences from the recent implementation of the “Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery” (RECOVER) study. Originally titled “Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection” (PASC), the RECOVER study represents a $1.2B investment by NIH in the fight against “Long COVID.” The project, comprised of over four master protocols and over 225 performance sites, involves a high degree of coordination and has provided an opportunity to explore practices to help expedite study start-up and reduce administrative burden. *Hub and performance site payment structure *Data and specimen sharing arrangements *Enrollment tracking *Issues involved in leveraging multiple NIH clinical research networks *Management approaches to best support and a complex project across multiple institutions *Attendees will network with other professionals in the field to collaborate on the cutting-edge information presented.

Research administration continues to undergo significant change as we look to better serve our researcher and leadership stakeholders. Research organizations have focused on streamlining processes, implementing information technology solutions, enhancing reporting, and redefining their operating models. But have we done enough? And what comes next? In this session, the speakers will outline their vision of research administration for the next 20 years, discussing where organizations and people may want to invest as they continually pivot to meet the needs of a growling complex international research model.

To establish and retain confidence in a research misconduct (RM) investigation and its outcomes, the research record needs to be acquired effectively and analyzed in depth. Many variables are involved in both data acquisition and data analysis during RM proceedings including: - What data are relevant, and why are these data relevant? - What do I (or my team) need to do to acquire these data? - Once I (or my team) have relevant data: how do I utilize forensic evaluation techniques to understand the research record? During this discussion at the SRAI 2022, we will utilize a case study approach starting with an anonymous allegation of potential research misconduct and map out 1) a data sequestration strategy based on potentially relevant data and 2) data analysis strategies specific to the data type and anticipated data formats acquired. We will also explore helpful tools and technology to assist you and your teams throughout these processes.

Central versus Departmental research in academic and non-academic systems vary by organizational characteristics, yet there is a long list of research resources necessary for optimal research conduct. Departmental research operations are fundamental service lines supporting investigator led, and sponsored research. This session is not about pre-award and post-award resources. This session is about identifying key resources to centralize and how best to optimally organize the research unit.

A substantial portion of federally funded research may be provided outside of the University or Research Facility by third parties that are engaged through subawards or procurement subcontracts. These relationships with third parties require compliance with crucial funding requirements; while managing a subaward is a shared responsibility of primary fund recipients and their subrecipients, subcontracting for goods and services triggers specific procurement and administration rules. Whether primary recipients pursue subawards or subcontracts depends on the nature of the activities to be funded and the overall place of these third parties in a primary recipient’s research strategy. The purpose of this session is to discuss key considerations in pursuing subawards and procurement contracts in federally-funded research as well as other management essential elements including allocation of human subject research responsibilities, managing risk, conflicts of interest, and foreign influence considerations among other key topics.

This session will provide perspectives on submission and non-financial transactions from the Recipient Organization - Department, School and Central Administration - and the NIH. We will cover topics from proposal review to award close-out, and explore Just-In-Time, pre-award spending, prior approval requests, and close-out documentation from the viewpoints of the institution and the NIH. We will also discuss strategies for effective engagement among the PI, the NIH and the institution.

SBIR and STTR projects can provide valuable research and financial opportunities to small businesses and the universities with whom they collaborate, but they also present a unique set of challenges. From Conflicts of Interest, IP and Data Rights to invoicing and payment; these projects, which are designed to promote research, have a very real potential to hinder it. This session will highlight the important Program requirements often overlooked by the Small Businesses and shed light on the challenges of partnering with Research Institutions. We will discuss the proposal process, the contract terms, flow down clauses, and various risk mitigation methods available.

This session will provide an overview of the establishment, operations and oversight of service centers. Service centers, especially core facilities, are an important mechanism to maximize the use of research resources and also to realize administrative efficiencies. These benefits can only be fully achieved if service centers are operated in a compliant and efficient manner. Topics for this session will address leading operational practices and include definitions, description of federal regulations, guidance for calculating rates, and considerations for subsidies, compliance and common issues.

Large-scale multi-disciplinary programmes addressing global challenges are growing in number. They encourage international collaboration by diverse organisations to address areas such as climate change, agriculture and food security, gender equality and infrastructure. Research institutions in the Global South and North are, however, relatively new to this way of working and do not always have the necessary infrastructure in place to establish and facilitate these new types of partnerships. How teams form and collaborate from the beginning can set the tone for the ensuing years of implementation. In this session on international collaboration, we use samples from UK-led programme AFRICAP (Agricultural and Food System Resilience – Increasing Capacity and Advising Policy) which sits within the Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) cohort. Through this lens, participants will be introduced to our research identifying factors that can facilitate or hinder new international and interdisciplinary collaborations and ideas on how to build effective global and interdisciplinary networks. Learning can be applied by those involved in establishing or developing such partnerships, allowing them to provide a robust foundation for global challenges research consortia.

There have been many workshops, sessions, webinars, and articles about what skills are needed to be an “effective” Research Administrator. While we consider what “effective” means, and there may be varying opinions on that depending on our role and type of organisation, we realize that what was needed in past years, may in fact not be relevant in 2022. It is broadly accepted that Research Administrators require a mix of content, technical, and relational skills. How has this balance changed over the years as regulations have become more complex and research itself more collaborative? This session, presented by a panel of experienced research administration leaders will explore what it took “back then” to be effective and successful, and what has had to change through the years to maintain and increase the level of effectiveness. We will discuss how this may lead to some insights into the skills required in the future. Our goal is to provide participants with broad guidelines on the skills needed to plan and implement a career pathway in research administration.

This case study will present best practices and lessons learned from a year-long initiative to support a working group of investigators seeking to improve their responsiveness to funding opportunities and potential research impact. This group served as a pilot for our office to create a model for helping discipline-specific or "theme-focused" teams and working groups build the necessary development capacity and management infrastructure to increase efficiency and competitiveness in their funding pursuits. Using the model prepared for this team, we will discuss what worked, what didn't, and share the tools and systems we developed along the way.

The session will review the requirements for subrecipient monitoring under OMB Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200. Topics under this session include: subaward vs. contractor determination, institutions policies on UG, risk assessment, risk mitigation, subrecipient monitoring, and more. The session will also briefly discuss FFATA reporting. This session will be interactive and encourages participants to share ideas from their respective institution.

We know that in today’s technology environment there is significant support for scientific research (biological, chemical, mathematics, physical sciences, social sciences and engineering) and support for the arts and humanities. However, support for science and the arts goes back centuries. This session will take a light hearted look at support for science and the arts and compare and contrast how this support has changed since the Renaissance. This session is intended to enlighten and entertain the audience as we travel through the centuries exploring scientific advances and how they were funded.

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic that led to a national shutdown in March 2020 complicated the efforts of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center to implement a new online Grants Management System known as “CS-RAMS” in April 2020. With a significant growth in research and after decades of paper-based routing, original signatures, and endless back-and-forth emails, Cedars-Sinai implemented CS-RAMS to allow for system-to-system grant submissions as well as electronic approvals and routing, enabling grant preparation and submission to be more effective and efficient. Prior to the Go-Live date, the team planned in-person training sessions for the research community. However, with the rapid development of COVID-19, the transition to a fully remote work environment, and an abrupt culture change, the team quickly revised the strategy to prepare virtual training sessions. We faced many challenges with the system implementation including technical glitches and training hurdles, but we also experienced many successful triumphs along the way that will educate others facing similar situations.

In this presentation facilitators will present different types of research metrics (the 3 P's) and provide guidance for the different uses of these metrics in the operational and strategic management of the research enterprise. We will discuss publicly available benchmarking, institutional data, and discuss how data can be used to inform decision making. Participants will be able to use the information presented during this session to support better operational performance at their institution and will understand how to gather and use publicly available data (e.g., HERD, NIH Reporter) to inform their research strategic planning and goal setting processes.

Effective communication and strong relationships between the faculty and administrative staff can be key to successful and painless management of a research grant. Administrators have plenty of stories involving stressful meetings with faculty - the PI of a study becomes overwhelmed with the financial and administrative management of grants, and in turn the administrator becomes frustrated when it feels like the faculty simply "don't want to listen". The goal for this session is to provide an overview of techniques, as well as an informal conversation between attendees to share real-life examples. Attendees will learn the best ways to tailor their communication style by identifying the needs of their faculty or department and improve their communications and confidence in their position and responsibility.

It is the role of Human Research Protection Programs (HRPP) to protect the rights and welfare of human participants in research. Have a knowledge of the background behind the research ethics regulations as well as the principles and requirements that must take place before research studies are executed are essential. In this session, we will take a journey to explore history of ethics board (ie, IRB) and how they have developed into HRPPs to promote a culture of the highest ethical and legal standards for the conduct of human research as well as explore the function and operations of a Human Research Protection program – including the role and responsibility of the IRB, COI, etc.

While accepting to take on a new role/responsibility you find that the previous leader/manager just walked away from the same very fire that you agreed to walk into? What do you do first to put out the many fires, how to gain confidence from an already burned out staff, how to cool down your PI's, and how to rebuild from the ashes.

Participating in a Federal education grant is multi-faceted yet creates opportunities for impact and change across the nation. In order to fully maximize a grant’s potential, it is important to familiarize oneself and each grant staff member with an understanding of allowability, reasonableness, and allocability of Federal financial regulations. Oftentimes grant professionals have grand and creative ideas, but these initiatives also need to abide by Uniform Guidance standards to ensure compliance. Collaboration across pre-award, central office project staff, and post-award teams is imperative in meeting the financial and programmatic needs for all involved. It is our goal within this session to provide examples, strategies, and lessons learned with fellow Federal award grantees through the use of case studies and open dialogue to help every grant find their path to success.

This presentation will encourage you to look further and to approach issues from a different angle. It will inspire you to look beyond the obvious, and to try thinking beyond things as they traditionally are. To illustrate creative thinking, this interactive talk will detail examples of novel ways to use existing data stored in research information management systems: the multiple uses of on-line faculty profiles, performance management, finding candidates for vacancies and reviewers for grant proposals.

Many institutions offer post-award training for fund managers and other financial personnel, but little to no training for Principal Investigators, Project Coordinators, or other study personnel. Since managing contract and grant funding is a team effort, it's important for all involved parties to understand best practices for managing research funds once received. This course is designed to give Department Administrators the skills they need to train their study personnel (including PIs) everything they need to know to be good stewards of research funds. Topics include: tips for teaching non-finance savvy personnel how to read ledgers and Notices of Awards (NOAs), how to give an overview of responsibilities (which office is responsible for what?), creating department-specific How-To guides and forms, conveying expectations and assigning responsibilities, and common pitfalls to avoid (e.g. acronym overload, too much technical detail, etc.).

An analysis and discussion of applicable policy changes and recent publication of guidelines applicable to the U.S. Research Enterprise in response to threats of non-compliance, theft of intellectual property, and manipulation of research award programs. This discussion will include an analysis of the most recent policy, guidelines, and approaches to research security program operations including methods and tools available to support organizational research aspirations.

Red Team reviews are commonly used in industry and increasingly in academia to ensure proposal quality before submission. The Red Team normally is tasked with (1) evaluating and recommending improvement fixes and/or (2) evaluating and scoring the proposal according to the solicitation evaluation factors. This session will present an overview of the Red Team process and its application to academic research proposals, especially large, complex projects that are becoming more common as they also become more competitive. Topics will include a definition of Red Team reviews, its role in proposal development, composition of the Red Team, timing of the review, necessary documents for review, and a sample review matrix.

There is an adage in computer programming: “Version 1 is always wrong.” The idea being that whatever you build, however you build it, you will always look back and say: “I wish I had done this differently.” Such is the process of the evolving eRA platform. This discussion session will focus on helping functional administrators manage the constant evolution of their eRA platforms. Such iterative and continuous improvement processes are critical to identifying pain-points, optimizing business processes, managing changes, and adapting to agency requirements and institutional policy changes. Our discussion will focus on how to work with end-users (e.g., researchers, administrators, technical staff) to identify concerns and support user adoption, as well as planning for when and how changes should be implemented. The session will finish with an open discussion with attendees to share their perspectives on these issues.

Recently the IUP Research Institute overhauled its website. This afforded us an opportunity to re-imagine the format and content of the web pages and purpose. We are not website professionals but our experience in pre-award, post-award and fiscal grant management gave us a unique perspective on how to approach this daunting task. We will share our approach, research, process and results. The website of the sponsored research office/ departmental research office is a valuable resource for researchers and university administration. Providing a clear path to information on the website encourages research and collaboration and reduces frustration with the process.

Implementing a new electronic research administration system can be an overwhelming task. The session will outline the needed items to start this process, who should be involved, is there a true need for a new system, and what the panel has learned through the process. Each university is unique so we are including a diverse panel in order to allow the audience to gain prospective from multiple universities.

The majority of our faculty lacked the understanding of who owned data created from research projects as well as accessing and using data that they believed they had a right to because of their role as a faculty member. Myself and two faculty from our research committee were tasked with researching already existing policies for data ownership within our institution (which was almost non-existent) and then finding we had to expand our research to other institutions and write a policy based on what we found that coincided with our own existing research policies. If our school was having this issue, there must be other research administrators in the same predicament who didn't know where to start and how to guide their researchers. This session will take participants from where our school started to completion of a data ownership policy and where it stands today.

Grant submissions require a lot of paperwork. A small proposal may run 50 pages. An R01 may ran anywhere from 75 to well over 100 pages. A complex grant can be substantially larger. What is the point of all the documents? This presentation will walk through proposal components from standard and more complex funding opportunities, discussing why each proposal component matters and to whom. Next, we will discuss strategies for communicating this insight to your researchers. Finally, we will discuss strategies to help your researcher craft the proposal component to clearly address the desired information.

The increased complexity and changing nature of research administration led us to evaluate the models we use institutionally to provide services to faculty. This session will look at Yale’s approach to regionalizing research administration services for academic and non-academic departments. Our organization, Faculty Research Management Services, seeks to raise the level of service to Principal Investigators while increasing compliance and mitigating risk. During this session we will discuss how the current model was designed and implemented on our campus, provide detailed examples of Pre and Post Award services to faculty and provide an opportunity to discuss all aspects of this model.

During this open discussion session the presenter will present some of his own stories of working with difficult personalities and other challenges faced from coordinating grant proposals (both pre and post) with other University offices, sub-awardees, and sponsors. The audience will also be invited to share their challenges and stories and discuss best practices on how to overcame theses common pitfalls and obstacles. Strategies and techniques for self-care and finding support will also be discussed.

Funding is a major priority for institutions but finding and securing grants is a time-consuming and increasingly competitive process. To succeed you need to gain insights into the complicated funding landscape, discover hidden opportunities and make informed decisions. This presentation will focus on using data and intelligence to win at the funding race.

Research administrators can ready their institution to use the most widely available DPI for individuals: Open Researcher and Contributor ID (orcid.org) as it becomes a common requirement in research management systems, and is referenced as a solution for the recent OSTP Guidance on NSPM-33. ORCID iDs are unique identifiers for researchers - their iD is their digital name and their ORCID record is a hub storing connections to their activities. The presentation will demonstrate ORCID use by funders and research institutions and discuss how ORCID use can help comply with research security requirements, including timely updates to NSPM-33 guidance and agency requirements.