55th annual meeting program

PRELIMINARY PROGRAM ~ JULY 25, 2013

AUGUST 4-7, 2013WASHINGTON HILTONWASHINGTON • DC

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF UNIVERSITY RESEARCH ADMINISTRATORS

This year’s program theme is “Investment – Commitment –Rewards.” Investment may take many forms – ourinstitutions invest in us as research administrators, we

invest in ourselves and through our efforts we invest in ourinstitution’s research enterprise. In addition, we invest our timeand talent in NCURA and NCURA invests in us through itsnumerous and varied professional development and networkingofferings. Commitment is also multi-faceted – we arecommitted to our careers, to professional development, tocontinuous learning and to being the very best researchadministrators we can be. We are also committed to the successof the research enterprise in the world, institutionally andglobally. NCURA is committed to the same – our organization isbuilt upon a strong commitment to provide the very bestprofessional development, networking and continuous learningopportunities to research administrators from around the world.Rewards stem from the investments and commitments made byus, our institutions and NCURA. These rewards are valuable andinvaluable, tangible and intangible. How does one value orquantify the reward of making a new professional connection atthe Annual Meeting who later helps you solve a long-standingissue or problem at your institution simply by sharing their ownexperiences and providing advice. The rewards that are realizedthrough these investments and commitments complete a cycleand generate the momentum for future investment,commitment and rewards.As research administrators we work in a cyclical manner all thetime. We invest time in identifying a funding source andpreparing the proposal with our PI’s. We commit to getting theproposal in on time and we see the reward of our hard workwhen the awards come in. The sponsor invests in the researchand the institution commits to do the work, act as a goodsteward of the sponsor’s investment, and follow the terms andconditions of the award. The rewards take the form ofknowledge created by the work performed and the advancementof the various disciplines supported by our sponsors. The levelof success we experience correlates with the level of investmentand commitment that we and our institutions make. We wouldlike to take the opportunity to recognize this investment andthank our institutions who support us and our professionaldevelopment. This is not an insignificant investment, andcontinued investment is critical for our success, and the successof NCURA.This year brings about a big change in the timing of the annualmeeting. AM55 will be held in August 4-7, 2013. While the timeof year has changed, the outstanding programming andnetworking opportunities that you have become accustomed towill not. Our Program Committee is dedicated to creating thehighest quality programming and offering members a robustprogram complete with 11 tracks and over 35 workshops servingresearch administrators at all levels and across all areas. Inaddition, we will have plenty of networking opportunitiesavailable for NCURA members to connect with their colleaguesfrom across the country and from around the world.

One thing will change with AM55 being held in August; members(and their institutions) will enjoy lower sleeping room rates. Thechange to August may also be a great opportunity to think abouttacking on a family vacation to your annual conference thissummer (the lower sleeping room rates will be available threedays pre and post conference). There are always lots of thingsfor families to do in Washington, DC in the summertime, and thebest part is many of them are free! Family members of all ageswill be occupied for hours with visits to the family-friendlyhistorical sites, arts and culture, theatre and performing arts,shopping, restaurants, and other outdoor activities. Put awayyour wallets, no other city offers as many fun, free attractions tofill your days. Explore Washington DC’s fifteen Smithsonianmuseums, plus the National Zoo – all free of charge! And, don’tforget CAMP NCURA for those of you who are travelling withlittle ones, there will be plenty of activities planned to keep yourloved ones occupied, with a home base right at the Hilton.Many of your favorite tracks will be on the program with a newspin and a new name for AM55. The ‘Clinical’ track will beshowcased as the “Biomedical” track and the ‘Human Capital’track as the “Career Skills” track. The scope and breadth of thesetracks have expanded over time and the name changes areintended to more effectively communicate the content of thesetracks. In addition, this year’s program will include a new corecurriculum track and the return of the Senior Forums. The “CoreCurriculum” track will be a comprehensive offering of primersessions covering the entire lifecycle of an award. Sessions in thistrack are designed for those new to research administration orlooking for an opportunity to explore a new area of interest. Weare also bringing back the Senior Forums, which are sessionsdeigned for our advanced level members where critical topicscan be discussed in greater depth. These forums will be theequivalent of two consecutive concurrent session time slots toallow for the in-depth discussions.We hope AM55 will increase the value of each institution’sinvestment in their research administrators, as well asdemonstrate that NCURA appreciates these investments and thecommitment our members have made to continued learningand professional development. On behalf of the entire AM55 program committee, we wish youa happy and healthy 2013, and we look forward to seeing you andyour families in August!

Vivian Holmes, Bruce Morgan, Susan Zipkin55th Annual Meeting Co-Chairs

WelcomeNCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC

2

thank youNCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC

3

Program CommitteeNCURA VICE PRESIDENT

VIVIAN HOLMES

PROGRAM CO-CHAIRSBRUCE MORGAN, University of California-Irvine

SUSAN ZIPKIN, Consultant

BIOMEDICALJAMIE CALDWELL, Loyola University Chicago

THOMAS WILSON, Rush University Medical Center

CAREER SKILLSMICHELE CODD, George Washington UniversitySAMANTHA WESTCOTT, Children’s Hospital

Los Angeles

CORE CURRICULUM CYNTHIA HOPE, The University of Alabama

ANTOINETTE LAWSON, University of Maryland, College Park

DEPARTMENTS, INSTITUTES, CENTERSCSILLA CSAPLAR, Stanford University

HEATHER OFFHAUS, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor

FEDERALJEAN FELDMAN, National Science Foundation

ALEXANDRA ALBINAK MCKEOWN, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

INTERNATIONAL JOHN CARFORA, Loyola Marymount University

JAMES CASEY JR., University of North Carolina at Chapel HillANNIKA GLAUNER, ETH Zurich/University of Zurich

POLICY/COMPLIANCE THOMAS COGGINS, University of South Carolina SUZANNE RIVERA, Case Western Reserve University

POST-AWARDJOSEPH GINDHART, Washington University

LOUISE GRIFFIN, University of Massachusetts LowellJIM WRENN, IT Works, Inc.

PRE-AWARD DEBBIE NEWTON, The University of Tulsa

ROBYN REMOTIGUE, Mississippi State University

PREDOMINANTLY UNDERGRADUATE INSTITUTIONS PAMELA NAPIER, Agnes Scott College

JERRY POGATSHNIK, Eastern Kentucky University

SENIOR FORUMSBARBARA COLE, University of Miami

KIM MORELAND, University of Wisconsin-Madison

WORKSHOPSJUDY FREDENBERG, University of Montana

CRAIG REYNOLDS, University of Michigan-Ann ArborCATHY SNYDER, Vanderbilt University

thank you to the following sponsors for your generous support!

NCURA MEMBER SPONSORS

NCURA CONTRIBUTING SPONSORS

NCURA 55TH ANNUAL MEETING SPONSOR

General InformationNCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC

4

CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL EDUCATIONNCURA is accredited by the National Registry of CPESponsors. This program is administered by the NationalAssociation of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA) tosponsor and award Continuing Professional Education(CPEs) to accounting professionals. Certified PublicAccountants will need to complete a CPE credit slip for eachsession you attend in order to receive CPE credits. CPE slipsare available at the NCURA AM55 Concierge on the TerraceLevel. Slips must be deposited in the CPE boxes located atthe NCURA AM55 Concierge desk. In accordance with thestandards of the National Registry of CPE Sponsors, 50minutes equals 1 CPE. Depending on the sessions andworkshops you choose to attend a maximum of 29 CPEcredits can be issued for NCURA’s 55th Annual Meeting.Fields of study available include Specialized Knowledge and Applications (S), Management (M) and ProfessionalDevelopment (P).

REGISTRATIONRegistration is available at www.ncura.edu and is availableto any individual engaged in the administration ofsponsored programs in a college, university, or teachinghospital. Please Note: Learning objectives for each sessionwill be noted in the conference program. Please consult thesession descriptions for program level details. The onlyprerequisite for meeting attendance is current involvementin university sponsored research programs. There is noadvanced preparation required to attend sessions. Thisconference is a “group-live” offering. For informationregarding administrative policies such as complaintresolution and refund, please contact our office at 202-466-3894.

NCURA is registered with the NationalAssociation of State Boards of Accountancy(NASBA) as a sponsor of continuingprofessional education on the NationalRegistry of CPE Sponsors. State boards ofaccountancy have final authority on the

acceptance of individual courses for CPE credit. Complaintsregarding registered sponsors may be submitted to theNational Registry of CPE Sponsors through its website:www.learningmarket.org.Discussion Groups and the Keynote Address will not beeligible for CPE Credits.

OVERVIEW OF CONCURRENT SESSIONS AND WORKSHOPSBASIC assumes some basic, fundamental researchadministration knowledge.INTERMEDIATE assumes basic knowledge and the sessionsintroduce and develop topics that exceed basic knowledge.Sessions focus on building grant and contract competency.ADVANCED assumes mastery of the subject and the sessionfocuses on in-depth knowledge or a broader range of topics.Sessions focus on mastering more difficult and complexscenarios.SENIOR AND SENIOR FORUM assumes that the member haspolicy level responsibility.OVERVIEW provides a general review of a subject area froma broader perspective.UPDATE provides a general review of new developments .

55TH ANNUAL MEETING MENTOR/MENTEE PROGRAM

Would you like to volunteer to serve as a mentor for the55th Annual Meeting? Would you like a mentor for theconference to help you navigate the myriad of sessionchoices and grow your peer network?

Information available at:http://collaborate.ncura.edu/NCURA55thAnnualMeeting/Meetings/VolunteerOpportunities/MentorProgram

6 WORKSHOPS SCHEDULE-AT-A-GLANCE

7 SUNDAY WORKSHOPS24 TUESDAY SENIOR FORUMS

SATURDAY • AUGUST 3, 20134:00 – 7:00 pm

25 REGISTRATIONWELCOME LOUNGE

SUNDAY • August 4, 20137:30 am – 5:00 pm

25 REGISTRATION8:30 am – 5:00 pm

25 WORKSHOPS (Additional fee required)Noon – 1:30 pm

25 WOR KSHOP LUNCHEON FOR FULLDAY SESSION PARTICIPANTS, FACULTY AND EVALUATORS6:15 – 7:00 pm

25 RECEPTION7:00 pm

25 SUNDAY DINNER 8:30 pm

25 ENTERTAINMENT BY THE CAPITOL STEPS9:00 pm

25 REGIONAL HOSPITALITY SUITES OPEN

MONDAY • August 5, 20136:15 – 7:15 am

25 NCURA FITNESS7:30 am – 5:00 pm

25 AM55 CONCIERGEEXPOSITION 2013 7:30 – 8:15 am

26 CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST AND ROUNDTABLE COMMUNITIES8:30 – 10:00 am

26 KEYNOTE ADDRESSOUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT IN RESEARCH ADMINISTRATIONAWARD 10:00 – 10:30 am

26 NETWORKING BREAK

10:00 am – 5:00 pm26 ASK THE NATIONAL

SCIENCE FOUNDATION10:30 – Noon

27 SPARK SESSIONS27 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 32 DISCUSSION GROUPS

Noon – 1:30 pm36 LUNCHEON AND PRESENTATION OF

JULIA JACOBSEN DISTINGUISHEDSERVICE AWARD RECIPIENTS ANDJOSEPH CARRABINO AWARD1:30 – 2:45 pm


2:45 – 3:00 pm45 NETWORKING BREAK

3:00 – 3:45 pm45 REGIONAL BUSINESS MEETINGS

4:00 – 5:00 pm46 SPARK SESSIONS46 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 52 DISCUSSION GROUPS

6:00 pm55 MONDAY EVENING DINE AROUNDS

9:00 pm 55 REGIONAL HOSPITALITY SUITES OPEN

TUESDAY • August 6, 20136:15 – 7:15 am

56 NCURA FITNESS7:30 am – 5:00 pm

56 AM55 CONCIERGEEXPOSITION 2013 7:30 – 8:15 am

56 CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST AND GET INVOLVED FAIR8:30 am – 5:30 pm

24 SENIOR FORUMS8:30 – 10:00 am


10:00 – 10:30 am65 NETWORKING BREAK

10:30 – Noon65 SPARK SESSIONS66 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 70 DISCUSSION GROUPS

Noon – 1:30 pm 74 LUNCHEON AND VOLUNTEER

RECOGNITION1:30 – 2:30 pm

74 SPARK SESSIONS75 CONCURRENT SESSIONS80 DISCUSSION GROUPS


2:45 – 3:45 pm84 SPARK SESSIONS84 CONCURRENT SESSIONS90 DISCUSSION GROUPS


4:00 – 5:00 pm93 SPARK SESSIONS94 CONCURRENT SESSIONS99 DISCUSSION GROUPS

6:00 – 10:30 pm 101 TUESDAY NIGHT EVENT –

Fun in the Summer Time!

9:00 pm 101 REGIONAL HOSPITALITY SUITES OPEN

WEDNESDAY • August 7, 20137:30 am – Noon

102 AM55 CONCIERGE7:30 – 8:30 am

102 ANNUAL BUSINESS MEETING AND CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST8:30 – 10:00 am


10:00 – 10:30 am 110 NETWORKING BREAK

10:30 am – Noon 110 SPARK SESSIONS110 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 115 DISCUSSION GROUPS

Noon ADJOURNMENT

117 KIDDIECORP118 REGIONAL OFFICERS 2013119 NCURA LEADERSHIP

table of ContentsNCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC

5

FULL DAY WORKSHOPS8:30 am – 5:00 pm

WORKSHOP 1THE BASICS: PRE-AWARDFUNDAMENTALS

WORKSHOP 2POST-AWARD BASICS

WORKSHOP 3EARLY IN THE MORNING TO LATE IN THEEVENING: DEPARTMENT RESEARCHADMINISTRATION (DRA)

WORKSHOP 4TRAINING PROGRAMS 101: ENGAGE,DEVELOP, AND IMPLEMENT!

WORKSHOP 5SOLVE THE GORDIAN KNOT AND RULE THE WORLD OF RESEARCHADMINISTRATION AND CLINICAL TRIALS

WORKSHOP 6THE MYSTERY OF F&A REVEALED –UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS, THE TERMINOLOGY, AND YOURIMPORTANT ROLE

WORKSHOP 7THE ALPHABET SOUP OF NIH TRAININGAND CAREER DEVELOPMENT AWARDS

MORNING WORKSHOPS8:30 am – NoonWORKSHOP 8BOOT CAMP ON THE BASICS OFCONTRACT DRAFTING ANDNEGOTIATIONS

WORKSHOP 9AN INTRODUCTION TO WORKING WITHU.S. INSTITUTIONS AND SPONSORS

WORKSHOP 10EXPLORING THE CONCEPTS OF EFFORTREPORTING AND HOW TO MINIMIZE RISK IN THE CURRENT COMPLIANCEENVIRONMENT

WORKSHOP 11SUBAWARDS & SUBRECIPIENTMONITORING: THE BASICS AND BEYOND

WORKSHOP 12SERVICE CENTERS – HOW TO OPEN ANDOPERATE – LEGALLY!

WORKSHOP 13TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, START UPS ANDINDUSTRIAL COLLABORATIONS

WORKSHOP 14FINANCIAL COMPLIANCE – WHAT ARE THETHINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW?

WORKSHOP 15OMB CIRCULAR BOOT CAMP – WHAT YOUNEED TO KNOW

WORKSHOP 16EXPORT CONTROLS AND U(NIVERSITIES):WHAT YOU (AND “U”) NEED TO KNOW!

WORKSHOP 17CREATING A POSITIVE AND CANDIDCULTURE IN YOUR OFFICE

WORKSHOP 18POLICY DEVELOPMENT ANDIMPLEMENTATION

WORKSHOP 19MANAGING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST INTHE CURRENT ENVIRONMENT: LESSONSLEARNED, QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED?

AFTERNOON WORKSHOP1:30 – 5:00 pm

WORKSHOP 20CAUGHT BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE: DEALING WITHTROUBLESOME TERMS FROM NON-PROFITS, FOUNDATIONS AND INDUSTRY

WORKSHOP 21COACHING RESEARCHERS TO WRITESUCCESSFUL GRANT PROPOSALS

WORKSHOP 22COST SHARING: WHY PRE- AND POST-AWARD RESEARCH ADMINISTRATORSNEED TO GET INVOLVED

WORKSHOP 23A TEAM APPROACH TO DEVELOPINGCOMPETITIVE GRANT PROPOSALS

WORKSHOP 24ADVANCED EXPORT CONTROLS: AWORKSHOP ON LICENSING & PROVENEXPORT CONTROL METHODS FOREAR/ITAR/OFAC COMPLIANCE EMPLOYEDAT UNIVERSITIES

WORKSHOP 25HERE COME THE FEDS! WHAT A SPONSORAUDIT IS LOOKING FOR AND HOW TOPREPARE YOUR INSTITUTION

WORKSHOP 26RESEARCH COMPLIANCE BASICS

WORKSHOP 27WORKING WITH INTERNATIONALINSTITUTIONS: ASSESSING COMPLIANCEAND MITIGATING RISK

WORKSHOP 28SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL: DOING IT ALL AT APUI WITH FEW STAFF MEMBERS

WORKSHOP 29CHANGE MANAGEMENT: THE PEEPPRINCIPLES – THERE IS NO I IN TEAM, BUTTHERE IS EI IN SUCCESSFUL CHANGEMANAGEMENT

WORKSHOP 30EFFECTIVE PRESENTATIONS FOR MATURE AUDIENCES

WORKSHOP 31FAR OUT!

thursday, August 8, 2013

FULL DAY WORKSHOP8:30 am – 5:00 pm

WORKSHOP 32PUTTING THE ‘FUN’ IN NIH FUNDING…A DAY WITH NIH!

Workshops Schedule at t Glance

NCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC

Sunday, August 4, 2013

6* Lead Presenter

WorkshopsNCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC


7* Lead Presenter

FULL DAY WORKSHOPS • 8:30 am – 5:00 pm

WORKSHOP 1THE BASICS: PRE-AWARD FUNDAMENTALSProgram Level: BasicThe foundation of a sponsored project is in the ideaconceived by the principal investigator, which then furtherdeveloped into a competitive proposal for external support.As research administrators, we play a key supportive role inassisting principal investigators to navigate the proposalthrough various stages in its development, review andsubmission to external sponsors. Further, researchadministrators are challenged with the ever changing rulesand regulations governing proposal processing. In thisworkshop, we will explore the myriad pre-awardrequirements surrounding proposals through thesubmission and award acceptance phases of the sponsoredprojects life cycle. Also, in this workshop overview, we willexplore proposal preparation and submission processes,examine some key elements of award negotiation andacceptance, apply regulations contained in OMB circulars,and address key compliance areas that affect pre-award.Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn the basics of OMB Circulars.• Participants will examine the various elements of aproposal.

• Participants will explore proposal submissions throughaward negotiation and acceptance.

• Participants will learn the key compliance areas thataffect pre-award.

Faculty: DEBBIE NEWTON*, Director of Research and SponsoredPrograms, The University of TulsaHOLLIE SCHREIBER, Manager, DASNR Sponsored Programs,Oklahoma State University

WORKSHOP 2POST-AWARD BASICSProgram Level: BasicThis workshop will focus on the topics that are mostrelevant in the day-to-day financial management ofsponsored projects while exploring a bit of the history andbig picture in order to explain why it is we do what we do. Itis designed for individuals new to post-award researchadministration and will include discussion of issues such asmanaging overspending on awards, timeliness of financialreports, closeout of awards, collections, cost transfers, costsharing, effort reporting, allowable costs, preparing foraudit, and much more. Come and hear the challenges,successes and lessons learned of the faculty while engagingin hands-on activities to help you apply your newknowledge. Bring your questions, concerns, and yourinstitution’s experience and expect a lively discussion.Faculty: MORNING FACULTY: ROBERT ANDRESEN*, Assistant Director, Research and Sponsored Programs, University ofWisconsin-MadisonAFTERNOON FACULTY: CYNTHIA HOPE, Assistant VicePresident for Research & Director, Sponsored Programs, TheUniversity of AlabamaBONNIEJEAN ZITSKE, Managing Officer, University ofWisconsin-MadisonTAMMY HUDSON, Associate Director, Contract and GrantAccounting, The University of Alabama


WORKSHOP 3EARLY IN THE MORNING TO LATE IN THE EVENING:DEPARTMENT RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION (DRA)Program Level: BasicIn research administration, each day comes with newopportunities, challenges, and surprises, and DepartmentResearch Administrators often are the first responders indealing with many of these surprising challenges! ManyDRAs get these “opportunities,” in areas from proposalinception through award management life cycle, at amoment’s notice – with little concrete expectation of whatthe day will really bring. This full-day workshop will delveinto many aspects of DRA: advocating for faculty, dealingwith a sponsored project from proposal to close out, effortreporting, allowable costs, reconciling, cost sharing andrecord retention. We will also dabble in discussions aboutaudit risks, human resource challenges, and institutionalimpacts that DRAs may face along the way. The session willbe highly interactive and is intended to providefundamental knowledge, tools for handling all manner ofsituations, and strategies for supporting your faculty – tohelp you make it through your day. The presenters committo sharing stories, providing context for these importantissues, and making your day not look so bad!Learning Objectives:• Participants will be able to identify key areas ofresponsibility, with knowledge of underlying federalregulations, impacting work.

• Participants will be able to identify strategies to prioritizework.

• Participants will be able to share best practices. • Participants will be able to return energized to theworkforce to face the next day!

Faculty: HEATHER OFFHAUS*, Director, Medical School Grant Review& Analysis, University of Michigan-Ann ArborSAMANTHA J. WESTCOTT, Manager, Sponsored ProjectsTeam, The Saban Research Institute, Children’s Hospital LosAngelesCSILLA CSASPLAR, Department Manager, Geophysics,Stanford University

WORKSHOP 4TRAINING PROGRAMS 101: ENGAGE, DEVELOP, AND IMPLEMENT!Program Level: IntermediateProviding educational opportunities for faculty, staff andstudents related to sponsored programs is critical for manyreasons, including ensuring compliance with federalregulations. However, in many situations, it is done on acase-by-case basis (if at all….) and may not necessarily meetthe needs of the stakeholders involved. This workshop willfocus on the basics of establishing a training program atyour institution focusing on three pillars of activity:engaging the stakeholders; developing the appropriateprogram; and implementing the program successfully. Thiswill be a highly interactive workshop targeted forindividuals considering a program for their institution.Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn what should be considered beforea training program is initiated.

• Participants will learn about specific tools available whendeveloping a program.

• Participants will learn about ways to market andadvertise their program.

Faculty: TONY VENTIMIGLIA*, Associate Director for Education andCommunication, Office of Sponsored Programs, AuburnUniversityEILEEN NIELSEN, Director of Research AdministrationEducation, Office of Financial Services, Harvard School ofPublic Health, Harvard UniversityGARRETT STEED, Senior Grant Officer, Office of Contracts &Grant, University of Colorado Boulder

Workshops NCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC


8* Lead Presenter



9* Lead Presenter


WORKSHOP 5SOLVE THE GORDIAN KNOT AND RULE THE WORLD OFRESEARCH ADMINISTRATION AND CLINICAL TRIALSProgram Level: IntermediateIn Greek legend, Alexander the Great solved the impossibleGordian knot by severing it with his sword. Fortunately,untangling the complexities of research administration andclinical trials need not invite similar rash action. Indeed, adecision to cut rather than untie the knot, althoughappealing, would be short sighted. Effective solutionsrequire a more thoughtful approach. Participants will enjoya full day workshop to explore the challenges of developingclinical trial budgets for both pharmaceutical sponsoredand NIH funded research studies. During this one dayworkshop you will have an opportunity to learn about therequirements for pre-budget development activities. Thisworkshop will review the components of a clinical trialbudget and what constitutes favorable payment terms.Having learned how to develop a successful budget, we willhave a group exercise and practice skills required tonegotiate contract language terms. This workshop will alsocover post-award financial administration of the trial andcompliance. Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain an understanding of the nuancesinvolved in developing and managing a clinical trialbudget and project expenses.

• Participants will learn the management of multifacetedissues that often arises in a negotiation of clinical trialagreements.

• Participants will increase knowledge of key contractterms and their implications in order to gain confidencein the negotiation process with sponsors.

• Participants will learn the complexities of clinical trialsmanagement; billing processes and their relationship tofinancial compliance.

• Participants will learn clinical trial closed-out proceduresand the management of post-close-out institutionalobligations and responsibilities.

Faculty: LISA BENSON*, Director, Research Administration andSponsored Programs, Connecticut Children’s Medical CenterPATRICIA TRAVIS, Associate Director, Clinical Research, TheJohns Hopkins University

WORKSHOP 6THE MYSTERY OF F&A REVEALED – UNDERSTANDINGTHE PROCESS, THE TERMINOLOGY, AND YOURIMPORTANT ROLEProgram Level: OverviewJust as mysterious as how the Facilities and Administrative(F&A) rate is calculated is where the recovered F&A revenuegoes. This workshop will provide insight into the manyfactors affecting the calculation, recovery, and distributionof F&A costs. The participants will learn how their everydaydecisions have an impact in each of those areas. They willbe better prepared to answer F&A related questions fromtheir faculty and campus administration. The attendees will learn what the F&A rate represents andhow department spending decisions become the basis of thecosting that is reflected in indirect cost pools or direct costbases. A simple exercise will demonstrate how institutionalcosts are treated in the F&A cost study and ultimately impactthe rate. Also, why is the submitted rate not necessarily whatthe institution negotiates? The workshop also explores whathappens after the rate is calculated.Application of the F&A rate is not always as straight-forward as we would hope. There is the issue of waivers, aswell as sponsor limitations and public universityconsiderations. Attendees will learn how these and otheractions they take can impact the return of indirect costs totheir institution.And what happens to those recovered F&A costs? Thedistribution of that revenue varies from institution toinstitution. The attendees will learn from faculty aboutvarious models including Central, Split, Distributed. Whilethere is no magic pot of money to support researchendeavors and expensive faculty startup packages, learnhow some institutions have modeled the F&A distributionto address critical needs. The workshop will provide time for attendees to askquestions and share their experiences in these areas.


WORKSHOP 6THE MYSTERY OF F&A REVEALED – UNDERSTANDINGTHE PROCESS, THE TERMINOLOGY, AND YOURIMPORTANT ROLE (continued)Learning Objectives:• Participants will have a basic understanding of F&A(regulations, components of the rate, calculations).

• Participants will learn about F&A concepts (cost sharing,capped vs uncapped pools, space studies, etc.)

• Participants will learn about factors affecting F&A Rateapplication that restrict F&A return.

• Participants will learn about distribution models forrecovered F&A.

Faculty: JULIE JARVIS*, Senior Director of Government Costing,University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignTRACEY FRASER, Independent Consultant, formerly SeniorDirector, Financial Service, California Institute of TechnologyJOSH ROSENBERG, Director of Cost Studies, Emory UniversityCATHY SNYDER, Director, Office of Contract and GrantAccounting, Vanderbilt UniversityAFTERNOON ONLY: DAVE RICHARDSON, Associate ViceChancellor for Research and Director of Sponsored Programs,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

WORKSHOP 7THE ALPHABET SOUP OF NIH TRAINING AND CAREERDEVELOPMENT AWARDSProgram Level: BasicPart of the stated mission of the National Institutes ofHealth (NIH) is “to develop, maintain, and renew scientifichuman and physical resources that will ensure the Nation’scapability to prevent disease.” Ruth L. Kirschstein NationalResearch Service Awards (Kirschstein-NRSA) training grantsand fellowships are awarded to support predoctoral andpostdoctoral research training to help ensure that a diverseand highly trained workforce is available to carry out theNation’s biomedical, behavioral and clinical researchagenda. Institutional Kirschstein-NRSAs (T awards) areawarded to domestic institutions that have the facilitiesand qualified faculty to provide for research trainingprograms in several scientific specialties. Individual

Kirschstein-NRSA Fellowships (F awards) are awarded toindividuals enrolled in doctoral degree training as well as topromising post-doctoral individuals with the potential tobecome productive, independent investigators in scientifichealth-related research fields. Career Development Awards(K awards) are awarded to provide support and “protectedtime” for an intensive, supervised career developmentexperience leading to research independence. While the successful attainment of any one of these NIHtraining/career development awards is honorable, the pre-and post-award administrative responsibilities are unique.This workshop will offer an overview of the administrationof NIH training and career development awards fromproposal preparation to closeout. We will also discuss theuse of X-Train, the on-line interface where authorized userselectronically process the required paperwork associatedwith Kirchstein-NRSA training grants and fellowships. Case studies and “hands on” activities will be utilized toenhance and emphasize the learning objectives.This workshop is brought to you by the letters F, K, T and X!!!Learning Objectives:• Participants will understand the importance of thespecialized information included in an Institutional NRSAproposal and where within their institution suchinformation may be acquired.

• Participants will be able to assist pre-doctoral and post-doctoral trainees with the preparation of their NRSAfellowship proposals.

• Participants will learn the post-award administrativerequirements for NIH NRSA and K awards.

• Participants will be prepared to discuss the nuances of Kawards with faculty.

• Participants will learn basic appointment andtermination functions of the X-Train System.

Faculty: BRENDA KAVANAUGH*, Associate Director, Office ofResearch & Project Administration, University of RochesterGLENDA BULLOCK,Manager of Business Operations, Divisionof Hematology, Washington University in St. Louis



10* Lead Presenter



11* Lead Presenter

MORNING WORKSHOPS • 8:30 am – NoonWORKSHOP 8BOOT CAMP ON THE BASICS OF CONTRACT DRAFTINGAND NEGOTIATIONSProgram Level: BasicAre you new to contract drafting and negotiations andwould like to learn about the best ways to manage theseactivities? Would you like to learn about the variouscontract and grant mechanisms and the significance eachplays in academic research, training and service? Thishands on and interactive session will use the example of acorporate research agreement to examine the anatomy of acontract and to demonstrate why we can (or can’t) acceptcertain provisions. Through this basic step-by-step review ofall the elements of a contract and related case studies,participants will have an opportunity to learn how toidentify what is and what is not acceptable language, andhow to rectify and redraft language to the satisfaction ofboth parties.Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn about the various contract andgrant mechanisms and how and when to use them.

• Participants will learn about the drafting of anagreement that meets the needs of both parties.

• Participants will learn how to identify the good, the badand the ugly language in any type of agreement.

Faculty: MARJORIE FORSTER*, Assistant Vice President, Research andGlobal Health Initiatives, University of Maryland, BaltimoreJANET SIMONS, Director of Research Policy, University ofMaryland, BaltimoreJEREMY TRYBULSKI, Policy Officer, University of California

WORKSHOP 9AN INTRODUCTION TO WORKING WITH U.S.INSTITUTIONS AND SPONSORSProgram Level: OverviewThis workshop will introduce participants to working underU.S. government funding. The format of the workshop willfollow the basic lifecycle of an award, from finding funding,applying for funding, accepting the award, managing theaward to closing out the award. Pre-Award topics coveredwill include: finding funding, institutional registrations withU.S. government agencies and systems, and commonproposal/budget preparation concerns. Post-award topicswill include financial management, procurement, propertymanagement and subawards. Compliance topics willinclude audit, protection of research subjects, and effortreporting. The purpose of this workshop is to provideparticipants with a broad overview of the various issuesassociated with working under U.S. government funding inorder to better understand the relevant terminology andconcepts. Sources of additional information on the varioustopics will also be provided, for participants who seek morein-depth knowledge than this workshop can cover. Thisworkshop is intended for research administrators from non-U.S. institutions who are seeking insight into how to workwith U.S. government sponsors, and collaborating with U.S.institutions from which they receive U.S. governmentfunding.Learning Objectives:• Participants will be able to describe the steps forregistering to apply for U.S. funding.

• Participants will be able to search for funding onGrants.gov.

• Participants will recognize key proposal components.• Participants will be able to explain the minimumrequirements for administrative systems under U.S.funding.

• Participants will be able to identify key compliance issuesassociated with U.S. funding.

Faculty: DAVID J. MAYO*, Director of Sponsored Research, CaliforniaInstitute of TechnologyDAVE RICHARDSON, Associate Vice Chancellor for Researchand Director of Sponsored Programs, University of Illinois atUrbana-Champaign

MORNING WORKSHOPS • 8:30 am – NoonWORKSHOP 10EXPLORING THE CONCEPTS OF EFFORT REPORTINGAND HOW TO MINIMIZE RISK IN THE CURRENTCOMPLIANCE ENVIRONMENTProgram Level: BasicEffort Reporting still retains its spot as the #1 financialcompliance issue for sponsored projects. The basic conceptsfor certifying salaries charged to grants have not changedmuch over the last 20 years, however issues that draw auditscrutiny continue to evolve year after year. Effort reportingcompliance must take into consideration items such as;OMB guidance (existing), agency specific requirements,academic appointment periods, institutional policies, salarycaps, cost sharing, systems and other issues. The workshopwill explore these areas and then provide context/examplesas to how risk can be identified and minimized. Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain an understanding of the basiceffort reporting requirements and how they should beapplied in an academic research environment.

• Participants will gain an understanding of the commoncompliance issues, expectations and risks associated witheffort reporting.

• Participants will explore methods to effectively manageand document the effort reporting process so that riskand audit scrutiny is minimized.

Prerequisites: Attendees should have a general knowledgefor effort reporting principles and how they are applied inan academic research setting.Faculty: JOSEPH M. GINDHART*, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Finance& Director, Sponsored Projects Accounting, WashingtonUniversity in St. LouisJENNIFER WEI, Director of Cost Studies and Effort Reporting,Northwestern University

WORKSHOP 11SUBAWARDS & SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING: THEBASICS AND BEYONDProgram Level: IntermediateThis workshop will explore the full cycle of subawards andsubrecipient monitoring, a complex, shared responsibilitythat begins at the time of proposal development andextends throughout the life of the subaward. The workshopwill focus on sharing tips, strategies and practical guidance,and is designed to introduce the topic to newcomers, aswell as provide comprehensive tools to more experiencedresearch administrators. Through discussions, case studiesand exercises, participants will work throughimplementation strategies, approaches and solutions in the areas of pre-award risk analysis, and post-awardmonitoring.Learning Objectives:• Participants will be able to recognize subawardcharacteristics.

• Participants will understand subrecipient monitoringresponsibilities.

• Participants will learn strategies for addressing day-to-day monitoring issues.

• Participants will learn strategies for addressing centralmonitoring responsibilities.

Faculty: ANTOINETTE LAWSON*, Director, Office of ResearchAdministration, University of Maryland, College ParkMICHIKO PANE, Director of Pre-Award Operations, Office ofSponsored Research, Stanford UniversityAIMEE HOWELL, Manager, Office of Contract & GrantAccounting, University of Maryland, Baltimore County



12* Lead Presenter



13* Lead Presenter

MORNING WORKSHOPS • 8:30 am – NoonWORKSHOP 12SERVICE CENTERS – HOW TO OPEN AND OPERATE –LEGALLY!Program Level: OverviewUniversity departments use a variety of products or servicesto perform their activities. When these products or servicesare provided within the university these units function asnon-profit businesses and are called recharge or servicecenters. The cost of providing products and services areallocated to users, including federally sponsoredagreements, by establishing billing rates which are appliedto the actual usage of services. The rate is designed torecover costs from those users who benefit from theproducts or services offered. The complexities of setting upand running a service center, or recharge center, continue tobe a challenge for research universities and this subject hasbeen on the DHHS OIG Work Plan for audits the last twofiscal years. This session will look at considerations when setting up andoperating a service center. The session will look in-depth atthe rate development including components of the budget,the rate base and service center audits. The workshop willincorporate a case study and exercises. Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn the characteristics of a servicecenter.

• Participants will learn what to budget in the billing rate. • Participants will learn the different rate bases that can beused to calculate the rate.

• Participants will learn what the audit findings on servicecenters have been and the risks your institution shouldmanage.

Faculty: PATRICK FITZGERALD*, Associate Dean for ResearchAdministration, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, HarvardUniversityANNE SULLIVAN, Director, Huron Education, HuronConsulting Group

WORKSHOP 13TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, START UPS AND INDUSTRIALCOLLABORATIONSProgram Level: IntermediateIntellectual property that results from university research is frequently licensed (a Bayh-Dole success!) to new orexisting companies for commercialization. Often facultypresent interesting new concepts not yet reduced topractice that companies wish to further develop throughresearch contracts that include the eventual right to licensethe technology. Nascent technology needs furtherdevelopment to bridge the oft-discussed “Valley of Death”through translational research. The federal government iskeenly interested in moving the technologies from thelaboratory to the marketplace and is funding the effortthrough programs such as NSF’s i-Corp. Many universitiesare also exploring new contracting mechanisms with newintellectual property terms. This workshop will examine thecomplex relationships that arise when universities interactin research projects that involve technology transfer.Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain an understanding of commonlyused contracting licensing approaches that addressbackground intellectual property and new foregroundintellectual property.

• Participants will explore the concept of a “BackgroundIntellectual Property Briarpatch,” understand theimportance of sponsored programs office in managingthe IP portfolio, and propose remedies.

• Participants will consider how to construct field of uselicenses to meet the needs of sponsors, faculty, and start-up companies.

• Participants will review proprietary rights agreements forSBIR and STTR projects.

• Participants will share experiences with federally-fundedtechnology translation programs.

• Participants will consider the special financialarrangements and constraints (risks) in working withstart-ups.

• Participants will discuss the requirements for financialconflict of interest disclosures and management plans. ➤

MORNING WORKSHOPS • 8:30 am – NoonWORKSHOP 13TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, START UPS AND INDUSTRIALCOLLABORATIONS (continued)Prerequisites:• Participants will have a sound understanding ofintellectual property terms.

• Participants will have experience and/or familiarity withdifferent types of licensing arrangements.

• Participants will gain exposure to proposing, negotiating,or administering university-industry research.

• Participants will have a familiarity with SBIR and STTRproposals and subcontracts.

• Participants will have a familiarity with conflict ofinterest policies and guidelines.

Faculty: JILDA D. GARTON*, Vice President for Research and GeneralManager, Georgia Tech Research Corporation and GeorgiaTech Applied Research Corporation, Georgia Tech

WORKSHOP 14FINANCIAL COMPLIANCE – WHAT ARE THE THINGSYOU NEED TO KNOW?Program Level: IntermediateCompliance starts when the proposal is being developedand doesn’t end until the project is over. It toucheseverything including direct costs, indirect costs, equipmentpurchases, service center costs, effort reporting, costsharing, cost transfers, contracts, subcontracts, ARRAfunding, you name it. The complex work we performrequires periodic reviews of financial compliance issues.Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn about the current auditenvironment related to research compliance and specificaudits at research universities.

• Participants will learn where the greatest financial risksgenerally occur.

• Participants will learn how to mitigate compliance risk.Faculty: MICHELLE VAZIN*, Director, Office of Contracts and Grants,Vanderbilt UniversityZACH BELTON, Director, Huron Consulting Group

WORKSHOP 15OMB CIRCULAR BOOT CAMP – WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOWProgram Level: BasicThis half day workshop will provide an in-depth study thatfocuses on understanding and applying tests forallowability, allocability, reasonableness and consistency.Case studies with specific reference to OMB circulars will bepresented. In addition this workshop will focus on thethought process associated with managing federal awards. How does one determine the allowability of direct chargingan expense to an award? Each transaction is separate anddistinct, no two are the same. Focusing on associating anexpense to the scope of work is the basis for determiningallowability. We will apply the basic principles and guidanceof the OMB circulars to our real life daily job responsibilities. Learning Objectives: Participants will gain anunderstanding of how to apply the circulars at atransactional level, interact and discuss real life examples inresearch administration, work on the process fordocumenting justifications associated with approvingexpenditures and walk away with strategies on interactingwith principal investigators when administrating an award.Faculty: JILL FRANKENFIELD*, Office of Research Administration,University of Maryland, College ParkDENISE CLARK, Associate Vice President for Administrationand Chief of Staff, Division of Research, University ofMaryland, College ParkTIM REUTER, Director, Post Award, Stanford UniversityERIN BAILEY, Center Manager and Senior ResearchAdministrator, University at Buffalo, Buffalo Center for Social Research



14* Lead Presenter



15* Lead Presenter

MORNING WORKSHOPS • 8:30 am – NoonWORKSHOP 16EXPORT CONTROLS AND U(NIVERSITIES): WHAT YOU(AND “U”) NEED TO KNOW!Program Level: BasicSo you have heard about these things called Export Controlsand you might even know a little bit about them. But whatyou don’t know can hurt “U”. What do you really need toconsider when developing an Export Compliance Program?This workshop will help you and your “U”niversity to gatherthe basics and begin considering your next steps. We willdig into the following questions: What are the big ExportControl issues? How do those issues impact universities(e.g. touch points)? What administrative functions shouldbe considered and who should be involved in the exportcompliance process? We will also discuss developingpractical approaches to compliance, conducting a riskassessment, getting and giving training, and highlightingresources to tap into as you build an Export ComplianceProgram for you and your “U”.Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn the common regulatory terms andconcepts pertaining to export controls.

• Participants will develop familiarity with the organizationand content of the export control regulations.

• Participants will learn to identify “red flags” that mayindicate the need for additional export assessment for aparticular grant, contract, or proposed activity.

• Participants will better understand the impact exportcontrol regulations have on research activities at collegesand universities.

• Participants will learn about the different types of exportlicenses and agreements and the steps to take if a licenseis needed.

• Participants will learn how to protect export controlledprojects.

• Participants will understand how to use some of themost common license exceptions and exemptions relatedto research and travel outside the U.S.

Faculty: JENNIFER MAY*, Associate Director of Compliance, Universityof MissouriALLEN DIPALMA, Director & Export Controls Official,University of PittsburghADILIA KOCH, Director of Export Compliance, CaliforniaInstitute of Technology

WORKSHOP 17CREATING A POSITIVE AND CANDID CULTURE IN YOUR OFFICEProgram Level: OverviewThe Gallup Organization launched a multi-year researchproject to try to define a great workplace. Based on thisresearch, the number one key discovery was: It was not thecompanies that were great; it was the workgroups thatwere great.In this workshop we are going to look at positive officeculture through the lens of what practices we, asindividuals, can incorporate -- beginning right away -- thatwill create and enhance our business relationships, leadingto a more positive, candid, and effective work place. Utilizinga wide variety of resources, including those from NCURA’sLeadership Development Institute and the subsequentExecutive Leadership Program, we will focus on threecomponents of what we can do to create or enhance theculture in our work place:• Management of Self: Emotional Intelligence and ourprofessional reputation

• One on One Communications: with your colleagues,direct reports and supervisor

• Teams and Team MeetingsSharing goals, managing obstacles, and experiencingsuccesses as well as disappointments can create strongbonds when they are coupled with a mindful and candidapproach to self, others, and team communications.Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn the most effective tools for self-management and what goes into managing yourprofessional reputation.

• This workshop will also examine the gift of feedback andfollow up in your one-on-one relationships withcolleagues, direct reports and supervisor.

• Further, strategies for effective team communication andteam meetings (and they’re not in the conference room!)will be explored.

Faculty: TARA E. BISHOP, Associate Executive Director, NationalCouncil of University Research Administrators

MORNING WORKSHOPS • 8:30 am – NoonWORKSHOP 18POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATIONProgram Level: IntermediateInstitutional policy reflects the principles that underlie allsponsored program activity on our campuses. It is theframework for many everyday decisions, and it is a signal ofour understanding of sponsor guidelines and regulations.Our policies, along with agency regulations, form thestandards against which auditors will measure ourperformance. The development of institutional policies ishandled in a variety of ways across the research community.This workshop will discuss the methods commonly used tocreate sponsored programs policies, offer some analysis ofthe strengths and weaknesses of each approach, andpresent options for formats and typical content elements. Inaddition, workshop participants will consider thetechniques used to promulgate policy across the campus toresearch administrators and to faculty. There are otherissues that will come into consideration in the workshop,including the process for evaluation policies against Federalstandards, the application to certain classess of sponsoredprojects, and the approach to reviewing and refreshingestablished policies. The workshop will include a look atsome specific policies created by universities, includingmore recently developed policies on cost-sharing, effortreporting, cost transfers, and others.Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain different perspectives about theprocess of creating policies for sponsored programoperations.

• Participants will acquire multiple views about ways toimplement policies.

• Participants will gain insights into potential strategies forpolicy consideration at their own institutions.

Prerequisites: This workshop is intended for senior leveladministrators who have experience creating and applyingpolicy.Faculty: PEGGY S. LOWRY*, Program Manager, NCURA Peer ReviewProgram, National Council of University ResearchAdministratorsKIM MORELAND, Associate Vice Chancellor for ResearchAdministration, University of Wisconsin-MadisonPATRICIA HAWK, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,Oregon State University

WORKSHOP 19

MANAGING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN THE CURRENTENVIRONMENT: LESSONS LEARNED, QUESTIONS TOBE ANSWERED?Program Level: AdvancedThe updated PHS/NIH requirements will have been public foralmost two years and in effect for almost a year when AM55convenes. In that time institutions have developed varyingways to implement and manage these and other conflict ofinterest (COI) requirements, not all of which are consistentwith each other. This workshop is intended to be an open-ended discussion of how institutions have dealt with therevised requirements and the challenges they face goingforward, given the possibility of added or revised oversight.Panelists will provide an overview of the context in whichthese requirements have developed, and the environment inwhich NIH and other agencies must operate in addressingissues around COI. There will be case studies from twodifferent institutions – an RU/VH private university with anacademic medical center and a large RU/VH publicinstitution – and discussion of the challenges each hasfaced in implementing and managing COI requirements.Participants will hear from those who helped draftinstitutional responses and who manage the ongoingprocess, and from those who work directly with faculty whomust comply with these requirements. There will also be adiscussion of how COI fits into the broader regulatory andcompliance framework.Workshop participants will be surveyed before the sessionon how their institutions have chosen to respond to keyelements of the updated PHS/NIH requirements. Theresults will be shared during the workshop as part of theoverall discussion.Learning Objectives: Participants will gain understanding ofthe environment in which COI requirements exist, at boththe institutional and operational level, and learn how otherinstitutions have chosen to interpret and implement COIrules.Prerequisites: Working knowledge of Federal andinstitutional conflict of interest policies and procedures.



16* Lead Presenter



17* Lead Presenter

WORKSHOP 19MANAGING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN THE CURRENTENVIRONMENT: LESSONS LEARNED, QUESTIONS TOBE ANSWERED? (continued)Faculty: ELIZABETH RAPISARDA*, Assistant Provost, Research &Graduate Education, Vanderbilt UniversityALISON COOPER,Manager, Conflict of Interest &Commitment Management Office, Vanderbilt UniversityVOICHITA DADARLAT, Assistant Vice President for ResearchCompliance, Purdue UniversityJANIECE HARRISON, Associate Dean for Finance &Administration, Vanderbilt School of EngineeringELIZABETH HEITMAN, Associate Professor, Medical Ethics,Vanderbilt School of MedicineCARRIE WOLINETZ, Associate Vice President, FederalRelations, American Association of Universities

AFTERNOON WORKSHOPS • 1:30 – 5:00 pmWORKSHOP 20CAUGHT BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE:DEALING WITH TROUBLESOME TERMS FROM NON-PROFITS, FOUNDATIONS AND INDUSTRYProgram Level: IntermediateTroublesome terms and conditions are no longer limited toindustry contracts and Federal contracts. While many of thechallenging issues have been the same over time,troublesome terms are now routinely showing up in non-profit and foundation awards as well. Old issues likeconfidentiality, publication, intellectual property, licensing,liability, insurance and indemnification will be the focus ofthis workshop, with primary emphasis on how to negotiateintellectual property (IP) terms and clauses closely associatedwith IP terms. This workshop will address all of these issuesfor non-profit, foundation and industry sponsors and willexamine new trends, such as more industry-like termscoming from non-profit and foundation sponsors. In thissession, participants will be provided with real-life examplesof contract clauses and case studies to help understand howto cope with these difficult terms.In addition to livelydiscussions and interactions throughout the presentation,the participants will apply the knowledge learned byworking in small groups using the case study approach.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn what the issues are and how toidentify them.

• Participants will learn what kinds of consequences mayresult from accepting the troublesome terms for boththe investigator and the institution.

• Participants will learn suggested alternative terms andconditions for minimizing or eliminating the impact ofthe troublesome terms.

Prerequisites: Previous work experience with non-profit,foundation or industry contracts and grants.Faculty: MARJORIE FORSTER*, Assistant Vice President, Research andGlobal Health Initiatives, University of Maryland, BaltimoreM. JEREMY TRYBULSKI, Policy Officer, University of California

WORKSHOP 21COACHING RESEARCHERS TO WRITE SUCCESSFULGRANT PROPOSALSProgram Level: IntermediateGrants specialists are often called upon to edit grantproposals or even to coach researchers on good writingtechniques. To be effective in this role, one must becomfortable with basic guidelines for style and format, aswell as the actual content of a strong proposal. This highlyinteractive workshop will feature key principles of successfulgrant writing, interspersed with practical exercises whereparticipants can sharpen their proposal writing skills. We willexplore what constitutes a fundable idea, what reviewersare looking for, how to write a persuasive case for funding,and how to get rid of some bad habits of academic prose. Bythe end of the workshop, participants will be more confidentof their ability to help researchers obtain funding in anincreasingly competitive environment.Learning Objectives:• Participants will be able to contrast major stylisticdifferences between academic prose and grant writing.

• Participants will be able to list twelve common pitfalls thatcause good ideas to be rejected and how to avoid them.

Prerequisites: Participants should have some responsibilityfor working with faculty to prepare their proposals.Faculty: ROBERT PORTER*, Director of Research Development,University of Tennessee

AFTERNOON WORKSHOPS • 1:30 – 5:00 pmWORKSHOP 22COST SHARING: WHY PRE- AND POST-AWARDRESEARCH ADMINISTRATORS NEED TO GET INVOLVEDProgram Level: IntermediateWhen a Principal Investigator proposes to share costs of anexciting research project by donating his or her time orsome other tangibles, the pre and post-awardadministrators are often the last ones to find out. We willdiscuss how getting involved right from the very beginningmay help the university stay compliant with Federalrequirements and keep the auditors at bay. This workshopwill provide an in-depth, detailed review of the issuessurrounding cost sharing on sponsored projects, primarilygrants funded by Federal agencies. The workshop will definecost sharing, including: voluntary; mandatory; voluntarycommitted; and voluntary uncommitted. We will reviewdifferent types of costs that qualify for cost sharing and therequirements for documenting, tracking and reporting costsharing. The relationship between cost sharing, effortreporting, and indirect cost rates will be analyzed anddiscussed. Recent audits conducted by the National ScienceFoundation (NSF) Inspector General will be reviewed. Theworkshop will include some case studies, based on realincidents, concerning various aspects of cost sharing.Learning Objectives:• Participants will understand what constitutes costsharing.

• Participants will acquire an understanding of theapplicable federal policies, including expectations forreporting and record keeping.

• Participants will learn different methods for capturing,tracking and reporting cost sharing.

• Participants will learn how cost sharing impacts Facilities& Administrative (F&A) rates.

Prerequisites: Pre-award and/or post-award intermediatelevel personnel or those re-examining cost sharing policiesand practices at their institution. Faculty: URMILA BAJAJ*, Director, Project Accounting, CaliforniaInstitute of TechnologyDAVID J. MAYO, Director of Sponsored Research, CaliforniaInstitute of Technology

WORKSHOP 23A TEAM APPROACH TO DEVELOPING COMPETITIVEGRANT PROPOSALSProgram Level: IntermediateOver the last decade or so, the approach to research hasevolved from individuals conducting independent researchprojects to cross-disciplinary collaborations conducted bydiverse teams. The approach to good grant writing also has evolved.Today we most often use a collaborative team approach todevelop and write a competitive proposal. This workshopcombines didactic and hands-on activities to explore bestpractices for proposal development and good grant writing.Participants will team up during the workshop and worktogether on ideas for possible grant proposals, but you donot need an idea for a project to participate! The focus willbe more on the process than the content. All you need tobring is your own brainpower and experience and yourwillingness to join a proposal development team. Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn how to develop and evaluate goodideas for proposals.

• Participants will discover how to build an effective teamfor proposal development.

• Participants will practice creating a proposaldevelopment plan. Learn some of the techniques ofeffective proposal writing.

• Participants will work in small teams to develop proposalsections.

• Participants will develop proposal components usinggood grant writing techniques.

Prerequisites: Participants should have a workingknowledge of the grants and proposal process.Faculty: DENISE WALLEN*, Research Officer/Senior Fellow, RobertWood Johnson Foundation Center for Health Policy, TheUniversity of New MexicoROBERT LOWMAN, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research,Research Professor of Psychology, The University of NorthCarolina at Chapel Hill



18* Lead Presenter



19* Lead Presenter

AFTERNOON WORKSHOPS • 1:30 – 5:00 pmWORKSHOP 24ADVANCED EXPORT CONTROLS: A WORKSHOP ONLICENSING & PROVEN EXPORT CONTROL METHODSFOR EAR/ITAR/OFAC COMPLIANCE EMPLOYED AT UNIVERSITIESProgram Level: AdvancedThis workshop will deliver practical information on provenexport control management methods implemented byuniversities to comply with export regulations administeredby the Departments of State, Treasury and Commerce.Methods include effective management of jurisdictiondeterminations, licensing and voluntary self-disclosures.Workshop faculty will use real-world examples to facilitatelearning and discussion. Workshop attendees willparticipate in the identification, jurisdiction determination,licensing and technology control process includingmanaging disclosures. Time will be allowed for questions,discussion and networking with others who are responsiblefor day-to-day oversight and management of exportcompliance. Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn the key attributes of an effectivecompliance program.

• Participants will learn how to prepare commodityjurisdiction requests, export license applications, andother licenses required under the EAR, the ITAR and OFAC.

• Participants will learn how to detect and managevoluntary self-disclosures of potential export violations.

Prerequisites: Participants should have an in-depthunderstanding or familiarity with the International Traffic inArms Regulations (22 CFR 120-130), Export AdministrationRegulations (15 CFR 300-799) and various Foreign AssetsControl Regulations (FACR) and sanctions programs.Faculty: ADILIA F. KOCH*, Director of Export Compliance, CaliforniaInstitute of TechnologyKAY ELLIS, Export Controls Officer, University of ArizonaJENNIFER MAY, Associate Director of Compliance, University of Missouri

WORKSHOP 25HERE COME THE FEDS! WHAT A SPONSOR AUDIT IS LOOKING FOR AND HOW TO PREPARE YOUR INSTITUTION Program Level: IntermediateO. I. G… the three most feared letters in sponsored research(just beating out COI and RCR). As Offices of InspectorGeneral (OIGs) have gained additional funding andresources, more research programs and offices findthemselves under scrutiny. Most of you have likely eitherexperienced an audit, or live in fear of receiving an intent to audit letter. While sponsor audits are inevitable, andunavoidable, component of receiving research funding, they don’t have to be a nightmare. This session will helpparticipants to understand what areas Federal auditors are most likely to focus on, common findings from the field, and best practices for “surviving” a sponsor audit. We will discuss:• Types of audits conducted (and who is involved)• The fiscal year 2011 audit plans for the major researchagencies:– National Institutes of Health (NIH)– National Science Foundation (NSF)

• The purpose of audits and what OIGs are really lookingfor Common findings.

• Practical advice on how to best position and prepare yourinstitution to face an OIG audit.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain an increased awareness of thetypes of audits.

• Participants will be helped to understand what areasFederal auditors are most likely to focus on.

• Participants will acquire information for successful auditpreparation.

• Participants will learn how to use the audit report as a way to improve compliance programs and best practices. ➤

AFTERNOON WORKSHOPS • 1:30 – 5:00 pmWORKSHOP 25HERE COME THE FEDS! WHAT A SPONSOR AUDIT IS LOOKING FOR AND HOW TO PREPARE YOUR INSTITUTION (continued)Prerequisites: The successful workshop participant willalready possess an understanding of:• the research lifecycle,• elements of a research budget,• cost sharing, effort reporting, program income, and otherspecial project requirements,

• reporting requirements and deliverables.Faculty: KIMBERLY GINN*, Director, Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLPMICHAEL BOWERS, Associate Director for Business &Technology Audit Services, Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology

WORKSHOP 26RESEARCH COMPLIANCE BASICSProgram Level: BasicResearch institutions are obligated by law to upholdnumerous standards for the ethical conduct of research. Inrecent years, these requirements have been lumped underthe heading “research compliance” and many institutionshave created positions that deal solely with regulatorycompliance in research. This session will provide anintroductory survey of the research compliance landscape,covering topics with which any research administrator,whether in central administration or a department, shouldbe acquainted, including: scientific integrity, the care anduse of animals; the protection of human subjects’ rightsand welfare; disclosure and management of real andperceived conflicts of interest; and export controls.Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn about requirements for scientificintegrity and Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR).

• Participants will learn about requirements for the careand use of laboratory animals.

• Participants will learn about requirements for humansubject protection.

• Participants will learn about requirements for conflict ofinterest oversight.

• Participants will learn about requirements for exportcontrols.

Prerequisites: This workshop is designed for individuals whohave had at least a few years of experience in the pre-awardrealm of research administration at either a central ordepartmental office.Faculty: TRACY S. ARWOOD*, Director, Office of Research Compliance,Clemson UniversitySUZANNE M. RIVERA, Associate Vice President for Research,Office of Research Administration, Case Western ReserveUniversity



20* Lead Presenter



21* Lead Presenter

AFTERNOON WORKSHOPS • 1:30 – 5:00 pmWORKSHOP 27WORKING WITH INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS:ASSESSING COMPLIANCE AND MITIGATING RISKProgram Level: OverviewCompliance is a formidable task at any institution.Additionally, as research administrators, we are increasinglyfaced with faculty and researchers working andcollaborating with international institutions. In suchsituations, how do we ensure research compliance at thesecollaborating institutions? What processes are needed fordetermining compliance requirements for internationalresearch activities at international collaborator institutions?What mechanism(s) exist for making the requiredcompliance considerations part of the day-to-day researchprogram? This workshop will explore many of the potentialcompliance requirements applicable to foreign institutionsengaged with our researchers and faculty in internationalresearch collaborations, assess when they are required, anddiscuss how they may be incorporated into the relationship. Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain an understanding of many of thecompliance requirements associated with internationalresearch activities (animal and human subjects, exportcontrols and sanctions programs, RCR, FCOI, FCPA, Audits,Boycott Act, etc.)

• Participants will learn a process for assessing whatcompliance requirements are applicable and when theymust be applied to the international institution will beexplored.

• Participants will learn how should designatedcompliance requirements be incorporated into theresearch program? What is the mechanism to ensureresearch compliance at these international institutions?What are the implications to our researchers anduniversities if they are not?

Faculty: NORMAN J. HEBERT*, Director of International ResearchAdministration, Office of the Vice President for Research,Brown UniversityJOHN W. HANOLD, Senior Associate Director, Office ofSponsored Programs, The Pennsylvania State University

WORKSHOP 28SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL: DOING IT ALL AT A PUI WITHFEW STAFF MEMBERSProgram Level: OverviewPredominately undergraduate institutions (PUIs) come in all sizes, shapes, and award volumes. This session is gearedtoward those who work at institutions with four or feweradministrators to manage all aspects of researchadministration -- people who have to have a very broadknowledge base, and who have no departmentaladministrators on their campuses. The workshop will behighly interactive, as we discuss best practices for jugglingall our responsibilities with limited resources. We’ll alsodiscuss how to go about adding additional staff positions as the enterprise grows, some “must-have” professionalresources, succession planning for small offices, and otherissues specific to staffs that are small in number but largein capacity and talent. Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to:• state best practices for offices with small staffs.• list at least three resources for small offices.• define typical succession plans for small offices.• perform a self-evaluation of their practices. Prerequisites: Participants should be working (or havepreviously worked) at a PUI with four or fewer staffmembers involved in research administration.Faculty: PAMELA NAPIER*, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,Agnes Scott CollegeKRIS A. MONAHAN, Director of Sponsored Research andPrograms, Providence College

AFTERNOON WORKSHOPS • 1:30 – 5:00 pmWORKSHOP 29CHANGE MANAGEMENT: THE PEEP PRINCIPLES –THERE IS NO I IN TEAM, BUT THERE IS EI INSUCCESSFUL CHANGE MANAGEMENT Program Level: AdvancedMultifaceted, never ending change is inherent in the field ofResearch Administration . As organizations supportingresearch strive to meet the ever changing demands of thefield, we must recognize and embrace the most criticalfactor contributing to the success or failure of managingorganizational change: the people factor. Join us as wediscuss the critical perspective of your human capitalstakeholders, how to manage the phases of change theyexperience and the importance of Emotional Intelligence(EI) in the successful navigation of organizational change.Channel your inner “Change Agent” and come ready to hearabout successful implementation strategies and share yourexperiences in this Senior forum.Learning Objectives:• Participants will be able to identify the key phases ofchange and associated human behaviors.

• Participants will be able to identify effective strategies to facilitate effective management of human response to change.

• Participants will be able to understand the impact of EIon organizational change management.

• Participants will engage in case-based scenarios andactivities to enhance understanding.

Prerequisites: Participants are engaged in senior leadershippositions and strategic planning.Faculty: AMANDA C. SNYDER*, Assistant Director, SponsoredPrograms Administration University of Maryland, BaltimoreOffice of Research & DevelopmentSARA JUDD, Consultant

WORKSHOP 30EFFECTIVE PRESENTATIONS FOR MATURE AUDIENCESProgram Level: OverviewDo participants in your presentations often text or checktheir email? Do they get fidgety or “rest their eyes?” Thisworkshop is designed to help you avoid these scenarios bygiving you tools to develop presentations that are engaging,content-rich, and geared to adult audiences. Research administrators possess a cadre of knowledge,skills, and abilities. Yet these skills may be different thanthose necessary to serve effectively as NCURA discussionleaders, panelists, or workshop faculty. Integrating adultlearning theory and techniques into presentations canmake the difference between attendees surfing the web on their smart phones and being fully engaged.Additionally, this workshop will offer tips on how to build acollaborative presentation with others, while clarifying thetypes of NCURA presentations and the varying roles andduties involved.Learning Objectives: Participants will learn presentationand training techniques tailored to adult learning andtidbits for presenting in various NCURA venues.Faculty: JUDY FREDENBERG*, Director, Research and SponsoredPrograms, The University of MontanaDIANE BARRETT, Senior Research Administration Consultant,rSmartCRAIG REYNOLDS, Associate Director, Office of Research andSponsored Programs, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor



22* Lead Presenter



23* Lead Presenter

AFTERNOON WORKSHOPS • 1:30 – 5:00 pmWORKSHOP 31FAR OUT! Program Level: OverviewNegotiating and managing contracts under the FederalAcquisition Regulations (FAR) is a challenge for even themost experienced Research Administrator. If you are new to the FAR, you have probably developed a migraine tryingto understand the FAR’s purpose and organization, and how all those Parts are supposed to fit together. If so thisworkshop is for you. We will explore the FAR and the Federal contracting Process. In addition, we will talk aboutcontract types and the issues universities face with someproblematic clauses. Warning! Working with the FAR maybecome habit forming!Learning Objectives:• Participants will understand the purpose of the FAR andits application.

• Participants will understand the architecture of the FARand how the Parts work together.

• Participants will develop an understanding of theGovernment’s contracting process and what is beingrequested from you.

• Participants will develop an understanding of a fewrequired and problematic clauses.

Faculty: RANDY DRAPER*, Director, Office of Contracts and Grants,University of Colorado BoulderrAMY V. BROOKS, Assistant Director-Awards, Office ofSponsored Programs and Research Administration, Universityof Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

FULL DAY WORKSHOP • 8:30 am – 5:00 pmWORKSHOP 32PUTTING THE ‘FUN’ IN NIH FUNDING…A DAY WITH NIH!Program Level: OverviewWear your favorite tropical shirt (it is summer time!), put onyour comfy sandals or loafers, and join NIH experts for a day ofsmooth sailing through the latest NIH grants process, programs

and policies. You may not think of trying to understand theapplication forms, working in the eRA Commons or navigatingthe NIH websites as “fun,” but don’t let that stop you fromparticipating in NCURA’s, “A Day with NIH” on Thursday, August8. NIH Program, Review, and Grants Management officials areoffering a laid back day, filled with informative and interactivepresentations, guidance, and an array of future NIH contacts forcritical points in the grants process!With what seems like an ocean-size amount of information toabsorb about NIH, the goal of this day will be to help you steerthrough the resources, understand the course, get-to-knowthe rules, and obtain tips for sailing through the eSubmissionand awards process, as well as learn how avoid getting stuckin the sand along the way. We’ll share details on high priorityinitiatives taking place at NIH, guidance on grant writing,administrative issues, and so much more. Experts willdemonstrate NIH on-line resources, such as RePORT andRePORTER, and how these tools can help administrators andinvestigators learn more about NIH funded research.When the sun sets, you’ll be able to return to your office orlab with a more complete understanding of NIH and thegrants process, as well as the knowledge of availableresources to help…plus have a chance to relax a little beforeheading back to reality. Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain a better understanding of policiesand procedures affecting the NIH grants process fromapplication to post-award.

• Participants will have the opportunity for personalinteraction with NIH staff and be able to obtain insightand suggestions for managing research grants in anincreasingly complex environment.

Faculty: CYNTHIA DWYER*, Communications Specialist & OutreachCoordinator, Office of Extramural Research, NIHSALLY ROCKEY, Deputy Director for Extramural Research,Director, Office of Extramural Research, NIHMEGAN COLUMBUS, Director, Division of Communicationsand Outreach, NIH Program Manager for Electronic Receipt ofGrant Applications and Agency Integration, Office ofExtramural Research, NIHSHERI CUMMINS, Customer Relationship Manager, eRAExternal Services, Office of Extramural Research, NIHSCARLETT GIBB, Lead, Customer Relationship Manager, eRAExternal Services, Office of Extramural Research, NIH

thursday, August 8, 2013

8:30 am – noonSENIOR FORUM #1CONSOLIDATED CIRCULAR RAMIFICATIONS: ADIALOGUE IN GRANT REFORM

Registration Limited, Pre-registration Required, No Additional Fee

Program Level: AdvancedThis is a session for senior research administrators whichwill nurture an interactive discourse on changes resultingfrom the OMB Circular consolidation. The panelists willfacilitate the discussion and offer comments regardingspecific regulation changes and the impact of those on ourinstitutions. Participants will find out what reform ideashave been implemented, discuss administrativerequirements and share their responses to new challenges.Questions can be proffered in advance, as well as during thesession. Come share your comments and solutions withyour colleagues as the dynamic world of researchadministration continues on its winding path toward theunknown. Learning Objectives: • Participants will analyze the significant changes inregulations related to the consolidation of the OMBcirculars.

• Participants will explore strategies for implementinginstitutional changes based on changes to theregulations.

Faculty: CINDY HOPE*, Assistant Vice President for Research andDirector, Office for Sponsored Programs, The University ofAlabamaJIM LUTHER, Assistant Vice President, Finance and ResearchCompliance Officer, Duke UniversityDAN EVON, Director, Contract and Grant Administration,Michigan State University

1:30 – 5:30 pmSENIOR FORUM #2A CONVERSATION WITH COLLEAGUES: ISSUES FORSENIOR RESEARCH ADMINISTRATORS

Registration Limited, Pre-registration Required, No Additional Fee

Program Level: AdvancedThis is a highly interactive session for senior researchadministrators targeting topics suggested by theparticipants. The sky is the limit here. The panelists willfacilitate a dialogue and offer their own comments on awide-ranging set of questions. Do you want to know howto help your staff become more engaged in the workplace?Are you looking for ideas about managing your boss? Doyou want to gain mastery of the proposed Federalconsolidated circular? Do you want to know how to managesubrecipients under the new FCOI rules? Do you havequestions about the intersection of effort reporting andcost sharing? Do you wonder if there are new approachesto managing and motivating staff? Those are a few of thetopics the group might address in this forum. Participantswill be asked to suggest topics or questions in advance, butthere will be plenty of time for spontaneity. Come shareyour questions and your experience with colleagues whospeak the common language of research administration!Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how to address complex problemsand issues.

• Participants will learn strategies to employ whenbrainstorming and solving problems.

Faculty: KIM MORELAND*, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research andSponsored Programs, University of Wisconsin - MadisonMARIANNE R. WOODS, Senior Associate Vice President forResearch (Emeritus), The University of Texas at San AntonioSUSAN SEDWICK, Associate Vice President for Research andDirector, Office of Sponsored Projects, The University of Texasat Austin

Senior ForumsNCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC

tuesday, August 6, 2013

24* Lead Presenter

FULLFULL

agendaNCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC

Saturday, August 3, 2013

25

4:00 – 7:00 pmREGISTRATION WELCOME LOUNGE


7:30 am – 5:00 pmREGISTRATION

8:30 am – 5:00 pmWORKSHOPS(ADDITIONAL FEE REQUIRED)

Noon – 1:30 pmWORKSHOP LUNCHEON FOR WORKSHOP FULL DAY SESSION PARTICIPANTS,FACULTY ANDEVALUATORS

6:15 – 7:00 pmRECEPTION

7:00 pmBANQUET

8:30 pmENTERTAINMENT BY THE CAPITOL STEPSThe Capitol Steps began as a group of Senate staffers who set out tosatirize the very people and places that employed them.

The group was born in December, 1981 when some staffers forSenator Charles Percy were planning entertainment for a Christmasparty. They decided to dig into the headlines of the day, and theycreated song parodies & skits which conveyed a special brand ofsatirical humor.

In the years that followed, many of the Steps ignored theconventional wisdom (“Don’t quit your day job!”), and although notall of the current members of the Steps are former Capitol Hillstaffers, taken together the performers have worked in a total ofeighteen Congressional offices and represent 62 years of collectiveHouse and Senate staff experience.

Since they began, the Capitol Steps have recorded over 30albums, including their latest,Take the Money and Run — forPresident. They’ve been featured on NBC, CBS, ABC, and PBS, and can be heard 4 times a year on National Public Radio stations nationwide during their Politics Takes a Holidayradio specials.

9:00 pmREGIONAL HOSPITALITY SUITES OPEN

* Lead Presenter

We put the MOCK in Democracy!

Fresh

“They’re

the best.

There’s no one

like them, no one

in their league.”

— Larry King,

CNN

NCN

ng,rry Kin thei

La—

” no one

eague.r le them,

i

iki

”

s no one

lk

l

on the best.

here’T

b o “They’re y

th

T

From Freshys

t From The Headlines! And Fresh

t From The Headlines!, y Crisppy And

e puWWe

From

K in DemocrCOthe Me put

t From The Headlines!

acy! Democr rat From The Headlines!

Monday, August 5, 2013

6:15 – 7:15 amNCURA FUN RUN ~ POWER WALKThe day will start at 6:15 am at the Hilton’s main entrance foyeron the lobby level for stretching. Runners and walkers will thenbe provided with maps and directions prior to departing thehotel at 6:30 am and returning around 7:15 am with plenty oftime left for participants to get ready before the first session.

7:30 am – 5:00 pmAM55 CONCIERGEEXPOSITION 2013



26* Lead Presenter

10:00 – 10:30 am • NETWORKING BREAK

10:00 am – 5:00 pm • ASK THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Do you have any burning questions about the NationalScience Foundation? NSF staff will be available to answerquestions about proposal preparation and submission,policies including cost sharing and data management,postdoctoral mentoring plans, award administration,technical and financial requirements, just to name a fewtopics. Do you want to know about all the services currently

and soon to be available in Research.gov? As part of this one-stop-shop event, NSF staff will be on hand all day on Monday,August 5th to answer any of your specific questions orconcerns. Come speak one-on-one with policy specialists,grant specialists, cost analysts, accountants and IT specialists. We want you to ask early, ask often and go home knowingthe answers!

THERE WILL BE CONTINUOUS REFRESHMENT BREAKS MONDAY – WEDNESDAY

NEW THISYEAR!

7:30 – 8:15 amCONTINENTAL BREAKFAST AND ROUNDTABLE COMMUNITIES Grab your breakfast and join your community for some coffee and conversation!

COMPLIANCE COMMUNITY

STRATEGIES FOR HELPING YOUR FACULTY OVERCOME THEBURDENS OF COMPLIANCEKRIS WOLFF*, Manager, Office of Sponsored Programs, FordhamUniversityLINDA BUCY, Assistant Vice President Finance and Controls, Office ofResearch, Virginia TechJULIA RODRIGUEZ, Grants and Contracts Administrator, University ofMissouri - ColumbiaDEPARTMENTAL RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION COMMUNITY

DOING MORE WITH LESSLORI BASSLER*, Research Administrator, Dept. of Internal Medicine,Internal Medicine, University of IowaRANDI WASIK, Director, Administration and Finance, Department ofUrology, University of WashingtonFINANCIAL RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION COMMUNITY

FINANCIAL COMPLIANCERASHONDA HARRIS*, Associate Director, Research Accounting Services,Temple UniversityINTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

NCURA INTERNATIONAL FELLOWSHIP PROGRAMDENISE CLARK*, Associate Vice President for Administration and Chiefof Staff, Division of Research, University of Maryland, College ParkSUSANNE RAHNER, Managing Director, Geologie-Projektmanagement-Trainings, YggdrasilJANET SIMONS, Director, Research Policy, University of MarylandBaltimore

PRE-AWARD COMMUNITY

WORKING WITH INDUSTRYKEVIN STEWART*, Industry Contracts Officer, University ofCalifornia, Santa BarbaraPREDOMINANTLY UNDERGRADUATE INSTITUTIONS

HOT TOPICS FOR PUIsMARTIN WILLIAMS*, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs, WilliamPaterson University

8:30 – 10:00 amPRESENTATION OF THE 2013OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT INRESEARCH ADMINISTRATION AWARDGUNTA LIDERS, Associate Vice President forResearch Administration, University ofRochesterKEYNOTE ADDRESS: DEE DEE MEYERSAs the first woman and the secondyoungest White House Press Secretary, DeeDee Myers learned the hard way thechallenges of representing the President tothe press, and vice versa. During her time in

the Clinton administration, she had a front-row seat atsome of the biggest events of the era, from the signing ofthe Mideast peace accords in 1993 to the passage of thePresident’s economic plan, international summitconferences and the controversies over healthcare. She alsogained unique insights into the special challenges facingwomen in politics, and leadership positions in every field.After leaving the White House, Myers was an originalconsultant to the NBC series, The West Wing, andcontributed story lines and technical advice throughout itsprizewinning long run. She is currently a Contributing Editorof Vanity Fair, and a frequent political commentator on NBCand MSNBC.



27* Lead Presenter

SPARK SESSIONS: These 15-20 minute, high energy, high deliverable offerings will get right to the good stuff and you will be able to check outmultiple topics in each time slot.

10:30 – 10:50 amA NOVEL APPROACH TO STIMULATING GRANTAPPLICATIONS FROM HUMANITIES AND SOCIALSCIENCE FACULTYJEREMY MINER*, Director of Grants and Contracts, Office ofResearch and Sponsored Programs, University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire

11:00 – 11:20 amEFFORT REPORTING DISSERTATION SURVEY RESULTS -INSIGHTS INTO BEST PRACTICES AT D/RUs AND PUIsASHLEY WHITAKER*, Assistant Director, Office of SponsoredPrograms, Nova Southeastern University

11:30 am – noonSHIBBOLETH: FEDERATED IDENTITY (SINGLE SIGN-ON)BETWEEN INSTITUTIONS AND THE FEDSJON PETERSON*, Network Administrator, Colorado StateUniversityRON SPLITTGERBER, Director of Research Services, ColoradoState University

10:30 am – noon • SPARK SESSIONS

BIOMEDICAL

POSTDOCTORAL FELLOW K99/R00 TRAINING GRANTS,SUBMISSION, PEER REVIEW TO AWARD PROCESSProgram Level: OverviewThis Presentation will take us on a journey from thesubmission process of a K99/R00 from an institutionaldepartment, to Scientific Peer Review and then onto theaward process within the NIH. This session will alsoincorporate a mock, scientific peer review?

Learning Objectives: Participants will share and contributesuccessful K99/R00 best practices and learn about the NIHprocess from submission; scientific peer review to award. PETER HAGUE*, Senior Research Administrator,Massachusetts General HospitalMELINDA B. NELSON, Chief Grants Management Officer,National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and SkinDiseases (NIAMS)CHUCK WASHABAUGH, Scientific Review Officer, NationalInstitutes of Health

10:30 am – noon • CONCURRENT SESSIONS AND DISCUSSION GROUPS

CONCURRENT SESSIONS

CORE CURRICULUM

THE GLOBALIZATION OF RESEARCH: RESEARCHADMINISTRATION IN THE 21ST CENTURYProgram Level: OverviewThe globalization of the research enterprise, expansion ofmajor international collaborations such as the Large HadronCollider at CERN and the extension of many US institutionsthrough foreign campuses pose exceptional challenges forresearch administrators. Resource allocations in support ofresearch administration offices have remained as flat as theworld in which we live, compete and collaborate. US continued on next page >

Learning Objectives: • Participants will recognize how the evolution of theacademic research enterprise has necessitated thedevelopment of research administration.

• Participants will understand how external factors haveinfluenced research administration.

• Participants will gain an appreciation of the impactglobalization has had on our profession.



28* Lead Presenter


CONCURRENT SESSIONS continued

DEPARTMENTS, INSTITUTES AND CENTERS

ETHICAL DILEMMAS FACING DEPARTMENT RESEARCH ADMINISTRATORSProgram Level: AdvancedAs department research administrators, we are often facedwith decisions that pose ethical dilemmas. Although thereare rules and regulations that we need to follow, there arefar more grey areas than black and white. For example, a PIasks you to order something that you feel may not beappropriate. You know you can get it done, but should you?In this session, we will discuss examples of ethicaldilemmas facing department research administrators andstrategies for handling them. We have our own thoughtsabout how to handle these situations; however, we are alsolooking for answers so come prepared to share and discussthis intriguing topic with us.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify the ethical values that areimportant to Department Research Administrators.

• Participants will recognize unethical behavior and whatto consider when faced with an ethical dilemma.

• Participants will learn the strategies and decision makingprocesses that provide a framework for understandingand working through ethical conflicts.

JIM MAUS*, Senior Research Administrator, WashingtonUniversity in St. LouisTERI KEELER, Associate Director Business Services and ChiefFinancial Officer, Department of Surgery, University ofWisconsin School of Medicine and Public HealthDIANE HILLEBRAND, Grant and Contract Officer, University ofNorth Dakota, School of Medicine & Health Sciences

THE GLOBALIZATION OF RESEARCH: RESEARCHADMINISTRATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY (continued)institutions are more challenged than ever to compete forthe best and brightest students and faculty as foreigninstitutions have grown in stature and at a pace rivaled onlyby the compliance mandates that are at times befuddlingand contradictory. Providing excellent customer service andmanagement for research is more challenging than everwith competing priorities.

SUSAN SEDWICK*, Associate Vice President for Research andDirector, Office of Sponsored Projects, The University of Texasat Austin

FEDERAL

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION UPDATEProgram Level: UpdateThis session is a comprehensive review of what is new anddeveloping with the National Science Foundation’sprograms, policies, people and budgets. Participants willlearn about changes affecting their institution and newprograms of interest to their researchers.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will understand upcoming changes to NSFpolicies and procedures.

• Participants will learn about current and future NSFbudgets, agency priorities, and involvement in electronicinitiatives including advances with Research.gov.

JEREMY LEFFLER*, Outreach Specialist, Policy Office, Divisionof Institution & Award Support, National Science FoundationJEAN FELDMAN, Head, Policy Office, Division of Institution &Award Support, National Science FoundationMARTHA A. RUBENSTEIN, Chief Financial Officer, and Head,Office of Budget, Finance & Award Management, NationalScience Foundation



29* Lead Presenter



FEDERAL

COGR AND THE UNIVERSITY RESPONSE TO THEPROPOSED OMB GUIDANCE (I.E. THE OMNI-CIRCULAR)Program Level: UpdateRecap of the COGR and University response to the ProposedOMB Guidance, and an update on the status.

DAVID KENNEDY*, Director, Costing Policy, Council onGovernmental Relations (COGR)

INTERNATIONAL

HORIZON 2020 (THE FRAMEWORK PROGRAM FORRESEARCH AND INNOVATION OF THE EU): NEWSCIENTIFIC FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVEGLOBAL RESEARCH EFFORTSProgram Level: OverviewHorizon 2020 is the new EU programme with a proposed€80 billion budget to be spent on research and innovationin 2014 – 2020. It has been designed to have simplifiedstructure and rules comparing to its predecessorFramework Programme 7 (FP7), but Horizon 2020 is still agiant financial instrument with many different schemeswhich might look challenging for a novice. The session willfocus on an update on the EU Framework Programme, asproposed by the European Commission, with an explicitattention to the rules for participation for US institutionsand practical advices on how to participate in an EU projectas a US institution. Participants will also learn the differentprogramme types and funding schemes in Horizon 2020suitable specifically for US institutions. The session aims tobring representatives of the US institutions interested incross-Atlantic collaboration together with representativesof the European Commission, European institutions andcurrently on-going European research projects, both fromUS and EU. Our intention is to initiate a vivid conversationabout personal experiences in EU projects, ways to fostercollaboration between the US and EU, and coherencetowards the global challenges. The Framework ProgrammeHorizon 2020 is expected to be adopted during Fall 2013,including its final budget and rules of participation.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be briefed about proposed Horizon 2020strategy and structure.

• Participants will learn programme types and fundingschemes suitable for US institutions.

• Participants will learn rules for participation for USinstitutions.

• Participants will hear about personal experiences andbest practices of applying and managing researchprojects from representatives of both US and EUinstitutions.

• Participants will debate about US – EU cooperative effortsto tackle with global challenges.

Prerequisites: No prior knowledge on European FrameworkProgrammes is required.DMITR CHICHERIN*, Research Liaison Officer, Aalto UniversityANNIKA GLAUNER, Senior Program and Research Manager,ETH Zurich/University of ZurichJAMES GAVIGAN, Minister Counselor - Research andInnovation, European Union Delegation to the United StatesJOHN WESTENSEE, Head of Research Support Office, AarhusUniversityKRISZTINA CZINER, Advisor - Grant Writing, Research SupportServices, Aalto University, FinlandDAVID RICHARDSON, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign



30* Lead Presenter



INTERNATIONAL

LEGAL AND BUSINESS CHALLENGES OFINTERNATIONAL EMPLOYMENT AND TAXATION: HOW TO STAY ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE LAWProgram Level: OverviewIncreasingly, universities establish long-term “boots on theground” operations in foreign countries for purposes ofresearch, technical assistance or other federally sponsoredprojects there. This presentation provides an overview of the nuts and bolts of maintaining such operations. We focus onhuman resources issues arising from sponsored projectsperformed overseas. Topics include immigration and visas forexpatriates and third country nationals, foreign employmentand labor law, consultants and contractors versus employees,and tax issues that cover personal and organizationalincomes taxes for both the US and host country, VAT, custom duties, and when tax and if exemption applies.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn to appreciate the unique business andlegal challenges of “boots on the ground” operations abroad.

• Participants will gain an understanding of therequirements involved with international employmentfor expatriates and third country nationals.

• Participants will be given an overview of the various taxobligations for individuals and institutions involved inglobal and international activities.

Prerequisites: Some experience in managing an overseasoperation and/or entity involving hiring local citizens, andsupporting expatriates and third country nationals. MARJORIE FORSTER*, Assistant Vice President for Research andGlobal Health Initiatives, University of Maryland, BaltimoreWILLIAM FERREIRA, Attorney at Law, Hogan Lovells US LLPBOB LAMMEY, Director, Higher Education, High StreetPartners, Inc.

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

CONFLICT OF INTEREST ISSUES FOR THE RESEARCH ADMINISTRATORProgram Level: BasicThis session will provide an overview of the principles,policies, procedures, and information management issuesinvolved in Financial Conflict of Interest (FCOI) disclosure,review, and management. The session will focus on whatresearch administrators need to know, as well as whatinstitutional policies and practices are needed forcompliance with PHS regulations and for collaborating withother institutions. The panelists include a researchadministrator, an IT manager, a communications specialist,and a compliance officer.

Learning Objectives: This session will provide an overview of COI policies, procedures, and practices for researchadministrators. LOIS BRAKO*, Assistant Vice President, Regulatory andCompliance Oversight, University of MichiganCATHY HANDYSIDE, Senior Project Manager, ITS, Universityof MichiganLORI DEROMEDI, Compliance Project Manager, University of MichiganTERRI MAXWELL, Senior Project Representative, ORSP,University of Michigan

POST-AWARD

COST PRINCIPLES FOR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONSProgram Level: BasicOMB Circular A-21 contains the cost principles foradministering federal awards at colleges and universities.This circular lays the foundation for central anddepartmental research administrators to successfullybudget and expend funds under sponsored awards. Thissession will explain the most critical elements of thecosting principles and highlight the issues most importantto new research administrators.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain an understanding of the mostrelevant sections of A-21.

• Participants will gain knowledge of how to apply the costprinciples when preparing budgets or reviewingexpenditures on federal awards.

TIM REUTER*, Director of Post-Award Operations, Office ofSponsored Research, Stanford UniversityDENISE CLARK, Associate Vice President for Administrationand Chief of Staff, Division of Research, University ofMaryland, College Park



31* Lead Presenter



POST-AWARD

SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING AND INVOICE REVIEWProgram Level: IntermediateSubrecipient monitoring is much bigger than simply addinga dollar figure to the budget or initiating payment on aninvoice. To assist our researchers, we must step into the roleof a project manager to facilitate the subaward processfrom the proposal stage to award close out. This includesmaking the determination of whether the proposed work isthat of a subaward or vendor, reviewing subawardeedocuments for completion and accuracy, invoice review,compliance, and other items related to risk managementand subaward monitoring. This session will outline our rolein working with subawards as well as to share bestpractices that have worked at other institutions.

Learning Objectives: Outline post award roles in workingwith subawards. Identify best practices for subrecipientmonitoring that have worked at other institutions.AIMEE HOWELL*, Manager, Office of Grants and ContractAccounting, University of Maryland, Baltimore CountyTAMARA LUCAS, Specialist, Contracts & Grants, University ofMaryland, BaltimoreAMANDA RAGALEVSKY, Post-Award & Contracts Manager,Partners HealthCare

PRE-AWARD

HOW TO ASSESS FINANCIAL RISK IN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONProgram Level: AdvancedWe aren’t serving our institutions well if we treat allfinancial risks as if they were equally problematic. Noproject is completely risk free; it may be necessary to acceptcertain low-level risks as the price of doing business. On theother hand, certain risks are potentially devastating andmust be avoided at all costs. The purpose of this session isto consider ways of assessing contractual clauses todetermine which financial risks are manageable and whichare not. We’ll begin by considering Bentham’s utilitarianismas a model for assessing financial risk. We’ll then reviewsome of the contractual clauses most commonly associatedwith financial risk (payment, inspection, warranty, default,infringement, and product liability). Finally, we’ll present (forfurther discussion and debate) a ranking of these clauses bydegree of financial risk.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will understand the basic principles ofBentham’s utilitarianism and how these principles can beused to assess financial risk.

• Participants will be able to identify the main contractualclauses associated with financial risk and the degree offinancial risk associated with each.

• Participants will be able to produce an approximateranking of these risks.

Prerequisites: Participants should have experience withreviewing and/or administering sponsored agreements.Participants should be familiar with typical contractualclauses.JOHN W. HANOLD*, Interim Director, Office of SponsoredPrograms, The Pennsylvania State University

CAREER SKILLS

DEADLINES: HOW TO MAKE EVERYONE STEP UP How do we enhance the productivity and performance ofthose we manage as well as those we work with and for?One key to the successful management of people andprojects is by ensuring a positive, productive use ofdeadlines. In this session we will discuss ways to set andmanage deadlines effectively.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify the most common blocks tomeeting deadlines.

• Participants will review the policies and procedures thatcan hinder or enhance an office’s success in managingprojects in a timely yet accurate manner. �

• Participants will gather useful ideas for improving yourinstitution’s proposal process.

Discussion Group Leaders: ANNE ALBINAK*, SeniorAdministrative Manager, Whiting School of EngineeringBusiness Office, The Johns Hopkins UniversityTOLISE MILES, Senior Grants and Contracts Specialist, Grantsand Contracts Administration and Finance, Children’sNational Medical Center



32* Lead Presenter



PREDOMINANTLY UNDERGRADUATE INSTITUTIONS

ASSESSING ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES AT PUIsProgram Level: OverviewA brief review of the PUI Community on Collaborate showsus there are as many ways to organize the sponsoredprograms function as there are PUIs. What’s the beststructure for the sponsored programs function at yourorganization? That depends on many things – the culture onyour campus, available resources to support the functions,the general type of research being performed, future plansfor changes in the types of research – all leading to theconclusion that the right structure for your organization isthe one that best serves the needs of faculty, administration,and the sponsors for each individual organization. But howdo you assess which is best? Come join this interactive groupto learn some issues to consider when evaluating yourinstitution’s structure and share your experiences of variousorganizational structures with other participants.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain an expanded understanding ofalternative structures for sponsored programs services.

• Participants will be provided information aboutfrequently encountered issues that arise when modifyingan organizational structure.

• Through participation, participants will learn “tricks ofthe trade” from colleagues who have experienced and/orled a reorganization of the sponsored programs services.

PAMELA NAPIER*, Director of Sponsored Programs, Agnes Scott CollegePAM WHITLOCK, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,University of North Carolina at Wilmington (Emeritus)

DISCUSSION GROUPS



33


THE OUTSIDERS: NAVIGATING CHALLENGES FACED BY CENTERS AND ORGANIZED RESEARCH UNITS IN A DEPARTMENT DRIVEN WORLDMultidisciplinary research has created researchadministration needs that sometimes require supportoutside of a traditional academic school or department.Those of us that work in institutes or centers face uniquechallenges in the administration of our extramural awards,and often it is useful to discuss possible solutions for thechallenges we face with others in similar positions. How dowe work within a variety of different department SOPs?How do we manage effort reporting when we aren’t the PI’shome department? How do we ensure we remain withinthe communication loop and are not forgotten? Join us forthis discussion group as we share our experiences andprovide some insight into the what has (and sometimes hasnot) worked for us as we support multidisciplinary teamsoutside of departmental structures.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify the unique challenges ofworking within an institute or center.

• Participants will share solutions to problems identified aschallenging from an institute or center perspective.

• Participants will gain access to a network of colleagues insimilar organizational structures.

Discussion Group Leaders: CHRISTINE BOYES*, BudgetManager, Children’s Hospital Los AngelesPAMELA FOSTER, Assistant Director, Pacific SouthwestRegional Center of Excellence, University of California, IrvineDAVID A. JAQUEZ, Manager, Departmental ResearchAssociate (DRA), University of California, Los Angeles, JonssonComprehensive Cancer Center

* Lead Presenter


DISCUSSION GROUPS continued

FEDERAL

BEST PRACTICES ON COMPLETING AN NIH TRAININGGRANT APPLICATIONThis session will discuss what contributes to a successfulNRSA Institutional Training Grant, and how to effectivelycommunicate your program in the training grantapplication. Topics include incorporating information aboutthe program itself, student pools, participating faculty, pasttraining history, and the institutional training environment.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn the building blocks for assemblingan NRSA Institutional Training Grant, with a focus on theprogrammatic aspects of these application.

• Participants will learn the importance of the data tables,a core piece of the applications.

• Participants will learn an overview of the peer reviewprocess for Training Grants.

Discussion Group Leader: NANCY DESMOND*, Acting NIHResearch Training Officer, National Institutes of Health

INTERNATIONAL

UNDERSTANDING INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATIONIN A CONTEXT OF GLOBALIZATIONTo begin our discussion – and using a basic definition fromWikipedia – “Intercultural communication is a form ofglobal communication. It is used to describe the wide rangeof communication problems that naturally appear withinan organization made up of individuals from differentreligious, social, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.Intercultural communication is sometimes usedsynonymously with cross-cultural communication. In thissense it seeks to understand how people from different continued on next page >

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be provided with a thoughtful anduseful overview of intercultural communication in thecontext of globalization and international collaboration.

• Participants will discover how institutions and individualscan effectively “frame” and promote better interculturalcommunication.



34* Lead Presenter



UNDERSTANDING INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATIONIN A CONTEXT OF GLOBALIZATION (CONTINUED)countries and cultures act, communicate and perceive theworld around them. Many people in intercultural businesscommunication argue that culture determines howindividuals encode messages, what mediums they choosefor transmitting them, and the way messages areinterpreted. As a separate notion, it studies situations wherepeople from different cultural backgrounds interact. Asidefrom language, intercultural communication focuses onsocial attributes, thought patterns, and the cultures ofdifferent groups of people. It also involves understandingthe different cultures, languages and customs of peoplefrom other countries” (Wikipedia). Using this definition as a starting point, Dr. Riess andCarfora will facilitate an interesting and timely conversationthat not only covers a host of themes noted above, but alsoplace them within the larger context of globalization andinternational collaboration. The authors will present anumber of perspectives from which participants can bothframe and better understand the “world” of interculturalcommunication and international collaboration.

Prerequisites: An interest in framing and betterunderstanding the “world” of intercultural communicationin a global context. Discussion Group Leaders: ANDY REISS*, Assistant Director,Council for International Exchange of Scholars, Institute ofInternational EducationJOHN CARFORA, Associate Provost for Research Advancementand Compliance, Loyola Marymount University


FOUNDATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS: HOW SPONSOREDRESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OFFICES WORK TOGETHERThis session will explore the complexities associated withestablishing a strong working relationship between thesponsored research office and the institution’s developmentor foundation office. Issues to be addressed are: When is anaward a contract/grant or a gift? How should the two officescoordinate support for faculty research interests? How canthe foundation facilitate the submission of a researchproposal which can only be submitted by a 501c3 or non-profit? How can you leverage donations and grant fundingto support research? The presenters will describe challengesrelated to these questions and encourage discussion amongsession attendees to explore best practices.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will become better aware of how thesponsored research office and the foundation can worktogether to support faculty research offices.

• Participants will learn who should be responsible forgrant management and what is in the best interest ofthe institution.

• Participants will develop an understanding of when anaward is a contract/grant or a gift.

Discussion Group Leaders: RICHARD S. PODEMSKI*,Associate Vice President for Research and Dean of theGraduate School, University of West FloridaJEANNE M. VIVIANI, Director, Research Programs & Services,New College of Florida



35* Lead Presenter



POLICY/COMPLIANCE

RESEARCH COMPLIANCE AT A PUI: DOING IT ALL Three leaders of Sponsored Programs at PredominantlyUndergraduate Institutions will share innovative methodsfor instilling and implementing research compliance.

Learning Objectives: Participants will have a betterunderstanding of the requirements and methods forimplementing research compliance at a PUI. Discussion Group Leaders: ALFREDO MEDINA, JR.*, AssistantVice President for Academic Affairs, Siena CollegeJOANN WAITE, Director of Sponsored Research and Programs,Gonzaga UniversityCAROLYN ELLIOTT-FARINO, Director, Grants and ContractsAdministration, Kennesaw State University

POST-AWARD

COST SHARING: POST-AWARD CHALLENGESCost sharing represents an administratively complex andhigh-risk business objective. The discussion group leaders willprovide the framework for overall discussion, with topicsincluding tracking and funding of cost share commitments,managing cost share spending, and recent audit findingsrelated to cost sharing. There will also be a discussion of someof the ways in which Northwestern has recently addressedspecific post-award management challenges related to costsharing, including changes to the management of differenttypes of cost sharing in the financial enterprise system.Participants are encouraged to bring the issues andchallenges currently on their desks related to cost sharing, aswell as their experiences, ideas, and solutions.

Discussion Group Leaders: KELLY MORRISON*, Cost ShareOfficer, Office for Sponsored Research, Northwestern UniversityELIZABETH ADAMS, Executive Director, Evanston, Office forSponsored Research, Northwestern University

POST-AWARD

F&A RATE CONSIDERATIONS FOR STRATEGICDECISION MAKINGAll research colleges and universities face unique challengesin preparing F&A proposals and negotiating F&A rates. Aswe go through these processes many of us often wonder ifwe’ve done everything we can do within the constraints offederal regulations to optimize our organization’s F&A costrecovery. The results of these actions often impact keyinstitutional decisions and directions that might impactnew research programs, capital planning and administrativeinfrastructure. In this discussion we will explore strategiesthat may be employed to maximize F&A cost recovery.Participants are encouraged to share their institutionalexperiences related to these issues.

Discussion Group Leader: MARK DAVIS*, Vice President &Partner, Higher Education & Academic Medical Centers,Attain, LLC



36* Lead Presenter



PRE-AWARD

PI CENTRIC SUPPORT MODEL – MOTIVATINGINCREASED GRANT PRODUCTIVITYGiven the well-correlated relationship between frequencyof submissions and frequency of funding for research-activefaculty our goal is to increase the number of proposalssubmitted. We must work proactively and think creativelyabout how to bring PIs to the table, prepare competitiveapplications and get more grant proposals out the door.

Learning Objectives: Participants will learn strategies forpromoting, nudging, pushing and pulling faculty to be moreproductive – writing more grants means winning moreproposals as well as tips and tricks (checklists, meetings andemail prompts) to stay on course and keep the teammoving toward completion. Discussion Group Leaders: SANDRA JUSTICE*, ResearchAdministrator, College of Arts and Sciences, University ofSouth FloridaMICHAEL MELANSON, Unit Research Administrator,University of South Florida, College of Education

Noon – 1:30 pmLUNCHEON AND PRESENTATION OF JULIA JACOBSEN

DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD RECIPIENTS AND JOSEPH CARRABINO AWARD

JOSEPH F. CARRABINO AWARD

JULIA JACOBSEN DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD

SALLY ROCKEYNational Institutes of Health

JUDY FREDENBERGUniversity of Montana

BARBARA GRAY Valdosta State University

STEVE HANSEN Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville

NORM HEBERT Brown University

DAVE RICHARDSON University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign



37* Lead Presenter

1:30 – 2:45 pm • CONCURRENT SESSIONS AND DISCUSSION GROUPS

CONCURRENT SESSIONSBIOMEDICAL

MANAGING YOUR CLINICIAN/SCIENTIST FACULTY:TAMING THAT “DIFFERENT ANIMAL”�Program Level: BasicAre you new to working with clinical faculty, or perhaps youhave already begun to work with clinical faculty? Are youlooking in your tool box for ways to improve (or better stillknow where to begin) and effectively communicate with theclinician scientist? If this is the case, you already know or arefinding out that clinician scientists have a different approachto research. Unlike basic science faculty, clinician scientistshave patient care commitments which may include surgery,on call duties, inpatient care and emergencies. Dedicatedtime for research may be limited or nonexistent, and it’s notdifficult to see where priorities might land. If you aresearching for ways to “tame that different animal” you havecome to the right place!

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how to use direct, proactivecommunication to partner with faculty.

• Participants will learn how to educate and provide thesupport needed in a time-effective way.

• Participants will learn how to build a productiveenvironment so your faculty can be successful.

SUE A. KELCH*, Research Senior Financial Specialist, KresgeHearing Research Institute, Department of Otolaryngology,University of MichiganSCOTT DAVIS, Associate Director, University of OklahomaHealth Science CenterDAVID LYNCH, Executive Director, Office for SponsoredResearch, Northwestern University


1:30 – 1:50 pmRESEARCH ADMINISTRATORS MASTER’S PROGRAMALEXANDRA HARTMANN*, Assistant Director of GraduateAdmissions, Emmanuel College

2:00 – 2:20 pmCOLLABORATE! MAXIMIZING NCURA’S PROFESSIONALNETWORKING PLATFORMSTEPHANIE MOORE*, Community Curator, National Councilof University Research Administrators

1:30 – 2:45 pm • SPARK SESSIONS

CAREER SKILLS

GOOD FENCES MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS: WORK-LIFEBALANCE IN RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION Program Level: OverviewWork-life balance is of particular importance to researchadministrators, whose work schedules are often dictated bynumerous forces outside their control. Workplace stress iswidespread, and contributes to health problems andburnout. Yet in the university environment, we arecontinually asked to do more with less. Under suchincreasing pressure, is it possible to excel at work and enjoyyour life? What are the keys to attaining work-life balance?This session will explore solutions, tools, and strategies forbalancing the demands of your job and the need for a lifeoutside of research administration.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be able to identify problem areas in their lives.

• Participants will be able to create a plan for achieving amore realistic balance.

• Participants will be able to implement key solutions andset workable boundaries to reduce stress and becomemore productive both at work and at home.

BRIGETTE PFISTER*, Director of Sponsored Programs forHumanities & Sciences, Virginia Commonwealth UniversityJENNIFER SHAMBROOK, Director of Grants and Contracts, St.Jude Research HospitalTRISHA SOUTHERGILL, Director of Grants Support Services,Clemson University


CAN I CHARGE THIS ITEM TO A GRANT? (A MINI GUIDE FORDETERMINING ALLOWABILITY OF CHARGES ON GRANTS)Program Level: BasicHow do we determine if an expense on a sponsored projectis allowable or unallowable? Is “we put it in the proposalbudget” enough justification for the expense? This sessionwill offer an overview of the cost principles as defined byOMB providing the basis for direct charging to sponsoredprojects. The panelists will discuss those costs that arenormally considered unallowable and what justificationsare needed to support their inclusion as a direct cost.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn tips for determining cost allowability.• Participants will gain an understanding of why tying theexpense to the scope of work is essential.

• Participants will learn how to classify expenses- direct vs.indirect based on their usage.

• Participants will learn how developing good habits willhelp prepare for an audit when questionable expenseshave been charged to your projects.

JENNIFER EVANS*, Post Award Manager, Purdue UniversityCalumetGLENDA BULLOCK, Manager of Business Operations, Divisionof Hematology, Washington University in St. Louis

CORE CURRICULUM

PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT/GRANTSMANSHIPProgram Level: BasicWhile not all research administrators are involved in theinitial stages of the grant lifecycle (the work that goes onprior to getting a proposal ready for submission) all of us canbenefit from an understanding of those first, crucial steps.Developing a project concept, sponsor identification, teambuilding, grant writing, etc. are all part of what is oftenlabeled research or proposal development. In this session wewill describe and discuss the what, when and why of theseimportant pre-proposal activities and will introduce a casestudy that will be used throughout this track to reinforce thekey concepts and ideas of the lifecycle of an award.

BOB LOWMAN*, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research,University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill



38* Lead Presenter



FEDERAL

OMB SUPER CIRCULAR A-81Program Level: UpdateThis session will take advantage of the collective wisdom ofthose participating to discuss the ramifications of theAdvanced Notice of Proposed Guidance (ANPG) issued inthe Federal Register, Vol. 77 no.39 (FEBRUARY 28, 2012) andthe subsequent final rules that are expected to be issuedlater this year. Topics include the combining of the OMBcirculars and approaches for managing the super circularfrom the institutional perspective.

Learning Objectives: Participant will learn up-to-dateinformation on proposed changes to the reform of FederalPolicies, share institutional responses and approaches forimplementation of this new circular.Prerequisites: Knowledge of OMB Circulars, federalcompliance initiatives and accountability standards.PATRICIA HAWK*, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,Oregon State UniversityDAVID J. MAYO, Director of Sponsored Research, CaliforniaInstitute of TechnologyDAVID RICHARDSON, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign



39* Lead Presenter



FEDERAL

REEPort, RESEARCH.GOV AND THE COMMONS: THE HIPPEST TRIP IN TOWN...AGENCYIMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESEARCH PERFORMANCE PROGRESS REPORT (RPPR)Program Level: UpdateThis session will provide updates on the USDA, NSF and NIHimplementation of RPPR: the new research reportingformat. Your faculty are already on board...are YOU?

Learning Objectives: Participants will learn about agencyexpectations for your faculty in submission of the newlyimplemented RPPR, including content, formatting, andlessons learned to date.JEAN FELDMAN*, Head, Policy Office, Division of Institution &Award Support, National Science FoundationKATELYN SELLERS, Management & Program Analyst,National Institute of Food & Agriculture, USDAEMILY LINDE, Grants Policy Analyst, National Institutes ofHealth

FEDERAL

THE ABCs OF THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,AN ALPHABET SOUP OF PROGRAMSProgram Level: OverviewDo you know what the following Department of Educationprograms are: TRIO, FIPSE, GAANN, FIP, ARRT, RERC, and RTTC?Our panel will provide information on a variety of Edprograms including these. Do you have a program that youcan add to our alphabet soup of Ed programs? Come andjoin your colleagues in discussing US Department ofEducation programs and add your two cents worth!

Learning Objectives: Following this session, participant willbe able to discuss a variety of US Department of Educationprograms. DEBORAH A. EPPS*, Research Coordinator, Department ofOrthopaedic Surgery, The Medical College of WisconsinBETH SEATON, Director of Research Administration,Northwestern UniversitySHANNON SUTTON, Director of Sponsored Projects, WesternIllinois University

INTERNATIONAL

ENSURING COMPLIANCE IN INTERNATIONALCOLLABORATIONSProgram Level: OverviewHow do we deal with allegations of misconduct in sciencewhen allegations are made against our internationalpartners in research? How do we address issues of enforcing and safeguarding the use of human subjects in researchwhen the research is conducted in a foreign country? How dowe address conflict of interest? How do we address issues offinancial misconduct with our international partners? Thesequestions will be addressed by our federal panelists who willshare their insights and discuss how we can managecompliance on the international scene.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn about compliance issues that can arise when contracting with foreign entities.

• Participants will learn successful strategies for dealingwith international compliance issues.

MARIANNE WOODS*, Senior Associate Vice President forResearch (Emeritus), The University of Texas at San AntonioALLISON LERNER, Inspector General, Office of InspectorGeneral, National Science FoundationSALLY ROCKEY, Deputy Director for Extramural Research,National Institutes of Health



40* Lead Presenter

POST-AWARD

MANAGING PERFORMANCE: USING METRICS TOINFORM, ENFORCE AND PREPARE Program Level: IntermediateThis session features a discussion of how the use offinancial transactions and performance data can be usedproactively to improve transparency, accountability and toprovide an enhanced culture of compliance. The Universityof North Carolina System and Duke University havedeveloped similar approaches to identifying potentialresearch administration compliance and performanceissues, and have developed commensurate proactivemeasures to improve performance and enhance the cultureof compliance throughout their respective constituencies.Presenters will discuss how performance metrics have beendeveloped, what is being measured, how standards wereestablished, and steps taken to enhance compliance andperformance, including campus policy development,improved systems, and required training. Models will beshared that are applicable to most universities, andinteractive discussion is encouraged among all participants.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be provided with suggestions for thedevelopment of a compliance performance matrix andidentifiable compliance metrics.

• Participants will be provided with insights into how touse data to measure compliance performance andmanagement at all levels.

• Participants will be provided with suggestions forestablishing proactive measures to establish andmaintain a culture of compliance.

SARAH SMITH*, Director of Sponsored Programs, Universityof North Carolina at Chapel Hill, General AdministrationPANDA S. POWELL, Director, Sponsored Programs, Office ofResearch Services, University of North Carolina WilmingtonJULIE COLE, Director, Research Costing Compliance, DukeUniversityTODD LEOVIC, Department of Immunology, Duke University



POLICY/COMPLIANCE

BUILDING BLOCKS OF RESEARCH POLICYDEVELOPMENTProgram Level: IntermediateDeveloping a research policy isn’t merely about followingthe federal regulations and protecting your institution fromfinancial or reputational risk. There are many factors to takeinto account when developing research policies, includingensuring accuracy and consistency, obtaining buy-in fromyour constituents, and eliminating as much ambiguity aspossible. Are you a new sponsored research office who istasked with developing the institution’s first research policy,or are you a decentralized institution in which policies arewritten at every level, university and school-wide, and youneed to navigate through the multiple channels to ensurecompliance at the individual level? This session will coverthe basic steps that should be accounted for whendeveloping a research policy and will include examples of anexisting institutional research policy.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will understand the basic steps in researchpolicy development.

• Participants will identify key points that will increaselikelihood of compliance at the individual level.

• Participants will be able to determine what sectionsshould be included in a policy or procedure.

Prerequisites: Participants are not required to have priorexperience in sponsored research policy development butshould have a general knowledge of key federal regulationsand sponsored research policies. DENISE MOODY*, Program Manager for Research Policy,Harvard UniversityELIZABETH LANGDON-GRAY, Assistant Provost for ResearchDevelopment and Planning, Harvard UniversityDAPHNE IRELAND, Policy and Communications Manager,Princeton University



41* Lead Presenter



PRE-AWARD

SENIOR HOT TOPICS: MIRACLES HAPPEN DAILY BUTTHE IMPOSSIBLE TAKES LONGER Program Level: AdvancedHas crowd sourcing sponsorships got you befuddled? Areyou trying to figure out how to deal with hybrid fundingsources that co-mingle funding from for-profit and not-for-profit sectors that result in the worst of both worlds interms and conditions? Or are you concerned about theuncertain future of research administration given theefforts to “reduce administrative burden”? Senioradministrators will endeavor to answer your questions ontopics that are hotter than the temperatures outside.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain insights on how other institutionsare handling “outside the box” issues.

• Participants will gain insights on how other institutionsare implementing new regulatory requirements.

• Participants will gain insights on how other institutionsare using metrics to demonstrate the increasedworkloads in sponsored projects offices during leanfunding periods.

Prerequisites: The session will address advanced topics butthe content will address questions arising at levels ofinterest to all.SUSAN SEDWICK*, Associate Vice President for Research andDirector, Office of Sponsored Projects, University of Texas at AustinLISA MOSLEY, Director of Research Advancement, ArizonaState UniversityJILDA GARTON, Vice President for Research, Georgia TechUniversity


JEKYLL AND HYDE: BALANCING RESEARCHDEVELOPMENT AND COMPLIANCEProgram Level: OverviewIn small offices, one person may have responsibility for both pre-award proposal development and for variousdimensions of post-award compliance. Are researchadministrators at PUIs at risk of developing MultiplePersonality Disorders--cheerily promoting extramuralfunding one minute, darkly warning of the dangers thenext? In this session, we will discuss strategies for keepingyour faculty engaged with grant-seeking and responsive toguidance, while maintaining good morale.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn to identify compliance risks at theirinstitutions before they become emergencies.

• Participants will develop strategies for integratingcompliance training into pre-award developmentactivities.

• Participants will identify skills of interpersonalcommunication to help maintain healthy workingrelationships even in worst-case scenarios.

KRIS A. MONAHAN*, Director of Sponsored Research andPrograms, Providence CollegeJOSEPH TOMARAS, Associate Director of External Grants,Bates CollegeJILLIAN CAWLEY, Assistant Director of Grants Development,Richard Stockton College of New Jersey



42* Lead Presenter


DISCUSSION GROUPS

CAREER SKILLS

NCURA BOOK CLUB, “TELLING AIN’T TRAINING”This discussion group offers insight into the trainingmethods and philosophy presented in the book “TellingAin’t Training” by Harold D. Stolovich and Erica J. Keeps. Thebook offers a consolidated view of the many knownlearning theories and puts them into “Six UniversalPrinciples.” It also outlines a model for efficient instruction.

Discussion Group Leader: MICHELLE POWELL*, Director ofeCommerce & Data, Office of Sponsored Programs, GeorgiaInstitute of Technology

CORE CURRICULUM

IDENTIFYING CORE COMPETENCIESResearch administrators have one of the toughest jobs atany institution. Day in, day out, their plates are alwaysoverflowing. As a part of the Core Curriculum track, thisdiscussion group will focus on some of the commonchallenges facing newcomers to research administration.Join me as we discuss the policies and proceduresnecessary to properly administer sponsored programs.Drawing on previous topics presented in this track, beprepared to talk about proposal development, managingdeadlines, dealing with difficult faculty, the importance ofmaintaining good relations between central offices anddepartmental research administrators, or whatever is onyour mind. You know, just your average day at the office.

Discussion Group Leader: CHERYL K. WILLIAMS, AssistantDirector, Office of Research and Project Administration,University of Rochester

BIOMEDICAL

CLINICAL TRIALS OFFICE – BEST PRACTICESDo you find yourself inundated with multiple clinical trialnegotiations? Do you find it difficult keeping track of theirstatus and trying to coordinate the budget, IRB and contractnegotiation process? Perhaps you may have even loststudies due to inefficiencies, or just trying to do too much.Have you created tools or best practices for facilitating andmanaging the negotiation and administration of externallyfunded clinical trials? If yes, or even if you are just lookingand have creative ideas then plan to join this discussiongroup as we focus our efforts toward identifying those bestpractices that lead to increased efficiencies and improvedoperations of your clinical trials office. Plan to share yourconcerns, thoughts, and your solutions!

Discussion Group Leader: RONALD F. POLIZZI*, AssociateDirector, Thomas Jefferson University



43* Lead Presenter




COMPLIANCE FROM THE DEPARTMENT/CENTER PERSPECTIVEThis discussion group will focus on compliance relatedissues from the departmental/center perspectives. We willidentify challenges and hurdles and offer practical tips toaddress compliance related issues. We will also discuss theimportance of the departmental research administrator’srole in their organization compliance chain. This roleawakening will allow the DRA to be more conscious ofcompliance issues and allow them to be the first line ofdefense for their organization.

Discussion Group Leader: DERICK F. JONES*, DepartmentalFinancial Manager, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

FEDERAL

BEST PRACTICES FOR NIH GRANT ADMINISTRATORSAND DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATORSDiscuss with fellow departmental and NIH grantadministrators their career long experience and tipsworking with the NIH. Plan on swapping check lists orimprove your own. Discuss topics such as: sequestration,GRA Salary Cap, Executive Level Salary Cap, JIT businessprocess for IRB and IACUC, and more. Bring your businesscards to develop a professional network with NIH focusedNCURA members.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will share NIH experiences and tips.• Participants will learn best practices from otherinstitutions.

• Participants will create contacts with NIH focused NCURAmembers.

Discussion Group Leaders: GARRETT STEED*, Senior GrantOfficer, Office of Contracts & Grant, University of ColoradoBoulderHEATHER OFFHAUS, Director, Medical School Grant Review &Analysis, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor

FEDERAL

PROPOSED SURVEY OF POSTDOCTORAL BENEFITSNIH officials will discuss a proposed survey to gatherinformation regarding benefits (health, retirement, leave,child care, etc.) provided to Postdoctoral Researchers at NIHgrantee institutions. The proposed survey will askparticipants about the types, costs, and funding source ofbenefits offered to Postdoctoral Researchers at theirinstitutions. Participants will have the opportunity tocomment on the clarity of the survey questions.

Discussion Group Leaders: DORIT ZUK*, Science PolicyAdvisor to the NIH Deputy Director for Extramural Research,National Institutes of HealthWALLY SCHAFFER, Senior Scientific Advisor for ExtramuralResearch, National Institutes of HealthERICA ROSEMOND, Program Officer, Office of ResearchTraining & Career Development, Division of Neuroscience &Basic Behavioral Science, National Institute of Mental Health

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

COI: THE YEAR IN REVIEWAs a result of changes to PHS regulations for FinancialConflict of Interest (FCOI) that went into effect on August24, 2012, many institutions have redesigned or modifiedtheir processes for disclosure and review. Participants will be invited to share their successes and challenges.Examples of implementation strategies from a selection ofsmall, medium, and large institutions will be shared to aidthe discussion.

Learning Objectives: Participants will have the opportunityto share “lessons learned” about the first year ofimplementation of the new PHS FCOI regulations. Discussion Group Leader: LOIS BRAKO*, Assistant VicePresident, Regulatory and Compliance Oversight, Universityof Michigan



44* Lead Presenter



POST-AWARD

CONVERSATIONS ABOUT COST TRANSFERS: WHY,WHEN, WHERE, HOW?This Discussion Group invites new and seasoned researchadministrators to talk about their experiences with costtransfers. What are the basics and what are the unwrittenrules?

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn when cost transfers are acceptable.• Participants will understand what transfers should causethem to question.

• Participants will learn how a transfer should becompleted from start to finish.

Discussion Group Leaders: KIMBERLY GINN*, Director, BakerTilly Virchow Krause, LLPADRIENNE LARMETT, Senior Consultant, Baker Tilly VirchowKrause, LLP

PRE-AWARD

LAYING THE FOUNDATION PRIOR TO PROPOSALDEVELOPMENT This session will discuss the building blocks and toolsrequired to lay a solid foundation for proposal development.Anticipated topics include budget templates,communication methods, staff training, facultydevelopment and more.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain new ideas for assisting in theproposal development process and will learn from othersabout methods that have been successfully implemented.

• Participants will have a deeper knowledge of industrytools.

Discussion Group Leader: HOLLIE R. SCHRIEBER*, Manager,Ag Sponsored Programs Administration, Oklahoma StateUniversity

INTERNATIONAL

ACCESSING EUROPEAN RESEARCH FUNDING Horizon 2020 will be the principal EU funding programme forresearch and innovation between 2014 and 2020. It will alsoincorporate activities of the European Institute of Innovationand Technology and innovation funding activities from the current Competitiveness and Innovation Programme. This session will provide an overview of the structure of the proposed new programme, details of the latestdevelopments in its negotiation process as well as someinsights on how non-EU institutions can participate.Participants will also be provided with some hints and tips onengaging with the first calls to be expected in January 2014.

Learning Objectives: Participants will become familiar withHorizon 2020 content, terminology, key players.Discussion Group Leaders: AGATHA KELLER*, Co-Director EUGrantsAccess, ETH Zurich & University of ZurichJAMES GAVIGAN,Minister Counselor - Research andInnovation, European Union Delegation to the United StatesCHRISTOPH EBELL, Counselor, Embassy of Switzerland in theUnited States of America



45* Lead Presenter




ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE: BUILDING RELATIONSHIPSAT PUIsCreating and maintaining relationships is a challengeunique to a Predominantly Undergraduate Institutionbecause at most PUI’s, the sponsored program office is quitesmall and the responsibilities are quite large. We are oftenthe pre-award office AND the post-award office. We are the“face” of compliance at our institution, but we also workdirectly with the business office, the board of directors,faculty in all disciplines, and with undergraduates seekingresearch opportunities. We do it all and we do it for a vastarray of constituents. This session will focus on how toestablish and nurture those relationships.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify key stakeholders at theirinstitution.

• Participants will be able to describe ways in which theirvarious relationships can make them more effective intheir roles.

• Participants will summarize effective communicationstrategies.

Discussion Group Leaders: JEFFREY RITCHIE*, Director ofSponsored Programs, Lewis UniversityKATIE PLUM, Director of Sponsored Projects, Angelo StateUniversity

2:45 – 3:00 pm • NETWORKING BREAK

3:00 – 3:45 pm • REGIONAL BUSINESS MEETINGS

Open to all Annual Meeting participants, and led by the Region’s chairperson, the Regional Business Meetings introducecurrent and incoming officers, describe ongoing initiatives and provide information on the regional spring meetings and howyou can get involved in your region!

REGION I, NEW ENGLAND(CONNECTICUT, MAINE, MASSACHUSETTS, NEW HAMPSHIRE, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT)

REGION II, MID-ATLANTIC(DELAWARE, MARYLAND, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, WASHINGTON, D.C., WEST VIRGINIA)

REGION III, SOUTHEASTERN(ALABAMA, ARKANSAS, FLORIDA, GEORGIA, KENTUCKY, LOUISIANA, MISSISSIPPI,NORTH CAROLINA, PUERTO RICO, SOUTH CAROLINA, TENNESSEE, VIRGIN ISLANDS,VIRGINIA)

REGION IV, MID-AMERICA(ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, KANSAS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI,NEBRASKA, NORTH DAKOTA, OHIO, SOUTH DAKOTA, WISCONSIN)

REGION V, SOUTHWESTERN(OKLAHOMA, TEXAS)

REGION VI, WESTERN(ALASKA, CALIFORNIA, HAWAII, NEVADA, OREGON, WASHINGTON)

REGION VII, ROCKY MOUNTAIN(ARIZONA, COLORADO, IDAHO, MONTANA, NEWMEXICO, UTAH, WYOMING)

INTERNATIONAL REGION(AUSTRALIA, AUSTRIA, CANADA, CHINA, CZECH REPUBLIC, DENMARK, FINLAND,GERMANY, JAPAN, LEBANON, NORWAY, PERU, PORTUGAL, QATAR, SAUDI ARABIA,SINGAPORE, SOUTH AFRICA, SPAIN, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND, UNITED ARABEMIRATES, UNITED KINGDOM, ZIMBABWE)



46* Lead Presenter

BIOMEDICAL

RISK MANAGEMENT AND LEGAL ISSUES AT ACADEMICMEDICAL CENTERSProgram Level: IntermediatePatient care, privacy and IP issues associated with researchat academic medical centers raises more institutional riskand liability issues than any other university based research.This panel discussion will present three primary researchrisk/liability issues in academic medical centers and discussinstitutional methods for managing the risk and liability.

Learning Objectives: Participants will hear riskmanagement strategies and approaches for three risk areasin academic medical center research which can either helpthem understand the approaches used at their owninstitutions or enable them to begin discussion of newstrategies at their own institutions.Prerequisites: Participants should be working at a level wherethe risk management strategies for research at their owninstitutions impact their work or or where they participate indecision making on such risk management approaches.MICHAEL B. AMEY*, Associate Dean, Research Administration,The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine


CONCURRENT SESSIONS

BIOMEDICAL

CTSA: ACT II (THE RENEWAL PROCESS) LESSONS LEARNEDProgram Level: OverviewFor institutions planning on resubmission of a CTSA, theprocess is no longer a renewal but rather a brand newapplication. This session will focus on lessons learned at YaleUniversity and the University of Rochester on planning andpreparing for the new RFA. Tips for moving the applicationprocess forward and ensuring that all aspects of the grantare addressed will be covered.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will have a better understanding the keyareas that need to be addressed for CTSA resubmission.

• Participants will have a better understanding pitfalls toavoid in a successful renewal application.

Prerequisites: Advanced level of understanding of clinicalresearch.TESHEIA JOHNSON*, Associate Director of Clinical Researchfor Yale School of Medicine COO, YCCI, Yale UniversityMAIJA NEVILLE-WILLIAMS, Administrative Director for theCenter for Clinical and Translational Science, The RockefellerUniversity



4:00 – 4:20 pmLEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 101 – THE QUALITIES OF A LEADERTopics from the new Leadership Development chapter ofNCURA’s Sponsored Research Administration: A Guide toEffective Strategies and Recommended Practices.

TONY VENTIMIGLIA*, Associate Director, Office of SponsoredPrograms, Auburn University

4:30 – 4:50 pmVOLUNTEERING FOR NCURA – HOW TO GET INVOLVEDALISSA BROWER*, Manager, National Volunteer Programs,National Council of University Research Administrators



47* Lead Presenter

CAREER SKILLS

KEY COMPONENTS OF TEAM COLLABORATIONProgram Level: OverviewMost would agree that research administration requiresteam effort. Knowing how to establish and cultivateeffective cohesive teams is a skill leaders in researchadministration must develop and utilize. If teams are notworking effectively, lack of service and audit findings arelikely to appear. This session will discuss how to build teamsthrough a series of six steps for effective team building andhow to determine if teams are operating successfully.

Learning Objectives• Participants will learn when to use teams or not.• Participants will learn general team compositionconsiderations.

• Participants will review the six steps for team building.• Participants will review criteria to measure team success.JO ANN SMITH*, Director, Assistant Professor, University ofCentral FloridaCELESTE RIVERA-NUÑEZ, Assistant Director, University ofCentral Florida



CAREER SKILLS

ASSESSING/EVALUATING SPONSORED RESEARCHSTAFF PERFORMANCEProgram Level: OverviewOne of the biggest challenges for managers is finding areliable method for assessing staff performance. Our staffmay have tremendous variation in the size and complexityof their portfolios. How do we determine appropriate levelsof work and responsibility; do we simply use volume of workproduced as a measure? We will discuss different methodsof assessing productivity, what works and what isn’t asreliable and methods for creating a ladder of responsibilityas well as productivity.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn of the essential but challengingtask value of assessing staff performance.

• Participants will identify the wide range of tasks thatmake up a portfolio.

• Participants will examine ways of measuring a researchadministrator’s portfolio.

• Participants will explore additional metrics that mayprove more reliable.

• Participants will learn of ways to create a ladder ofresponsibility as well as productivity.

MICHELE CODD*, Associate Director, Sponsored ProjectsAdministration, George Washington UniversitySHANDRA WATSON, Sponsored Projects Manager, GeorgeWashington University

CORE CURRICULUM

BUILDING A BUDGET I: FOUNDATIONS OF BUDGETINGProgram Level: BasicThis session will continue the introduction to the basicconcepts and topics related to research administrationduring the lifecycle of an award. Developing a clear andreasonable budget is one of the most important pieces ofthe proposal process. The regulations state that the budgetshould be the financial expression of the statement of work. continued on next page >

Learning Objectives: • Using the OMB Circulars as the basis for our discussion, thissession will explore the foundations of budget building.

• Participants will discuss allowability, allocability andreasonableness, administrative and clerical salary issues,determination of subrecipient, vendor or consultantstatus, and many more issues surrounding budgeting.

• This session should lay the groundwork for researchcoordinators to successfully and confidently build asound budget.



48* Lead Presenter




AND THE TOP TEN THINGS ARE...OR ALL I WANTED TO BE WAS A DEPARTMENTAL RESEARCHADMINISTRATOR (TIME MANAGEMENT)Program Level: BasicAs we strive to achieve completion in our dailydepartmental tasks, whether we are on the pre-award, post-award, or both sides of the equation we must balancenot only our faculty, staff, central offices and sponsors, butalso a myriad of internal and external rules/regulations/deadlines/etc. How do we do this and stay sane? Thissession will try and focus on successfully managing timeand meetings; implementing change and team work withtraining, useful motivation, delegation and autonomy. Thissession will be lighthearted and informative.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn to manage time in our work day.• Participants will learn to build teams and relationships towork efficiently.

• Participants will learn best practices we can all share.• Participants will gain strengths from teaming.• Participants will learn to implement change and teamwork with: training; useful motivation; delegation;autonomy; and, useful tools.

• Participants will learn to recognize and grow thecollaboration within their department and with theircentral offices to build the necessary bridges.

RANDI WASIK*, Director, Administration and Finance,Department of Urology, University of WashingtonSINNAMON TIERNEY, Assistant Director, DepartmentalResearch Administration, Sponsored Projects Administration,Portland State University

BUILDING A BUDGET I: FOUNDATIONS OF BUDGETING(CONTINUED)The ability to build a budget that directly ties to the workbeing performed will enhance the chances of being fundedby the sponsor, and understanding how to assist PIs inbuilding a reasonable budget is essential to our roles asresearch administrators. A case study will be presented anddiscussed at the end of the session to ensure that the keyconcepts and ideas were comprehended so that theattendees who are new to the research administrationcommunity have a solid understanding of the most relevantpoints along the spectrum from start to finish in regards tothe lifecycle of an award.

REBECCA HUNSAKER*, Assistant Director, Administration,College of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University ofMaryland, College ParkMEREDITH LEE, Assistant Director, Center for Advanced Studyof Language, University of Maryland, College ParkGAYE BUGENHAGEN, Director of Administrative Services,Sociology Department, University of Maryland, College Park

FEDERAL

UPDATE ON FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES AT THE NEAAND NEHProgram Level: UpdateProgram officers for the National Endowment for the Artsand the National Endowment for the Humanities willdescribe current grant initiatives at the Endowments andanswer questions about programs and grant management.

Learning Objectives: Participants will have a greaterawareness of grant opportunities at the two culturalendowments. CARRIE HOLBO*, Grants Management Specialist, NationalEndowment for the ArtsSTEFANIE WALKER, Senior Program Officer, Division ofResearch Programs, National Endowment for the HumanitiesDANIEL SACK, Senior Program Officer, Division of ResearchPrograms, National Endowment for the Humanities



49* Lead Presenter



HOT TOPICS

TIPS FOR CREATING AND SUBMITTING A NCURA YOUTUBE TUESDAYProgram Level: OverviewAlways wanted to see your name in lights? You can, withNCURA YouTube Tuesday! This is an excellent volunteeropportunity for NCURA Members. Come learn how tosupport your colleagues by providing your time andexpertise. Establish yourself as an expert in your field, show us your talent, and help your colleagues gainexpertise on a research administration topic of yourchoosing. We will provide an informational session forcreating your very own NCURA YouTube Tuesday video. Tips,guidance and information on creating a 2-3 minute NCURATube submission, and once you are ready we will have afilming room available on site.

KALLIE FIRESTONE*, Senior Compliance Specialist,Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyTARA E. BISHOP, Associate Executive Director, NationalCouncil of University Research Administrators

INTERNATIONAL

ENABLING THE GLOBAL RESEARCH ENTERPRISE FROMPOLICY TO PRACTICE - 2014 INTERNATIONALNETWORK OF RESEARCH MANAGEMENT SOCIETIESCONFERENCE (INORMS)Program Level: OverviewDo you find yourself managing a growing number of globalprojects and collaborations in your institutional sponsoredportfolio? Is your institution looking to expand its global reachand sponsorship beyond the United States? If you answeredyes to either question, then join this session to hear how theupcoming International Network of Research ManagementSocieties (INORMS) conference will provide you with multipleopportunities to expand your global network and knowledgewithout having to leave the United States. The 2014 INORMSconference is scheduled for April 10-13 in Washington D.C. Thisoverview will share what’s unique about the conference, whyyou would benefit from attending, and how your participationwill make the world a smaller place.

DAVID RICHARDSON*, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign MARTIN KIRK, Director, Office of Research Services, Universityof British ColumbiaBILL SCHWERI, Director of Federal Relations, University ofKentucky



50* Lead Presenter

POST-AWARD

STRATEGIES FOR AUDIT SUCCESS: SURVIVING ANAUDIT FROM PROPOSAL TO CLOSEOUT Program Level: AdvancedWe will discuss the types of audits and potential areas offindings that have impacted higher education in recentexperience. The session will be an open discussion on theconcerns, questions and confusions of the researchadministrator who need to deal with these “auditors.”Additional topics may include internal control failures thathave caused many of these findings, and, how best to avoidthem at your institution.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain an awareness of common researchadministration audit findings and how they affect aninstitution.

• Participants will gain an understanding of the range of AuditAgencies that may conduct an audit at your institution.

• Participants will gain an understanding of the role and therole of other administrators in the audit process.

• Participants will discuss the importance of assessing andimproving internal controls for high risk audit areas.

• Participants will learn about internal control failures thathave caused many of these findings.

• Participants will learn how best to avoid significantsponsored research administration breakdowns at theirinstitution.

MICHAEL BOWERS*,Associate Director for Business &Technology Audit Services, Massachusetts Institute of Technology



POLICY/COMPLIANCE

USING BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE TO DRIVE RESEARCHADMINISTRATION IMPROVEMENTProgram Level: AdvancedWhen properly planned and developed, businessintelligence in the form of metrics can drive performance,change behavior and support the need for investments inresearch administration infrastructure. To best support aninstitution’s research mission it is imperative for researchadministration offices to have meaningful informationabout what they do, how much they do, how they do it, andhow long it takes to do it – in the form of metrics. Metricsare critical to providing central research administrationleadership with a full picture of their operations, but theyare also critical for department administrators in managingtheir diverse portfolios that often include more thanresearch-oriented tasks. This session focuses on the benefitsof using business intelligence from both a central researchadministration leadership perspective as well as from adepartment leadership perspective. The following arebenefits from metrics we will discuss: motivate teams toachieve desired outcomes; define business processes andresponsibilities; manage stakeholder expectations; monitorthe impact of new processes; improve decision-making andprioritization; and, evaluate staff and team performance.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn how metrics can benefit yourresearch administration operations.

• Participants will learn how to begin developing metricsand how to put metrics into operation at your institution.

• Participants will learn which metrics are most useful forcentral and department level leadership.

Prerequisites: Participants should have a broad knowledgeof research administration functional areas and theiroperational drivers as well as knowledge of researchadministration data collection methodologies. MARCIA SMITH*, Associate Vice Chancellor, Office ofResearch Administration, University of California, Los AngelesASHLEY BAKER-LEE, Vice President, Basic ResearchOperations, Bechman Research Institute, City of HopeJENNA LEE, Interim Director, Office of Sponsored Research,Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope



51* Lead Presenter



POST-AWARD

PLANNING FOR THE BONFIRE: CREATING THEPAPERLESS OFFICE Program Level: OverviewAre you considering making your operations paper-free?Have you considered what electronic files should look likeand how they should move within your office? How do youconvert all those old paper files? How to convince everyoneto “let go” of the paper? How much efficiency can beachieved with having files at your fingertips? In this sessionwe will discuss strategies and practices learned from theimplementation of an electronic filing system for a centralsponsored projects office at a large research institution.

Learning Objectives: Participants will discuss topics including: • strategies for designing a paperless filing system, even inthe absence of an electronic data system.

• repository design and folder structure for electronic filingsystem.

• conversion options for years of old paper files anddisposing of paper files.

• implementation strategies for an electronic filing system.• pitfalls and lessons learned from the implementation of apaperless system.

• how paperless files have improved office workflow,customer service and proposal/award management.

HEATHER MISHRA*, Lead Financial Analyst, CaliforniaInstitute of TechnologyJERI MUNIZ, Executive Director, Department of Contracts andGrants, University of Southern California


BUILDING YOUR OWN LIFEBOAT: TOOLS FORBEGINNING RESEARCH ADMINISTRATORSProgram Level: OverviewResearch administration involves so many components in“getting the job done” in a timely manner. Particularlyimportant is the utilization of effective leadership skills inResearch Administration. These skills are required not onlywith Directors of Research Administration, but in allemployees working in the research administration field,leading faculty down the pursuit of extramural funding.This presentation is geared for participants that are justbeginning to learn research administration, and for thosewho have been in this field for a few years.

Learning Objectives: Participants will gain insight on theunique and effective type of teamwork and leadership skillsinvolved in the workings of two separate pre-award/post-award departments. KATHI SCHOONOVER-REDDEN*, Director of Research andSponsored Programs, Northeastern State UniversityTOM JACKSON, Assistant Vice President of Academic Affairs,Northeastern State University

PRE-AWARD

IMPLEMENTATION OF PHS FINANCIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: HOW WELL ARE WE COPING WITH THESE REGS?�Program Level: AdvancedImplementation of PHS Financial Conflict of Interest hasresulted in universities issuing new or revised institutionalpolicies and procedures. This session will discuss howimplementation of the new regs has gone and whatproblems and issues have been encountered. It will also lookat how universities are dealing with the implementationissues that have surfaced.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how the PHS FCOI have affected universities.

• Participants will learn strategies for dealing with theissues that have surfaced concerning FCOI.

MARIANNE R. WOODS*, Senior Associate Vice President forResearch (Emeritus), University of Texas at San AntonioMICHELLE STEVENSON, Assistant Vice President for ResearchIntegrity and Director of Research Ethics,The University ofTexas at San Antonio



52* Lead Presenter

CAREER SKILLS

EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS LEARNED WHILEPURSUING MASTER AND DOCTORAL DEGREESA review and discussion of the reasons, advantages,potential pitfalls and perils associated with pursuing aMaster’s or Doctoral degree.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will understand the implications of pursuingan advanced degree while working full time.

• Participants will discuss tips and tools proven successfulfor research administrators who are pursuing or havecompleted an advanced degree, and provide perspectivesfrom professionals with experience in a variety of degreeprograms and disciplines, including Master’s degreeswith a focus on research administration. Takeawaysshould include an understanding of what degree trackand discipline is the best for the individual, in addition totips and tools to help along the way.

Discussion Group Leaders: SCOTT NILES*, Grants andContracts Administrator, Office of Research and SponsoredPrograms, Morehead State UniversityGARRETT STEED, Senior Grant Officer, Office of Contracts &Grants, University of Colorado BoulderTONI SHAKLEE, Assistant Vice President for Research,Oklahoma State University


DISCUSSION GROUPS

CAREER SKILLS

WORKING WITH MULTIPLE GENERATIONS IN THEWORKPLACE: DEVELOPING AND PROVIDINGINNOVATIVE METHODS FOR COMMUNICATION AND TRAININGOne reality of today’s workforce is the span of generationswho must learn to work together. Developing and providingappropriate methods for training, networking, communicationand collaboration for research managers and administratorscan be challenging in this “one size does not fit all”environment. To borrow a phrase “it takes a village” and, withtoday’s diverse working culture, it really is a village! We mustrecognize that, indeed, it requires a complex range ofresources and offerings to ensure that the profession thrivesand is responsive to the research environment. Managingexpectations; understanding various generation-basedcommunication styles and increasing collaboration amongresearch managers and administrators is imperative to thesustainability of a vibrant research community. Styles oftraining and continuing education must be tailored to eachaudience and finding the appropriate tools are critical to thesuccess of your operation. Areas such as in-house training;mentoring and reverse mentoring; learning to addressgenerational bias; increasing workplace leadership and theuse of professional societies will be discussed.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will have an enhanced awareness ofcommunication and training models.

• Participants will learn best practices to addressgenerational bias and strategies to develop and support workplace.

Discussion Group Leaders: DENISE WALLEN*, ResearchOfficer and Senior Fellows, Research Assistant Professor,University of New MexicoKATHLEEN M. LARMETT, Executive Director, National Councilof University Research Administrators



53* Lead Presenter



CORE CURRICULUM

PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT/GRANTSMANSHIPThis is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldat 1:30 pm: Proposal Development/Grantsmanship

As a follow-on to the earlier concurrent session, thisdiscussion group will offer participants the opportunity topose questions, find solutions, and offer support to oneanother in the activities related to research development.

Discussion Group Leader: BOB LOWMAN*, Associate ViceChancellor for Research, University of North Carolina atChapel Hill


COMMON CONTRACT ISSUES FOR DRAsThis discussion group will discuss common issues that arenot included in a contract that hinder a DepartmentalAdministrator role in implementing the contract.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be helped to understand you are notalone.

• Participants will learn how to work with your institutions’Contracting Department.

• Participants will learn how to manage a ‘messing’contract - everyone has at least one.

Prerequisites: Understanding of basic contract language.Discussion Group Leaders: VALERIE CRICKARD*, ResearchCost Management - Grant Accountant, University of NorthCarolina at CharlotteERIKA COTTINGHAM, Pre-Award Services Manager,University of North Carolina Charlotte


CAN I CHARGE THIS TO A GRANT? This is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldat 1:30 pm: Can I Charge This Item to a Grant?

Grab some coffee and let’s chat! The OMB provides us somebasic guidance for cost allowability, but what happens whenwe go back to our offices and into the real world of grantadministration? Let’s face it, often times costs lurch in the greyareas. This discussion session will be a follow-up to the “Can ICharge It to My Grant” session and will be taking a more in-depth look at cost allowability. Participants will have anopportunity to bring their questions and insight on some of themore signification issues that they have encountered whenreviewing costs for allowability. The session will also provideparticipants the chance to talk-over some case scenarios andoffer some personal experiences to share with the group. Bycollectively discussing relevant cost allowability concerns andscenarios the participants will gain understanding of thevarious methods and approaches used by their peers todetermine the allowability of costs on sponsored projects.

Discussion Group Leaders: JENNIFER EVANS*, Post-AwardManager, Purdue University CalumetGLENDA BULLOCK, Manager of Business Operations, Divisionof Hematology, Washington University in St. Louis



54* Lead Presenter

POST-AWARD

RECORD RETENTION: BEST PRACTICES FORDEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATORS AND CENTRALOFFICESThis discussion session will focus on issues associated withmanaging records and establishing and implementingrecords retention policies at the departmental & centraloffices level. The panel will discuss policies, procedures andshare best practices which successfully work in effectivelymanaging records and ensuring retention of requireddocumentation in accordance with established policies atschools across the country. Please join our open forumdiscussion as we review key issues in regards to recordretention that are affecting departmental & centraladministrators.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify the key criteria for efficientlymanaging record keeping in research administration atthe department and central office levels.

• Participants will learn how the panel has addressed these matters.

• Participants will discuss how your departments andcentral offices are managing these issues.

• Participants will become knowledgeable about variety ofapproaches to deal with record retention.

Discussion Group Leaders: ELANA GLATMAN*, AssociateDirector, Pre-Award Services, Worcester Polytechnic InstituteCONNIE GALANIS, Senior Sponsored Program Specialist,Worcester Polytechnic Institute



FEDERAL

HOW DO “YOU” DEAL WITH DOE LABS?An open discussion on issues working with DOE’s Labs no matter the type of partnership or arrangement. General issues and specific problems are welcomed for the discussion.

Discussion Group Leader: JACKIE KNISKERN*, Director,Contract and Financial Assistance Policy Division, U.S.Department of Energy


CURRENT ISSUES IN MANAGING RESEARCHADMINISTRATION: BEST PRACTICES FOR DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATORSThis discussion session will focus on crucial issuesassociated with managing research administration at thedepartmental level. The panel will discuss successfulpolicies and procedures that have been developed in theirdepartments. Please join our open forum discussion as wereview key research issues that are affecting departmentaladministrators.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify the current important matters, inmanaging research administration at the department level.

• Participants will learn how the panel has addressed theseconcerns.

• Participants will discuss how your department ismanaging these issues.

• Participants will become knowledgeable about variety ofapproaches to deal with complex situations.

Discussion Group Leaders: TOLISE MILES*, Senior Grants andContracts Specialist, Grants and Contracts Administrationand Finance, Children’s National Medical CenterCHERRI HELMS, Director, Pre-Award, Towson UniversityLAURA MEANEY, Associate, Huron Consultant Group



55* Lead Presenter

PRE-AWARD

PROJECT MANAGEMENT: TOOLS AND TECHNIQUESFOR THE PRE-AWARD ADMINISTRATORManaging a project can be daunting; and every project isunique in terms of the problems that arise, the prioritiesand the resources assigned it, the environment in which itoperates, and the research administrator’s attitude and styleused to guide and control the project activities. Thisdiscussion will serve as a platform for colleagues to discussand share insight regarding project managementtechniques. In addition, participants will find theinformation useful and possibly will be able to apply theideas and solutions to their projects and situations.

Discussion Group Leaders: ROSEMARY MADNICK*, AssistantVice President, Research Administration, Los AngelesBiomedical Research InstituteNETTIE NELMS, Director, Sponsored Projects Accounting, LosAngeles Biomedical Research InstituteJAN CRANE, Senior Grants and Contracts Officer, Los AngelesBiomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center

POST-AWARD

SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING AND INVOICE REVIEWThis is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldat 10:30 am: Subrecipient Monitoring and Invoice Review

Discussion Group Leaders: AIMEE HOWELL*, Manager, Officeof Grants and Contract Accounting, University of Maryland,Baltimore CountyTAMARA LUCAS, Specialist, Contracts & Grants, University ofMaryland, BaltimoreAMANDA RAGALEVSKY, Post-Award & Contracts Manager,Partners HealthCare


BEST PRACTICES IN THE ELECTRONIC GRANTSMANAGEMENT PROCESSDue to budget constraints, PUIs can’t always afford all thebells and whistles when it comes to electronicmanagement of grants. Come and share your best practicesfor both pre- and post-award, whether it be as simple as anExcel spreadsheet, an Access database, or fully integratedwith Banner or PeopleSoft products.

Learning Objectives: Participants will share best practicesabout electronic research administration.Discussion Group Leader: ROBIN DEWEY*, Director ofAcademic and Government Grants, McDaniel College

6:00 pm • DINE AROUNDS

9:00 pm • REGIONAL HOSPITALITY SUITES OPEN





56* Lead Presenter

THERE WILL BE CONTINUOUS REFRESHMENT BREAKS MONDAY – WEDNESDAY


8:30 – 10:00 am • SPARK SESSIONS

6:15 – 7:15 amNCURA FUN RUN ~ POWER WALKThe day will start at 6:15 am at the Hilton’s main entrancefoyer on the lobby level for stretching. Runners and walkerswill then be provided with maps and directions prior todeparting the hotel at 6:30 am and returning around 7:15am with plenty of time left for participants to get readybefore the first session.

7:30 am – 5:00 pmAM55 CONCIERGEEXPOSITION 2013

7:30 – 8:15 amCONTINENTAL BREAKFAST AND GET INVOLVED FAIR Grab your breakfast and join your community for somecoffee and GET INVOLVED! Volunteering for NCURA is a fantastic way to buildconnections and opportunities in your profession. NCURA’s communities, Pre-award, Financial ResearchAdministration, International, Departmental, Compliance,PUI and Electronic Research Administration, have volunteeropportunities that you can get involved with TODAY! Each ofNCURA’s regions and national committees will also berepresented so you can find out more about what they doto explore future call for nomination opportunities. By getting yourself out there and connecting withcolleagues you are moving your career forward.Volunteering allows you to gain new ideas and newapproaches that you didn’t think of before, benefitting youand your institution. Current NCURA volunteers will beexcited to talk with you, so make sure to check out theVolunteer Fair and learn about how you can get involvedand connected today!

8:30 – 8:50 amFIND OUT ABOUT THE RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICALCENTER MASTER'S DEGREE THOMAS E. WILSON*, Assistant Vice President/SeniorResearch Administrator, Rush University Medical Center

9:00 – 9:20 amPI CENTRIC SUPPORT MODEL SANDY JUSTICE*, Research Administrator, College of Arts andSciences, University of South FloridaMICHAEL MELANSON, Unit Research Administrator, Post-award, College of Education, University of South Florida

9:30 – 9:50 amFIND OUT ABOUT THE UNIVERSITY OF CENTRALFLORIDA'S MASTER'S DEGREE JO ANN SMITH*, Director, Assistant Professor, University ofCentral Florida



57* Lead Presenter

BIOMEDICAL

BUDGET DEVELOPMENT CLINICAL TRIALS: HOW TOBREAK EVENProgram Level: BasicThis session will focus on developing a proper budget forClinical Research projects, and in particular how to developand negotiate budgets that break even, perhaps evendevelop institutional residuals. We will discussmethodologies to ensure all costs are properly consideredincluding items ancillary to the department performing theresearch, separation of standard of care from actualresearch costs, guiding the PI to understand and include allassociated costs, and working to develop budgets that havea realistic chance of completion without the institutionincurring self-funded costs.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be introduced to the philosophy andcommunication process around developing budgets andaccepting awards that are managed to the bottom line.

• Participants will leave with a basic understanding ofwhat the true cost elements of clinical research are and aworking knowledge of standard of care versus trueresearch costs.

• Participants will be introduced to good budgetingtechniques and receive some tips and guidance onpractices that will assist in full cost coverage and propercommunication with PI’s and sponsor’s through-out thebudget development process.

BRIAN FARMER*, Director of Research and FinancialOperations, Cleveland ClinicHEATHER OFFHAUS, Director, Medical School Grant Review &Analysis, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor

8:30 – 10:00 am • CONCURRENT SESSIONS AND DISCUSSION GROUPS

CONCURRENT SESSIONS

CAREER SKILLS

YOU’RE IN CHARGE OF YOURSELF – SELF-GUIDEDPROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENTProgram Level: OverviewHow do you get from here to there? Do you know what youwant to be when you grow up? How many skills does it taketo climb the career ladder? Which career ladder should youclimb? What is your value proposition to the organization?What if no one asks you these questions? This panel willfocus on self-directed strategies to enhance yourprofessional development from both a technical and non-technical perspective. The presenters will share somestrategies that have worked for them, and will inviteparticipants to share their experiences as well.

Learning Objectives: Participants will develop a sense ofself-awareness and empowerment related to professionaldevelopment.LISA MOSELY*, Executive Director, Research Operations,Arizona State UniversitySAMANTHA WESTCOTT, Manager, Sponsored Projects Team,Children’s Hospital, Los AngelesJOSIE JIMENEZ, Associate Director, Office of Grants andContracts, New Mexico State University



58* Lead Presenter

CAREER SKILLS

WORKLOAD BALANCING: A CASE STUDYProgram Level: BasicIn August 2012, MIT’s Office of Sponsored Programs embarkedon an experiment to work with one of its faculty members tooptimize the proposal review process. The essence of theproject was to develop real-time metrics for ‘busy-ness’ and aprototype system for distribution of proposals in need ofreview. The project team incorporated lessons from diverseindustries – from investment banking to manufacturing.Research has shown that adding a little additional flexibilityto such operations can reap substantial results. But carefulattention to the culture and dynamics of a cradle-to-gravesponsored projects office is essential to the success of anysuch project. Join us as we discuss the effort and its results.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will see an example of applying operationsresearch techniques to sponsored research programproblems and evaluate whether a similar approachwould be valuable to their organization.

• Participants will also learn of the change managementapproaches taken in order to enable adoption of theproject.

MICHELLE CHRISTY*, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,Massachusetts Institute of TechnologySHAWNA VOGEL, Associate Director, Malt Center forRegenerative Medicine, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologySTEPHEN D. DOWDY, Director, Research Information andSystems, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

CORE CURRICULUM

BUILDING A BUDGET II: CASE STUDIES AND AUDIT FINDINGSProgram Level: BasicThis session will continue the introduction to the basicconcepts and topics related to research administrationduring the lifecycle of an award. Developing a clear andreasonable budget is one of the most important pieces ofthe proposal process. The regulations state that the budgetshould be the financial expression of the statement of work.The ability to build a budget that directly ties to the workbeing performed will enhance the chances of being fundedby the sponsor, and understanding how to assist PIs inbuilding a reasonable budget is essential to our roles asresearch administrators. A case study will be presented anddiscussed at the end of the session to ensure that the keyconcepts and ideas were comprehended so that theattendees who are new to the research administrationcommunity have a solid understanding of the most relevantpoints along the spectrum from start to finish in regards tothe lifecycle of an award.

Learning Objectives: Using the foundations set in Building aBudget I, we will review and discuss case studies and auditfindings to help participants gain a practical understandingof the challenges faced when creating a budget and therisks and consequences involved as well.REBECCA HUNSAKER*, Assistant Director, Administration,College of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University ofMaryland, College ParkMEREDITH LEE, Assistant Director, Center for Advanced Studyof Language, University of Maryland, College ParkGAYE BUGENHAGEN, Director of Administrative Services,Sociology Department, University of Maryland, College Park





59* Lead Presenter




EXPORT CONTROLS WHEN YOU’RE NOT IN CHARGE -THE IMPORTANCE OF THE THREE “Ps”: PRODUCTS,PEOPLE, PLACESProgram Level: BasicDo you get intimidated by export control terminology suchas ITAR, EAR, OFAC, ECCN, deemed exports, etc? Do youinteract on a daily basis with faculty, but just hearing theterm “export controls” from your central researchadministration office terrifies you? This session focuses onthe day-in-the-life scenarios department administratorsmight encounter but aren’t aware how they relate to exportcontrols. We will provide basic tools and knowledge onexport controls which the department administrator cantake back with them and immediately use. This session willbe very interactive with Q&A discussions and case studies.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will understand the basic principles ofexport control regulations.

• Participants will learn how the department can help yourexport control office.

• Participants will identify key “red flags” during theproposal and award stages.

DENISE MOODY*, Program Manager for Research Policy,Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Harvard UniversityJENNIFER PONTING, Senior Grants and Contracts Officer,Harvard UniversityDAVID NGO,Managing Officer, Pre-Award Servcies,University of Wisconsin-Madison

HOT TOPICS

SIMPLIFICATION: THE FUTURE OF RESEARCHADMINISTRATION Success for a research administrator is defined as his/herability to get things done. This success is being constantlythwarted by increasingly complex regulations and eachinstitutions unique interpretation of these regulations.When new regulations appear, the first reaction is to insertadditional steps into a business process that is alreadystruggling to be efficient, leading to unnecessary burdenson investigators and administrators. This session will focus on how institutions look inward toincrease operational efficiencies thus reducing continued on next page >

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn to use data to guide decision makingand improve organizational effectiveness.

• Participants will learn methods for gathering feedbackleading to continuous operations improvement.

• Participants will be provide with a framework on how tomanage risk and identify areas for focused operationalimprovement.


60


* Lead Presenter



INTERNATIONAL

NCURA EXCHANGE PROGRAMSProgram Level: OverviewBoth NCURA Fellows and research administrators at theinstitutions that host them have reported that theexperience surpassed all expectations. Come and hear froman NCURA Fellow and a lead contact at a Host Institutionabout their experiences and why they found it soworthwhile and then learn from a member of the NCURAExchange Program selection committee, about what ittakes to successfully apply for the program.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn about the benefit of being anNCURA Fellow.

• Participants will learn how Host Institution staff benefitfrom this program.

• Participants will learn the criteria for applying.KATHLEEN M. LARMETT*, Executive Director, NationalCouncil of University Research AdministratorsBETH SEATON, Director of Research Administration, McCormickSchool of Engineering, Northwestern UniversityMICHELLE VAZIN, Director, Office of Contracts and Grants,Vanderbilt UniversityKARIN DYASON, Project Manager Capacity Building andProfessionalisation, SARIMA DENISE WALLEN, Research Officer/Research AssistantProfessor, College of Education, Senior Fellow, RWJ Center forHealth Policy, University of New Mexico

SIMPLIFICATION: THE FUTURE OF RESEARCHADMINISTRATION (CONTINUED)administrative burdens. We will explore the currentchallenges we face and discuss some tactics our institutionhas undertaken to better serve our research community.More importantly, we will give our vision for the future stateof research administration to best optimize organizationalefficiencies. A hint is in the title: SIMPLIFICATION.

ANDREW CHASE*, Vice-President, Partners ResearchManagementGARY SMITH, Senior Administrative Director - MGH ResearchManagement, Massachusetts General Hospital

INTERNATIONAL

INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE: BUILDING ANINTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIONProgram Level: OverviewA collaborative program, crossing cultural and internationalborders, is a growing expectation of many sponsors. Thesecollaborations depend upon communication, buildingrelationships, and negotiation. Each of these can be achallenging part of our work as research administrators, andeven more so in the international arena. The panelists willspeak from their diverse backgrounds about struggles,strategies and solutions for success in interculturalnegotiations. The panel will address ways to improve theimpact and effectiveness of our intercultural communications,share concepts and practices for intercultural dialogue with afocus on effective negotiations, and share ideas for policydevelopment in support of successful collaboration.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be briefed on key issues in interculturalcollaborations.

• Participants will gain insights for facilitating andimproving the effectiveness of communications andnegotiations with their international colleagues.

JANET SIMONS*, Director, Research Policy, University ofMaryland, BaltimoreFELIX MOESNER, Director, Consul, swissnex Boston, Consulateof SwitzerlandMOODY EBRAHEEM ALTAMIMI, Award Administrator, Officeof Competitive Research Funds, King Abdullah University ofScience and TechnologyPEGGY BARTEK, Senior Grants Administrator, MassachusettsGeneral Hospital


61* Lead Presenter


POLICY/COMPLIANCE

HUMAN SUBJECTS PROTECTION IN NIH FUNDED RESEARCHProgram Level: BasicThis session will focus on how to apply the HHS HumanSubjects regulations to NIH funded research. It will includean overview of the regulations, guidance on determining ifyour research involves human subjects or is exempt fromthe regulations, information about NIH grant applicationrequirements, and post award requirements. Case studieswill be presented to illustrate key points.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn the key definitions of humansubjects research and exempt research in the HHSregulations.

• Participants will learn the NIH requirements forapplications proposing human subjects research.

• Participants will understand how NIH uses peer review to evaluate the human subjects section of grantapplications and how this evaluation can impact theoutcome of review.

• Participants will gain knowledge about NIH humansubjects requirements for applications that are likely tobe funded.

• Participants will learn about post award human subjectsrequirements and how to handle situations such asimplementing new human subjects research in on-goingawards.

ANN HARDY*, Extramural Human Subjects ProtectionsOfficer, National Institutes of Health

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING A RESPONSIBLECONDUCT OF RESEARCH (RCR) PROGRAMThis session will compare the approaches to policy,procedures, and pedagogy for formal instruction inResponsible Conduct of Research between two verydifferent institutions, and encourage participants to share what has and hasn't worked for them. Issues to be addressed: Change management, Implementation across decentralized cultures, effective class design andinstruction, frequency This is not a session about NIH and NSF RCR Policies. Participants should already have afamiliarity with NSF and NIH policies and the challengesaround RCR. Examples of challenges might be 1) coming up with an institutional policy that is simple and yet able to be carried out. 2) procedures for identifying and trackingwho needs to take and who has taken the class 3) decidingwhich classes satisfy the RCR requirement 40 findingfaculty who are willing to teach the class. We welcome you to bring your own ideas and challenges to address.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will come away with tips and techniques fordesigning an effective responsible conduct of research(RCR) class and a variety of ways to implement policiesand procedures around RCR.

• Presenters will share issues around RCR implementationat a private and a public research institution, and willshare approaches to class design and facilitation.

TONY ONOFRIETTI*, Director of Research Education, TheUniversity of UtahKAREN WOODWARD MASSEY, Director of Education andOutreach, Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences





62* Lead Presenter

POST-AWARD

EFFORT REPORTING – A CENTRAL AND DEPARTMENTADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVEProgram Level: AdvancedAs research administrators we must work together with ourinstitutions to ensure we are compliant with federalregulations in order to protect our funding and our reputation,and effort reporting is an important part of this. Sometimesthere can be a communication gap making this collaborationdifficult. Do you want to learn how to work together to bemore compliant with effort reporting and to make the processeasier? This session will give a quick overview of effortreporting, expectations from a central administrationperspective, examples of challenges and solutions undertakenfrom the department side, as well as suggestions and bestpractices for how central and department administrators canwork together to ensure that your institution is compliantwith effort reporting requirements.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain an understanding of effortreporting requirements and expectations from thecentral perspective

• Participants will gain knowledge of effort reportingchallenges facing departments and some possiblesolutions.

• Participants will learn skills and best practices forcentral/department administration to work together toensure compliance with effort reporting requirements.

ALIX CARTER*, Effort Certification Coordinator, PartnersHealth CareLYNELLE CORTELLINI, Grant Manager,Massachusetts GeneralHospital



PRE-AWARD

PRIMER: PREPARING INDUSTRY RESEARCH PROPOSALSAND BUDGETSProgram Level: IntermediateThis session focuses on the unique challenges of researchproposals and budgets for industry funded research forresearch administration offices: • Should an institution’s charges be fixed price or costreimbursable? What are the advantages of either pricing scheme?

• What indirect cost rate is applicable? • What should the institution’s strategy be when theprincipal investigator has already started negotiating aresearch agreement without submitting a proposal?

• What should be done when a check appears for a researchstudy without a proposal having been submitted?

• Why is it important for the investigator to provide aspecific statement of work (for intellectual property orother potential dispute matters), and milestone/deliverable requirements?

Come prepared to join in this session’s conversation as weshare the secrets of success in working with industryproposals and budgets.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will leave with a fundamental understandingof the challenges of industry proposals and budgets.

• Participants will leave with a fundamental understandingof the advantages and disadvantages of fixed price vs.cost reimbursable pricing schemes.

• Participants will share tips and practices to increase their efficiencies.

Prerequisites: Familiarity with industry proposals andbudgets. SCOTT B. DAVIS*, Associate Director, University of OklahomaHealth Sciences CenterDEBBIE NEWTON, Director of Preaward Services, University of Tulsa



63* Lead Presenter


DISCUSSION GROUPS


COACHING PIs TO BE SUCCESSFUL STEWARDS OFTHEIR RESEARCH PROGRAMThis session will focus on a discussion of strategies forbuilding and developing productive working relationshipsbetween research administrators and research faculty. Wewill discuss challenges and rewards of assisting faculty inbuilding productive habits relative to award requirementsfor reporting, financial management and staff supervision.Discussion leaders will share their perspectives. This sessionis designed for participants to identify problem situationsand provide an open discussion of possible solutions.

Discussion Group Leaders: LORETTA BASSLER*, ResearchAdministrator, University of IowaLISA LANG, Departmental Research Administrator, College ofEngineering, University of IowaANNE SUTER, Department Administrator, Anatomy and CellBiology, Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa

HOT TOPICS

TIPS FOR CREATING AND SUBMITTING A NCURA YOUTUBE TUESDAYThis is a follow-up discussion to concurrent session heldMonday at 4:00 pm: Tips for Creating and Submitting aYouTube Tuesday

Discussion Group Leaders: KALLIE FIRESTONE*, SeniorCompliance Specialist, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyTARA E. BISHOP, Associate Executive Director, NationalCouncil of University Research Administrators

INTERNATIONAL

FUTURE-PROOFING INTERNATIONAL GRANTSMANAGEMENT Research administrators supporting young and experiencedresearchers are facing greater challenges as the fundinglandscape becomes more complex and global. On the onehand research managers and administrators need to ensurethat the legal framework of research agreements isappropriate and complies with institution, funder, andregulatory requirements while being in-line with theresearchers’ needs; and on the other that applications,budgets and financial accounting meet funder rules and continued on next page>

Learning Objectives: The different roles a researchadministrator needs to take on when dealing with multiplefunding mechanisms and when to apply them. Prerequisites: Experienced research administrators withsome experience in submitting international complexproposals (at least partners from 3 different countries).

CORE CURRICULUM

A DAY IN THE LIFE OF A NEW RESEARCHADMINISTRATORThis session is a forum for those who are in the beginningstages of their careers as Research Administrators. The goal is to create a dialogue where we can all discuss best practices.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn best practices from otherinstitutions.

• Participants will address some of the “gray areas" inresearch administration.

• Participants will share tips on honing organizationalskills, time management techniques, staying current withchanges, and dealing with stress.

Discussion Group Leader: TONY MARANTO*, SubawardsSpecialist, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School ofPublic Health


64


* Lead Presenter



FUTURE-PROOFING INTERNATIONAL GRANTSMANAGEMENT (CONTINUED)institutional policies, and it is getting even more complexwhen international partners and multiple fundingresources are involved. This requires distinct skill sets,however it is a distinction that arguably needs to be blurredin order to provide the most efficient and comprehensiveservice to the researchers as well as funding agencies. Thissession will consider the different ways in which grantadministration can benefit from expertise not immediatelyidentified with grants management. The presenters willexamine trends and give case studies.

Discussion Group Leaders: ANNIKA GLAUNER*, SeniorProgram and Research Manager, ETH Zurich/University of ZurichDAVID J. MAYO, Director of Sponsored Research, CaliforniaInstitute of Technology

PRE-AWARD

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) & THE DEFENSETHREAT REDUCTION AGENCY (DTRA): PROPOSALSUBMISSION, NEGOTIATION AND AWARDACCEPTANCE�There are several things to consider when applying for,negotiating and accepting awards from the Department ofDefense (DoD) of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency(DTRA). This discussion group will allow attendees to sharetheir experiences and best practices for dealing with theProgram Officers and Grant Management Officers fromboth agencies.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will discuss the history and mission of DTRAand DoD.

• Participants will describe the submission and fundingrequirements of each organization.

• Participants will learn about the Required Forms.• Participants will learn about Budget Negotiation.• Participants will understand the Terms and Conditions of the Award.

Prerequisites: Individuals new to the field of researchadministration, departmental and pre-award staff,Regulatory Compliance Staff, and individuals from otherrelated areas will benefit from this discussion group. Discussion Group Leader: JAMIE CALDWELL*, Director, Officeof Research Services, Loyola University Chicago


WHERE TO START? BUILDING AN OSP FROM THEGROUND UP Where do you start when building a new Office ofSponsored Programs at a PUI? Do you focus your energiesmainly on getting new grants or putting policies andprocedures in place or doing it all at once? How do youprioritize? How do you determine what’s best for yourinstitution? What relationships do you cultivate first? Where do you look for help and advice? Two experiencedleaders in PUIs will share their experiences and views andlook forward to a lively discussion with you.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify the functions andresponsibilities necessary for a new OSP.

• Participants will learn how to prioritize in developinginfrastructure and relationships.

• Participants will have a better understanding ofresources available to them as they build their new office.

Discussion Group Leaders: JULIE GUGGINO*, Director,Research & Sponsored Programs, Central WashingtonUniversityJEANNE VIVIANI, Director, Research Programs and Services,New College of Florida


65* Lead Presenter




POST-AWARD

RESOLVING POST-AWARD ISSUES WITH SUBRECIPIENTSJoin us for an open discussion of the various issues and challenges involved in coordinating and managingsubrecipients. Discussion leaders will provide opportunityfor the group to offer suggestions, pose questions and consider optimum best practices in managingsubrecipient organizations.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be able to identify issues and challengesin managing subrecipients.

• Participants will explore best practices and possiblemodel actions for managing subrecipients andmonitoring their financial and programmatic progress.

Discussion Group Leaders: JULIE COLE*, Director of ResearchCosting Compliance, Duke UniversityW. SCOTT ERWIN, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,Texas State University-San Marcos



10:30 am – noon • SPARK SESSIONS

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

SURVIVING A SPONSOR AUDITWe all hear, read and learn about audits as precautionarytales. But what is it really like to experience one? Is it as badas described- or maybe worse? Let’s come together andshare our experiences with the group, both good and bad, togive a more clear picture of an audit and what we learnedfrom it that made us better research administrators.

Discussion Group Leader: MICHELE CODD*, AssociateDirector, Sponsored Projects Administration, GeorgeWashington University

10:30 – 10:50 amBORING MEETINGS SUCK: WHAT MEETINGORGANIZERS AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS CAN DO TO HELPKAREN WOODWARD MASSEY*, Director of Education andOutreach, Research Administration Services, HarvardUniversity

11:00 – 11:20 amP-CARDS – THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE JUST PLAINUGLY…. W. SCOTT ERWIN*, Director, Sponsored Programs, Texas StateUniversity – San Marcos

11:30 – 11:50 amGROUND ZERO ON UP: BUILDING THE UNIVERSITY(LITERALLY)GILLISANN HAROOTUNIAN*, Director, University Initiatives &Projects for Resource Development, Division ofAdministration, California State University, FresnoMARY LOUISE HEALY, Associate Director for ResearchAdministration, Johns Hopkins University – Zanvyl KriegerSchool of Arts & Sciences



66* Lead Presenter


CONCURRENT SESSIONS

BIOMEDICAL

EVALUATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CLINICALTRIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSProgram Level: AdvancedMany Academic Medical Centers have begun looking atclinical trial management systems and improving theiraccess to Clinical Data in research. This session will focus onthe important factors that should be considered whenevaluating, selecting, and implementing a new ClinicalTrials Management System. For example:• Selection Process (Vendor(s)• Software Customization• Best Practices for Large Scale Implementation– Installation & Training

RICK ROHRBACH*,Managing Director, Huron ConsultingGroupTESHEIA JOHNSON, Chief Operating Officer, Yale Center forClinical Investigations, Yale University School of Medicine

BIOMEDICAL

MANAGING FACULTY APPOINTMENTS AT ACADEMICMEDICAL CENTERSProgram Level: IntermediateMany differences and complexities exist in theadministration of research programs in a clinical settingcompared with those in a traditional universityenvironment. This session will explore some of thesedifferences and expand on issues related to academicmedical centers and clinically based research programs. Forexample, universities often complain that it is difficult forinstitutions to account fully for the time spent by physicianscientists because the boundaries associated with teaching,research, and patient care are blurred. Moreover, theseactivities are accounted for differently by specific federalagencies. This session will cover topics such as appointmentletters, the definition of institutional base salary, clinicalpractice plans, affiliated vs. non-affiliated hospitals, whatconstitutes 100% effort, distinguishing between clinicaleffort and clinical trial effort, how to manage effortcommitments on K Awards, VA appointments, and Medicaretime reporting. This session is designed to facilitatedialogue among the participants.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain knowledge about compensationand effort reporting requirements within academicmedical centers and clinically based research programs.

• Participants will articulate federal guidance that governsfaculty appointments at academic medical centers witha focus on guidance applicable to University-VA jointappointments and how this is implemented at researchinstitutions.

• Participants will assist hospital and clinically basedadministrators in better understanding theadministrative and regulatory environments.

• Participants will gain a better understanding of what isinvolved in the management of a comprehensive effortreporting program and provide the opportunity todiscuss participant practices and experiences.

Prerequisites: Practical experience in managing complexfaculty appointments (including practice plans and VAappointments), the research portfolio, and the effortreporting process for physicians and researchers inacademic medical centers.JAMIE CALDWELL*, Director of the Office of Research Servicesfor the Health Sciences, Loyola University Chicago


67* Lead Presenter





LARGE AND COMPLEX PROPOSALS: MAKING ACOMMITMENT TO ACHIEVE THE REWARDS Program Level: IntermediateAs federal funding becomes scarcer, many researchers aretrying to make the most of their proposal efforts by applyingfor large, collaborative proposals, program projects, centerfunding, or federal contracts. What do you do when theycome to you for assistance? This session will provide you withresources that have worked for other Research Administrators.The panel will share lessons learned and best practices sothat you will be prepared when the opportunity arises.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will explore their role on the research team.• Participants will identify obstacles and opportunities forsuccessful proposal submission.

• Participants will learn strategies to effectively manageproposal development and submission.

Prerequisites:Experience with proposal development of anysize will be beneficial.DIANE MEYER*, Pre-Award Services, Iowa State UniversityJERRY WEINBERG, Interim Graduate Dean and Vice Provostfor Research, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville

FEDERAL

NIH UPDATEProgram Level: UpdateThis session covers the latest news from the National Institutesof Health including budget information, current policy topics,policy reminders, and updates on NIH eRA activities.

MARCIA HAHN*, Director, Division of Grants Policy, OPERA,National Institutes of Health

CORE CURRICULUM

THE PROPOSAL PROCESSProgram Level: BasicBudget complete…check. Final science documentsreceived…check. You have all the documents needed foryour proposal package but how do you actually get them tothe sponsor? Submitting a proposal can be an intimidatingand sometimes complex process. This session will continuethe introduction to the basic concepts and topics related toresearch administration during the lifecycle of an awardwith a panel discussion of the basic elements of electronicproposal submission, offering best practices and practicaltips for error free submissions. This session is designed forthose new to research administration and will highlightsome common issues that tend to come up with proposalsubmission. A case study will be presented and discussed atthe end of the session to ensure that the key concepts andideas were comprehended so that the attendees who arenew to the research administration community have a solidunderstanding of the most relevant points along thespectrum from start to finish in regards to the lifecycle ofan award.

Learning Objectives: Participants should come out of thissession with a good understanding of the basic aspects ofelectronic proposal submission.TAMARA LUCAS*, Specialist, Contracts & Grants, University ofMaryland, BaltimoreDENNIS PAFFRATH, Assistant Vice President for SponsoredPrograms Administration, University of Maryland, BaltimoreMURIEL AVERILLA-CHIN, Senior Contract Administrator,University of Maryland, College Park



68* Lead Presenter



INTERNATIONAL

LEADING PRACTICES FOR INTERNATIONAL RESEARCHCOLLABORATION IN THE LIFE SCIENCESProgram Level: OverviewParticipants will gain an understanding of how to useleading practices to approach and develop internationalcollaborative initiatives.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn leading practices for successfuldevelopment of collaborative relationships.

• Participants will learn leading practices for successfulmanagement of the collaborative process.

• Participants will learn leading practices to facilitatecommunication between local and internationalcolleagues.

JENNIFER HANNIGAN*, Senior Manager-Mid America,Deloitte, LLPJAMES J. CASEY, JR., Interim Director of Pre-Award Services,University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

POST-AWARD

ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES AND STRATEGIES FORDEPARTMENTAL POST AWARD BUDGET MANAGEMENTProgram Level: IntermediateThe day to day budget and financial management of grantactivity and the variety of other responsibilities in yourposition can be overwhelming. Organization, Prioritizationand Data Management are all keys to being successful injuggling the ever changing budget situation within adepartment. During this session, learn about somesuccessful strategies you can use to assist you on a day today basis in order to create efficiencies and find balance infinancial management.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify pitfalls that can undermine your effectiveness.

• Participants will discuss data management tools to assist with periodic, sporadic and surprise requests for information.

• Participants will identify strategies you can use tominimize that overwhelming urge to just run.

ANDREA COMLEY*, Contracting Officer, Office of Grant andResearch Development, Washington State UniversityBROOKE MARCHETTI, University of Pittsburgh, Departmentof Surgery

POST-AWARD

TOP ISSUES IN GRANT ACCOUNTING AND THE IMPACTON FINANCIAL OPERATIONSProgram Level: OverviewThe grant accounting operation exposes the institution toconsiderable risk. Important functions such as billing, cashapplication, and closeouts are critical to the compliancesuccess of the institution. Oftentimes, the focus ofcompliance is on the day-to-day transactions; however, theactual accounting for those transactions and subsequentbilling and closeout expose the institution to the most risk.This session will dive into grant accounting issues caused bypeople performing the tasks, processes that fail toaccomplish the right goals, and information technologysystems that sometimes compound the problems.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will come away with a better understandingof the implications of grant accounting functions,

• Participants will learn best practices to avoid auditscrutiny

• Participants will learn measures that provide solutionsfor the people, process and technology involved in thegrant accounting operation.

MARTIN SMITH*, Director, Sponsored Accounting and CostAnalysis, Stevens Institute of TechnologyMARK DAVIS, Vice President & Partner, Higher Education &Academic Medical Centers, Attain, LLC



69* Lead Presenter



PRE-AWARD

MTAs: BOTH SIDES NOWProgram Level: IntermediateNegotiating material transfer agreements can prove to be acomplex process. Both sides have its policies and obligationsrequired for the use of the provided material. Many times thenegotiation turns difficult because of a misunderstandingaround poorly written language. Typically, a discussion aroundwhat is really meant by the language solves the problem. But,other times a road block ensues when the provider isadamant about certain types of clauses. If you are lucky, as inmy case, you are working with someone who understands thereasons for the strict language. Most of the time that is notthe case. So, how can we get around these types of situations? How can we attempt a mutually acceptable solution, if we donot understand the rationale behind the other side’sexpectations? In this unique session, we will be exploringboth sides of the house, with members from both sides of thehouse!! This session offers two speakers from the university(recipient) perspective AND a speaker from the industry(provider) perspective. Everything is not as it would seem. Andyou will find out why! We will discuss key components of thenegotiation of MTA’s and explore creative solutions towardmutually acceptable solutions.

Learning Objectives: Take what you learn from this sessioninto your next MTA negotiation and expect different, andhopefully, more expeditious and positive results!MARJORIE FORSTER*, Assistant Vice President for Researchand Global Health Initiatives, Office of Research andDevelopment, University of Maryland, BaltimoreJEREMY TRYBULSKI, Policy Officer, University of CaliforniaMELISSA WHITE, Contracts Manager, Senior IntellectualProperty Specialist, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Inc.


POLICY, PROCESS AND THE PUIProgram Level: OverviewThis highly interactive session features a discussion of thepolicies and core processes that are essential to effectivesponsored program management, and how to develop,communicate and enforce these in a predominantlyundergraduate institution, where acceptance andfundamental understanding of these rules and regulationsmay not be widespread among faculty or theadministration. Panelist will offer tips and models forensuring compliance while respecting the PUI environment.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify core policies and proceduresessential to effective grant management.

• Participants will develop strategies and communicationtools to effectively implement necessary policies andprocedures.

• Participants will develop a sensitivity and awareness ofthe sometimes unique PUI environment and howcompliance may be best managed in that climate.

JULIE COLE*, Director of Research Costing Compliance, Duke UniversityPEGGY LOWRY, Program Manager, NCURA Peer Review,National Council of University Research AdministratorsPAM WHITLOCK, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,University of North Carolina at Wilmington (Emeritus)



70* Lead Presenter


DISCUSSION GROUPS

BIOMEDICAL

BUDGET DEVELOPMENT CLINICAL TRIALS: HOW TOBREAK EVENDuring this session participants will have the chance todiscuss methods and philosophies related to developing andnegotiating clinical trial budgets that will break even.Participants are encouraged to bring their experiences inworking with internal staff and in negotiating with sponsorswith full cost recovery in mind. While not necessary, it mayalso be useful to attend the concurrent session on this topicimmediately preceding as primer to this discussion. Topicswill include communication, including what, when and withwhom to communicate, costing processes, measurementfocuses, and implications of unanticipated cost changes,enrollment issues, and managing to the bottom line.

Discussion Group Leaders: BRIAN FARMER*, Director ofResearch and Financial Operations, Cleveland ClinicHEATHER OFFHAUS, Director, Medical School Grant Review &Analysis, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor

CAREER SKILLS

LIFE AFTER CRA CERTIFICATIONHave you successfully passed your 4-hour exam? Are younew to Research Administration and looking to take yourexam? Whether you have your CRA or are consideringsitting for the exam, at some point you will askyourself...”What Now?”

Learning Objectives: From this discussion, existing andpotential CRA’s will be able to have a comprehensive planfor staying current on Research Administration issues andhelpful ways to make your CRA work for you. Discussion Group Leaders: THEA MILLER*, Senior Manager,Accounting, Emory UniversityLINDSEY DEMERITT, Assistant Manager, Sponsored ProjectsTeam, Children’s Hospital, Los Angeles

CORE CURRICULUM

BUILDING A BUDGET: ALL YOUR QUESTIONSANSWEREDThis session will continue the introduction to the basicconcepts and topics related to research administration duringthe lifecycle of an award. Developing a clear and reasonablebudget is one of the most important pieces of the proposalprocess. The regulations state that the budget should be thefinancial expression of the statement of work. The ability tobuild a budget that directly ties to the work being performedwill enhance the chances of being funded by the sponsor, andunderstanding how to assist PIs in building a reasonablebudget is essential to our roles as research administrators. Acase study will be presented and discussed at the end of thesession to ensure that the key concepts and ideas werecomprehended so that the attendees who are new to theresearch administration community have a solidunderstanding of the most relevant points along the spectrumfrom start to finish in regards to the lifecycle of an award.

Learning Objectives: • Continuing from sessions I and II, participants will begiven tools for developing sound and reasonable budgets.

• Participants will share their experiences, ideas andstrategies for budget development and management.

Discussion Group Leaders: REBECCA HUNSAKER*, AssistantDirector, University of Maryland, College ParkMEREDITH LEE, Assistant Director, Center for Advanced Studyof Language, University of Maryland, College ParkGAYE BUGENHAGEN, Director of Administrative Services,Sociology Department, University of Maryland, College Park



71* Lead Presenter


DISCUSSION GROUPS


MAKING ENDS MEET ON A SHOESTRING BUDGETDo more with less. Work smarter, not harder. Sorry, but wecan’t afford that. Do any of these sound familiar? If yes andyou work outside of a central office, then this discussiongroup may be just for you. We will spend time togethersharing best practices for saving money, becoming moreefficient, and keeping your unit going when times are tight.Possible topics for discussion include sharing staff,understanding and managing to your funds flow,implementing Lean tools, setting limits, learning when tosay “no,” and so on. Please bring your best ideas and lessonslearned and be prepared to share!

Learning Objectives: • Participants will discover and share new approaches toallocating resources in their units for improved efficiency.

• Participants will identify and share new opportunities forcost savings in their units.

Prerequisites: A working knowledge of budgeting fordepartmental operations and oversight.Discussion Group Leaders: CRAIG REYNOLDS*, AssociateDirector, Office of Research and Sponsored Programs,University of Michigan-Ann ArborJIM MAUS, Senior Research Administrator, WashingtonUniversity in St. Louis

INTERNATIONAL

INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE: BUILDING ANINTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION This is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldat 8:30 am: Intercultural Dialogue: Building an InternationalCollaboration

Take this opportunity to meet the panelists, hear moreabout facilitating intercultural communication andnegotiation, and share your own experiences.

Learning Objectives: Participants will share their ownstruggles and solutions for establishing internationalrelationships, and will have the opportunity to askquestions related to intercultural interactions andcollaborations.Discussion Group Leaders: JANET SIMONS*, Director,Research Policy, University of Maryland, BaltimoreFELIX MOESNER, Director, Consul, swissnex Boston, Consulateof SwitzerlandMOODY EBRAHEEM ALTAMIMI, Award Administrator, Officeof Competitive Research Funds, King Abdullah University ofScience and TechnologyPEGGY BARTEK, Senior Grants Administrator, MassachusettsGeneral Hospital


72


* Lead Presenter



POLICY/COMPLIANCE

SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING TIPS AND BESTPRACTICES Subrecipient monitoring is an increasingly hot topic. At firstpass, seems to be a simple concept: propose a subawardcollaboration, perform work on a sponsored subaward,charge/send invoices, receive payment and then report.However, those with any experience with subrecipientmonitoring know that there are a number of factors thatcan quickly reduce administrative exercises into abureaucratic nightmare. Federal regulations and otherrelated guidance have not historically proven to be of muchassistance in providing illumination on common questionsand complications. And, to top it all off, subrecipientmonitoring is typically one of the first areas that auditorsfocus on. This session is intended to briefly discuss the basicrequirements associated with subrecipient monitoring andhow to comply with these requirements. We will thendiscuss common issues and provide tips/best practices onhow to mitigate potentially unwanted outcomes.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain an understanding of (some of) the expectations of the federal government and otherresearch sponsors related to the subrecipient monitoring.

• Participants will gain an understanding of the basicrequirements of institutional subrecipient monitoring“systems,” including policies and procedures.

• Participants will gain an understanding of commonissues related to managing subrecipients, how problems have come to light and potential methods foraddressing them.

Discussion Group Leaders: DAVID NGO*, Managing Officer, Pre-Award Services, University of Wisconsin-MadisonKRISTI VITALE, Director, Analysis and Reporting, ColumbiaUniversity

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

REPORTING/COMMUNICATING NON-COMPLIANCE TOFEDERAL/STATE OVERSIGHT AGENCIESAlthough most projects are performed without incident,occasionally we find ourselves having to report non-compliance or other unexpected problems to federalagencies and other oversight bodies. When must you reportand what steps should every administrator bear in mindbefore picking up the phone or sending a writtencommunication about a problem? Who else at yourUniversity needs to know *before* you report and what kind of damage control is critical for reducing the impact on your research programs and institutional reputation?

Learning Objectives: Participants will learn when to reportproblems in research, how and to whom reports should bemade, and what other steps are necessary to protect theresearch and minimize disruption on campus.Prerequisites: Basic understanding of the variouscompliance obligations associated with doing federally-funded research.Discussion Group Leaders: SUZANNE M. RIVERA*, AssociateVice President for Research, Case Western Reserve UniversityTHOMAS A. COGGINS, Director, Sponsored AwardsManagement and Research Compliance, University of SouthCarolina


73* Lead Presenter




POST-AWARD

PURCHASING CARDS, BOOM OR BUSTHaving fun yet? Purchasing Cards on grants can be ablessing or a curse. We will review best practices that can beused to ensure that grants charges from credit cards areallocable and allowable. Come to discuss your experiencewith purchasing cards – good, bad or ugly.

Learning Objectives: Participants will learn of best practicesto use if allowing purchase cards on grants.Discussion Group Leader: LOUISE GRIFFIN*, ExecutiveDirector, Corporate and Foundation Relations, University ofMassachusetts Lowell

PRE-AWARD

LIMITED PROPOSAL SUBMISSIONS: WHO DECIDES? Many sponsors offer programs that restrict the number ofproposals that can be submitted by the institution or by theacademic unit within the institution. How do you identifythese limited submission opportunities? How do youdistribute information regarding these restrictedopportunities to your faculty? If only one PI can submit, butmore than one PI wants to submit – who decides whichproposal goes to the sponsor? What’s the basis for thatdecision? And what do you do when multiple proposalsappear at the last moment? All these and more relatedtopics will be discussed in this interactive session.Participants are encouraged to bring questions or situationsoccurring at their own institution for discussion.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain insight into how other universitiesare managing limited submissions.

• Participants will learn strategies for locating limitedsubmission opportunities.

• Participants will discover new ways to distributeinformation related to limited submissions to faculty andstaff on campus.

• Participants will learn how to ensure the proposal mostlikely to succeed is the one the sponsor reviews.

Discussion Group Leaders: DANIELLE McELWAIN*, SeniorSponsored Programs Administrator, University of SouthCarolinaRICHARD WHITE, Technical Writer, University of SouthCarolina


FACULTY DEVELOPMENT AT PUIs: INVESTING IN PEOPLE You work in a great office with informed people who areproactively disseminating funding opportunities and deftlymaneuvering bureaucratic roadblocks. You strive to ensurethat your faculty are getting the best service and supportyou can offer. But you work at a predominantlyundergraduate institution, and you find that for manyfaculty, getting research grants is not part of their careerpath. And for many of those who do seek out grants, theymay not have the professional, organization, orcommunication know-how it takes to win a grant or toadminister one effectively if they do get it. What can aresearch administrator do to help in the professionaldevelopment of their faculty?

Learning Objectives: • Participants will understand what faculty development isand distinguish it from “applying for more grants.”

• Participants will increase their knowledge of the range offaculty development activities that work at other PUIs.

• Participants will expand their network of resource peoplewho can aide them when they return to their campus.

Discussion Group Leader: JOSEPH McNICHOLAS*, Director,Office of Research and Sponsored Projects, LoyolaMarymount University



74* Lead Presenter

Noon – 1:30 pm • LUNCHEON AND VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION

THE CATHERINE CORE MINORITY TRAVEL AWARDRECIPIENTS ARE:• WANDA CARDENAS, University of Colorado Denver• JULIE GALLEGOS, University of New Mexico Health Science Center

• ROSALINDA NATIVIDAD, Texas Tech University HealthSciences Center at El Paso

• KELBA SOSA, Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva



1:30 – 1:50 pmPLAN YOUR FUTURE IN 15 MINUTESSUZANNE M. RIVERA*, Associate Vice President for Research,Office of Research Administration, Case Western ReserveUniversity

2:00 – 2:20 pmMANAGING THE STORM FOLLOWING AN ENTERPRISEWIDE FINANCIAL AND GRANTS MANAGEMENTSYSTEM IMPLEMENTATIONKERRY PELUSO*, Associate Vice President for ResearchAdministration, Office of Sponsored Programs, EmoryUniversity



75* Lead Presenter


CONCURRENT SESSIONS

BIOMEDICAL

FCA, REGULATORY STRUCTURE, AND WHATHAPPENED AT MAYO CLINICProgram Level: IntermediateSurviving a False Claims Act investigation is a dauntingexperience for any academic research institution. The end ofan investigation does not mark the end of your challenges.This session will start with an overview of the False ClaimsAct and some of the “hot button” topics that are most oftenthe focus in the area of sponsored research, and will alsoprovide insight on managing and resolving a False ClaimsAct investigation. The financial penalties are naturally at thetop of any institution’s concerns when it comes to resolvinga False Claims Act investigation. It is also important to keepother non-monetary sanctions in perspective, includingsuspension/debarment, special award terms or conditions,institutional compliance agreements, and/or enhancedsponsor oversight. The panel will provide practical tips thatwill mitigate the likelihood of your institution becomingsubject to those types of non-monetary sanctions. Thissession will also review one institution’s response followinga U.S. Department of Justice investigation and subsequentNIH inquiry.

ANNE SULLIVAN*, Director, Huron Consulting GroupDAVID LYNCH, Executive Director, Northwestern UniversityMICHAEL VERNICK, JD, Partner, Hogan Lovells LLP

CAREER SKILLS

WHAT DO WE NEVER HAVE ENOUGH OF – TIMEProgram Level: OverviewWe work in a fast paced environment with competingdemands for our time and energy. At any given moment wemay have to redirect our energies due to an urgentdemands. Stress can be almost crippling if we fall prey tothose who demand our talents. Time management skills arenecessary tools for our individual toolkit to help maintaincalm, increase energy and keep forward momentum.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will be shown different methodologies for time management.

• Participants will be shown steps to take control of their time.

• Techniques for controlling your day will be explored.• Techniques for dealing with your staff and others toensure you maximize your time potential will be discussed.

• We will discuss and explore other ways to boost yourenergy level and thereby maximize your day.

RANDI WASIK*, Director, Administration and Finance,Department of Urology, University of WashingtonRASHONDA HARRIS, Associate Director, Research AccountingServices, Temple UniversityALBANA CEJNE, Associate Director, Temple University



76* Lead Presenter



CORE CURRICULUM

AWARD REVIEW AND NEGOTIATIONProgram Level: BasicYou have been notified that the sponsor is ready to issue anaward to your institution and you are ecstatic! Now what?Award negotiations and acceptance can be challenging andtime consuming. Even in the most basic awardmechanisms, issues can arise. Building on previous topicsrelated to the basic concepts of the research administrationlifecycle, this session will outline issues like timeliness ofaward set up, period of performance, budget revisions, pre-award costs, etc., and give you an idea of how differentinstitutions manage the activities at time of award.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain an understanding of commonterms to review in award notices.

• Participants will learn common issues associated withparticular contract terms and alternative language foruse in negotiations.

• Participants will better understand the importance ofparticular terms for specific research projects.

MARY SCHMIEDEL*, Associate Dean for ResearchAdministration and Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,Georgetown UniversityMONIQUE ANDERSON, Assistant Director, Office of ResearchAdministration, University of Maryland, College ParkTOLISE MILES, Senior Grants and Contracts Specialist, Grantsand Contracts Administration and Finance, Children’sNational Medical Center


THE "INS" AND "OUTS" OF PI TRANSFERS: ADEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVE ONFACULTY MOVES BETWEEN INSTITUTIONSProgram Level: IntermediateThis session will describe the transfer process from both theincoming and outgoing institution’s perspective. Contentwill include compliance issues, logistical issues, and workingwith your institutional official to ensure the process goessmoothly. In addition, we will briefly touch on what to coverduring the faculty onboarding process.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will understand the compliance, financial andlogistical issues that commonly come up during a transfer.

• Participants will understand how to work with a newfaculty member.

• Participants will understand how to facilitate the processas a departmental research administrator.

Prerequisites: Basic understanding of grant awards.JENNIFER CORY*, Director of Research, Pediatrics, StanfordUniversity



77* Lead Presenter



INTERNATIONAL

RESEARCHER AND COPYRIGHT - EU AND US PERSPECTIVESProgram Level: BasicThe session will highlight two issues : 1. Copyright policyand how it affects agreements between researchers anduniversity. Current issue of debate is how the demands ofopen access publishing are affecting the copyright policiesand agreements between university and researchers. Manycountries in the EU , including Finland, do not have work forhire legislation , so without agreements rights are nottransferred to the university. US universities have hadcopyright policies where rights to publish have been withthe individual researchers but the demands of fundingbodies for open access publishing have introduced newagreements ensuring open access publishing rights to theuniversity. 2. We will also look at copyright awareness - howto ensure that researchers are aware of and understanduniversity copyright policy and practical implications ofagreements. Examples of tools for increasing copyrightawareness among researchers include videos from AaltoUniversity website http://copyright.aalto.fi/en/videos/ .

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how copyright policy affectsagreements between researchers and university.

• Participants will learn about specific questions related toresearchers copyright in EU as compared to US. One topicis the university copyright policy taking into account USwork for hire legislation and the need for agreements inEU universities between university and researchers oncopyright, as work for hire legislation does not exist inmost EU countries.

• Participants will discuss agreements on researcher’seconomic and moral rights, taking into account, thatthere are restrictions concerning agreement on moralrights in most EU countries.

• Research professionals will learn copyright knowledgeneeded in their work and they will also learn to use toolsthat will help researchers understand copyright andintellectual property issues and terms.

MARIA REHBINDER*, Legal Counsel, Aalto University CATHY INNES, Director, Business and Innovation, College ofVeterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University

FEDERAL

NIH Q&AProgram Level: UpdateThis informal panel discussion will provide participantsanother chance to ask questions about NIH grantsadministration. Representatives from the NIH Office ofPolicy for Extramural Research Administration and IC grants management staff will on hand. Pre-submission of your questions is strongly encouraged athttps://www.surveymonkey.com/s/5HCC6MS

MARCIA HAHN*, Director, Division of Grants Policy, OPERA,National Institutes of Health



78* Lead Presenter



POLICY/COMPLIANCE

FACE OFF!!! ALIGNING PERSPECTIVES: NCURA PEERREVIEWERS AND HOST INSTITUTIONProgram Level: IntermediateDo you wonder how reviewers who assess your researchadministration operations develop their questions andapproach? Is the site visit what you expected? Are thequestions posed to you at the 5,000 foot level or picky anddetailed? Have questions led to correctly connecting the dotsor ended up at a completely wrong place? Operationalimprovements in research administration are an increasinglyvisible and expected part of doing business. But how do youknow if your reviewers are really getting at the facts for youroperation and therefore making recommendations that arerelevant to your institution? Come and listen to a few of theinteresting exchanges at an actual peer review of a sponsoredprograms office involving the review team and institutionalmembers undergoing the review. During this session thereviewers will discuss the basis of how they develop questionsand what information they use to help assess an operation.Panel members who have received a review will share theirthoughts about preparing for a site visit and stakeholderreactions after they have fielded questions from the reviewers.For the first time you will see a live demonstration of how asite visit question-and-answer session works! Panel memberswill additionally briefly discuss how they approached theirpost-review plan of action. This session will help you tobecome mentally prepared for a peer review of your operationand the site visit and reduce the “what happens” questions.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain an understanding of theapproaches used by peer reviewers to gather information.

• Participants will obtain an understanding of aninstitution’s preparation, review and response to the peerreview process.

• Participants will hear about different stakeholderperspectives before and after a peer review.

PEGGY LOWRY*, Program Manager, NCURA Peer Review,National Council of University Research AdministratorsSUSAN CARTER, Director, Research Development Services,University of California, MercedCHRIS HANSEN, Peer Reviewer, National Council of UniversityResearch AdministratorsAUTUMN SALAZAR, Director of Contracts and GrantsAccounting, University of California, MercedTHEA VICARI, Director, Sponsored Projects Services, Universityof California, Merced

POST-AWARD

LOST IN TRANSLATION – THE LANGUAGE OF RESEARCH ADMINISTRATIONProgram Level: BasicDo you have the 411 on the FSR425 that has to be submittedvia Commons ASAP, but no later than COB today? Have youreviewed the award from NCI? Is that the award from theNational Cancer Institute or the National CommerceInitiative? The language of research administration is filledwith abbreviations and acronyms that can lead to confusionand errors. This session will provide a decoder ring to themost common terms and acronyms utilized in post awardresearch administration. The session will focus on thedefinitions and categories as well as explain theirimportance, relatedness and functionality.

Learning Objectives: Participants will gain a basicunderstanding of the most common terms and acronymsused in post award administration as well as theirimportance, relatedness and functionality.JEREMY FORSBERG*, Assistant Vice President for Research,University of Texas at ArlingtonLISA MOSLEY, Executive Director, Research Operations,Arizona State University



79* Lead Presenter



PRE-AWARD

IS THIS CHECK A GIFT OR A GRANT?Program Level: IntermediateThe goal of increasing extramural funding at ourinstitutions has taken on new importance over the lastseveral years. With federal funding of research shrinkingand with research institutions facing continued financialchallenges, many institutions have sought to increasefunding from other sources…some traditional and somenot. The individuals at our institutions responsible forsecuring such funding have different motivations andagendas, which may not necessarily correlate withinstitutional policies and practices. In such cases, conflictcan arise between stakeholder motivations andinstitutional benefit. This conflict is often first revealed inthe extramural funds review and classification process. This session will examine the classification of extramuralfunding, the motivating factors and differing perspectivesof key stakeholders and will explore three models proven tobe successful for managing extramural funds classification.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be able to describe what distinguishesgifts from other types of extramural support.

• Participants will be able to articulate what motivates keystakeholders in the classification of extramural funds.

• Participants will be able to discuss the similarities anddifferences between three successful extramural fundsclassification models.

Prerequisites: This session is offered at the intermediatelevel and assumes that participants have a solidunderstanding of the differences between grants,cooperative agreements, contracts and subcontracts andhow their institution manages sponsored projects.BRUCE MORGAN*, Assistant Vice Chancellor for ResearchAdministration, Office of Research Administration, Universityof California-IrvineANTHONY F. VENTIMIGLIA, Associate Director, Office ofSponsored Programs, Auburn University


STIMULATING PROPOSAL WRITING THROUGHOUTREACH & EDUCATION AT PUIsProgram Level: BasicDuring this session, the presenter will share ideas on whathas (and has not) worked for stimulating proposal writingat a PUI given limited resources. Participants will have theopportunity to share information on their programs andoutreach/education activities, and will have the chance to ask questions regarding what other PUIs are doing in this arena.

Learning Objectives: • Participants should leave this session with ideas for on-going outreach/educational activities they can easily andinexpensively implement on their campuses.

• Participants will have the chance to ask questions andshare on their training programs with other PUIs.

TRICIA L. CALLAHAN*, Director, Proposal Development, Miami University



80* Lead Presenter


DISCUSSION GROUPS

CAREER SKILLS

CHANGE MANAGEMENT FOR eRA IMPLEMENTATIONSThis session is geared towards those who face theimplementation of a new electronic researchadministration (eRA) system on an institutional level. Learn common steps it takes to prepare for and facilitate asuccessful implementation. Understand and accommodatethe needs of key groups of users. Realize and manage thechange involved in implementing a new system. Presenterswill share their experiences and lessons learned.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be prepared for and facilitatinginstitution-wide eRA implementations.

• Participants will learn how to manage human nature’sresistance to change.

• Participants will identify needs of target implementationgroups (Administrative, Faculty, Chair, Dean, CentralResearch Administration Office).

• Participants will learn how to foster collaborationbetween functional and technical groups.

• Participants will learn to precipitate and manage aculture of change on an institutional level.

• Participants will learn about sustainability.Discussion Group Leaders: SUSAN SORENSEN*, eRASpecialist, Drexel UniversityHEATHER MISHRA, Lead Financial Analyst, CaliforniaInstitute of Technology


DECONSTRUCTING THE RFA: IT’S WHAT’S INSIDE THAT COUNTSHave you ever wondered why all that information is listedon a “Request for Application (RFA)?” What is it used for?What does it mean? Do I need to read it? This discussion will“deconstruct” a RFA and answer those questions.

Learning Objectives: How to read and understand a federalsolicitation (RFA).Discussion Group Leaders: MATT BERRY*, ProposalDevelopment Specialist, University of Oklahoma - Norman CampusCHARLES HATHAWAY, Director, Office of Grant Support,Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University

CORE CURRICULUM

THE PROPOSAL PROCESSThis is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldat 10:30 am: The Proposal Process

As a follow-on to the earlier concurrent session, thisdiscussion group will offer participants the opportunity topose questions, find solutions, and offer support to oneanother in the process of proposal submission.

Discussion Group Leaders: TAMARA LUCAS*, Specialist,Contracts & Grants, University of Maryland, BaltimoreDENNIS PAFFRATH, Assistant Vice President for SponsoredPrograms Administration, University of Maryland, BaltimoreMURIEL AVERILLA-CHIN, Senior Contract Administrator,University of Maryland, College Park



81* Lead Presenter



FEDERAL

GRANTS UPDATE - WHAT’S NEW AT NIFA (USDA)Learn about upcoming changes to grant policies andprocedures, and opportunities to provide input from NIFA’sOffice of Grants and Financial Management. Get the lateston new Interagency initiatives and efforts to enhancecustomer service.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be familiar with new policies andprocedures, including newly implemented terms andconditions for formula-funded grants.

• Participants will know about upcoming applicationdeadlines and when NIFA anticipates releasing majorRFAs for FY 2014.

• Participants will be aware of open, or soon to be opening,invitations for stakeholder comment and plannedoutreach activities.

• Participants will get status updates on new Interagencyinitiatives for FY 2014.

Discussion Group Leader: ERIN DALY*, Policy Branch Chief,U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)

INTERNATIONAL

SUCCESS FACTOR MOBILITY: THE MARIE SKLODOWSKACURIE ACTIONS UNDER HORIZON 2020, THEUPCOMING FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME FOR RESEARCHAND INNOVATION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSIONIt is more recognized and accepted nowadays that mobility isa key-factor in achieving a successful scientific career. Thebenefits gained from the mobility experience range fromacquiring news skills, being exposed to new cultures, openingof new horizons, exchanging of information, getting accessto better research facilities etc.. For almost 20 years the MarieCurie Fellowships have been one of the main instruments topromote a culture of Œmobility‚ in the European Union andbeyond. However, Œmobility‚ can be daunting for prospectapplicants fear not to find a place in the previous HostInstitution or country once the Œmobility‚ period is over.Participants will also be provided with some hints and tips onengaging with hosting fellows from Europe as of 2014.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how to get expertise on Horizon2020 (content, phases, terminology, key players).

• Participants will learn how to tackle the challenges ofdealing with a European home institution remotely and aEuropean host locally.

Discussion Group Leaders: ANNIKA GLAUNER*, SeniorProgram and Research Manager, ETH Zurich/University of ZurichVIKTORIA BODNAROVA, Information Officer, EURAXESS Links USA



82* Lead Presenter



POLICY/COMPLIANCE

EFFORT REPORTING – WHAT ARE YOUR CARROTS AND STICKS?With budgets shrinking and funding opportunities gettingtighter, accurate and compliant effort reporting is essential.In this general group discussion, we will identify varioustactics that participants are taking to ensure compliancewithin their institutional polices. What systems are beingused and how does your institution monitor to ensurecompliance? What mechanisms are in place to encouragecompletion? What action plan is in place to manage non-compliant participants? What are your carrots and sticks?

Learning Objectives: Through group discussion we willexamine best practices in developing or enhancing acompliant effort reporting program.Discussion Group Leader: DIANE DOMANOVICS*, AssistantVice President, Sponsored Projects, Case Western ReserveUniversity

POST-AWARD

F&A RECOVERIES - WHERE DO THE DOLLARS GO?As budgets tighten, the use of Facilities and Administrative(F&A) cost recoveries is scrutinized even more. Institutions takedifferent approaches in distributing the recovered F&A fromsponsored projects. Some institutions have modeled central orsplit F&A distribution to address critical needs of the researchenterprise such as faculty startup support. Others fullydistribute F&A recoveries with an expectation that centralfunctions will be charged out to those receiving units.Participants in this session will be able to share experiences ofwhether the distribution models at their campuses have beensuccessful and explore alternate models. Please join thissession to ask questions and share your experiences.

Learning Objectives: Basic understanding of F&Adistribution models and options.Discussion Group Leaders: JULIE JARVIS*, Senior Director,Government Costing, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignJOSH ROSENBERG, Director of Cost Studies, Office of Grantand Contract Accounting, Emory University



83* Lead Presenter



PRE-AWARD

GROUND ZERO ON UP: BUILDING THE UNIVERSITY(LITERALLY) This panel addresses the major and unique fundingmechanisms for infrastructure grants, which are ofincreasing importance during times of budget cuts and theon-going recession. Funding an infrastructure project oftenproceeds along a 10- to 20-year trajectory, from conceptionto completion. That trajectory begins with funds thatsupport the conceptual work, such as planning grants andfeasibility studies, and from there proceeds to majorconstruction grants. Next is the pursuit of funds thatsustain the infrastructure, such as funds for research, staff,and equipment. At the very end of the 20-year spectrum arefunds for renovation of the aging project.

Learning Objectives: Funding an infrastructure project isamong the most complex and prolonged challenges facedby sponsored projects administrators. • Participants will emerge with an understanding of thenecessity and best practices for sequencing the grantapplications for the entire life of a project.

• Participants will gain information on the major federal,state, and regional funding sources to do this forinfrastructure programs.

• Participants will also gain the technical knowledgenecessary to produce successful infrastructure proposals,from budget recommendations to networking withcolleagues in facilities and plant operations.

Discussion Group Leaders: GILLISANN HAROOTUNIAN*, Directorof Sponsored Programs, California State University, FresnoMARY LOUISE HEALY, Associate Director of ResearchAdministration, Johns Hopkins University - Zanvyl KriegerSchool of Arts & Sciences


A COLLABORATION ON BUDGETING FROM PRE-AWARD TO POST-AWARDWhat are the benefits of involving post award folks in thebudget preparation for proposal submissions. What aresome of the positives of this kind of collaboration and whatare negatives of non-collaboration.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will discuss what problems come to playwhen pre and post award do not communicate at budgetpreparation stage of proposal development and alsoprovide some case scenarios of the pitfalls of non-collaboration and successes of collaboration.

• Participants will share their insights on budgetingprocesses and how those processes work or do not workat their institutions.

Discussion Group Leaders: JO BARNES*, Director, Office ofResearch & Programs, Southern Illinois UniversityEdwardsvilleTERI GULLEDGE, Research Administrator, Southern IllinoisUniversity Edwardsville



84* Lead Presenter


2:45 - 3:45 • SPARK SESSIONS



CONCURRENT SESSIONS

BIOMEDICAL

MANAGING PROJECTS: BIG AND SMALL Program Level: OverviewHave you ever been asked to produce a report, streamline aprocedure or implement a new system? Big or small scale, weare all managing projects each day. A basic understanding ofproject management will help set you up for success everytime. Using examples from Clinical Trial system and IRBimplementations, this session will introduce you to the basicsof project management with a focus for research administrationand give you some specific tactics for getting things donewithin the university setting. We will also discuss “scope creep,”its effects on a project, and plans for setting expectations andsticking to them to complete projects on time. Finally, we willtalk about the types of roles you may need or want on yourproject team and how to manage participation and goals:from subject matter experts to senior leadership.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn the four basic elements of any project.

• Participants will be introduced to creating and managinga project team.

• Participants will learn tricks and tips for managingprojects within university research administration.

• Participants will learn to identify “scope creep” andstrategies for managing it.

HEATHER MISHRA*, Lead Financial Analyst, CaliforniaInstitute of TechnologyMARK BOURBONNAIS, Director, Research Support Services,UC Irvine School of MedicineMELODY G. BELL, Project Manager, Office of AcademicInformation Systems (AIS), UT Southwestern Medical Center

2:45 – 3:00 pmJOHNS HOPKINS MASTER OF RESEARCHADMINISTRATION DEGREE – DOORS OPEN FALL OF 2014 - FIND OUT MORE!KATHLEEN BURKE*, Associate Dean, Johns HopkinsUniversity, Advanced Academic Programs

3:10 – 3:30 pmMOTIVATING EMPLOYEES THROUGHTELECOMMUTING AMANDA C. SNYDER*, Assistant Director, SponsoredPrograms Administration Office of Research & Development,University of Maryland, BaltimoreDENNIS PAFFRATH, Assistant Vice President for SponsoredPrograms Administration, University of Maryland Baltimore



85* Lead Presenter


CONCURRENT SESSIONS

CAREER SKILLS

COMMUNICATION...IS IT A LOST ART?Program Level: OverviewCommunication is an often used word but are we really justtalking or typing? One definition from the Merriam-Websterdictionary is “a process by which information is exchangedbetween individuals through a common system of symbols,signs, or behavior”. When we speak to our faculty and othersat our institution, are we utilizing a common languageunderstood by everyone or are we speaking our own“special” language and expecting everyone to understandwhat we are trying to convey? Are there instances where weread but don’t get beyond an abrupt email? Ever try toexplain to your family and friends what you really do? Thisinteractive session will discuss the importance of ensuringwe are communicating the desired message to those withwhom we interact. Body language, personality types, andskills are critical to adjusting our use of various forms ofcommunication to ensure the information we areexchanging is being received as we desire.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn the difference between speakingand communicating.

• Participants will gain an understanding of theimportance of communicating in a manner that ensuresthe recipients receive the correct message.

• Participants will increase their awareness of adjustingtheir communication so it is understood by the audience.

PAM WHITLOCK*, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,University of North Carolina at Wilmington (Emeritus)PEGGY LOWRY, Program Manager, NCURA Peer ReviewProgram, National Council of University Research Administrators

CAREER SKILLS

GOOGLE ME: YOUR PROFESSIONAL REPUTATION INTHE MODERN AGEProgram Level: OverviewWhat does your online presence say about you? Currently,more and more personal information is available on the web.For example, your friends or family might mention yourname in a social network or tag you on online photos, oryour name could appear in blog posts or articles. The Googlebrand has become evolved into a brand as the Google searchengine is often the starting point for someone to learn moreabout you. This session will cover what an employer maylook for in searching you online, what your employees mightfind, and provide suggestions and discussion around how tomanage your online profile including what to do if you findunwanted content or personal data on the web. We will alsoexplore opportunities to enhance your web presence and tobe found as a professional by your peers or potentialemployers.

Learning Objectives:• Each participant will receive information about what apotential employer, colleague or collaborator may findout about him or herself on the internet.

• Participants will be given advice and guidance on how toimprove the desired results of on-line informationavailable about themselves.

• We will also invite questions and hope to engage in livelydiscussion about how to have some control of your ownreputation.

SAMANTHA WESTCOTT*, Manager, Sponsored Projects Team,Children’s Hospital, Los AngelesMICHELE CODD, Associate Director, Sponsored ProjectsAdministration, George Washington University


WHY DO WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT EFFORTREPORTING? (AND TIPS ON HOW TO DO IT!)Program Level: IntermediateWho wants to talk about effort? It is a daunting topic toboth the seasoned administrator and the faculty memberalike. Everyone wants to say all the right things, butsometimes a lingering feeling that all the cards aren’t onthe table. Join us to delve into the ins and outs of a good conversation around an occasionally sticky topic.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will explore how to discuss effortdistributions with both faculty and staff.

• Participants will be able to articulate the importance andresponsibility in accurate effort allocations.

• Participants will be able to identify tactics for productiveeffort discussions.

• Participants will learn about critical audit areas and howthe current audit environment may change withproposed circular changes.

Prerequisites:Working knowledge of your institutionalpolicies regarding effort review and certification. HEATHER OFFHAUS*, Director, Medical School Grant Review& Analysis, University of Michigan-Ann ArborDAVID NGO, Managing Officer, Pre-Award Services,University of Wisconsin-Madison



86* Lead Presenter



CORE CURRICULUM

LIFECYCLE OF AN AWARD – FINANCIAL MANAGEMENTProgram Level: BasicThere will be a follow-up Discussion Group on FinancialManagement Tuesday 4:00-5:00pm

This session will continue the introduction to the basicconcepts and topics related to research administrationduring the lifecycle of an award. It will pick up where awardreview, negotiation, etc. stopped. Now that the institutionhas been notified an award is likely to be received or hasbeen received what the institution can do to support the PIand department during the life of an award. The attendeewill leave with a good introduction to what processes andbest practices are critical to the successful management oftheir sponsored programs as it specifically relates tofinancial management of the award during its period ofperformance or budget period. A case study will bepresented and discussed at the end of the session to ensurethat the key concepts and ideas were comprehended sothat the attendees who are new to the researchadministration community have a solid understanding ofthe most relevant points along the spectrum from start tofinish in regards to the lifecycle of an award.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain a better insight on key processes forsponsored programs related to financial management ofawards.

• Participants will acquire useful tips and strategies fordepartmental and central administrators to worktogether to manage awards.

TIM REUTER*, Director, Post-Award, Stanford University



87* Lead Presenter



FEDERAL

HOW TO PROMOTE AND MANAGE NSF GRADUATERESEARCH FELLOWSHIPS ON YOUR CAMPUSProgram Level: OverviewThe NSF Graduate Research Fellowship program is a centralpiece of NSF’s efforts to develop the future workforce inSTEM fields. This competitive program usually awards some2,000 new fellowships each year. The grants managementstructure is unlike that of research grants, and campusresearch and accounting officials need to be familiar withthe process. This session will include key officials from NSFand a campus coordinator, providing the latest news onprogrammatic and reporting requirements.

Learning Objectives: Participants in this session will learnthe structure and process for NSF Fellowships, hear howother institutions promote and manage the program, andbe briefed on financial management aspects.STEVEN H. SMARTT*, Associate Dean for Academic Servicesand Assistant Provost for Research, Vanderbilt UniversityGISELE MULLER-PARKER, Program Director, National ScienceFoundationJEAN FELDMAN, Head, Policy Office, Division of Institution &Award Support, National Science Foundation

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

EXPORT CONTROLS: JUST THE BASICS - HOW TO KEEPYOUR FACULTY AND RESEARCHERS OUT OF TROUBLE!Program Level: BasicIntroduction to the basic concepts associated with exportcontrols and university research activities to help keep yourfaculty and researchers out of trouble! Learn about basicexport terms and common myths, know what regulationsare involved that impact university research, determinewhat is subject to the regulations and what is not, get thebasics on how to get started with developing your ownexport compliance program.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn the common regulatory terms andconcepts pertaining to export controls.

• Participants will develop familiarity with the organizationand content of the export control regulations.

• Participants will learn to identify “red flags” that mayindicate the need for additional export assessment for aparticular grant, contract, or proposed activity.

• Participants will better understand the impact exportcontrol regulations can have on research activities atcolleges and universities.

• Participants will get the basics on how to get startedwith their own export compliance program.

• Participants will be provided with resources on where togo for help.

KAY ELLIS*, Export Controls Officer, University of Arizona

FEDERAL

NSF’S HIGHER EDUCATION R&D UPDATEProgram Level: BasicThis session will provide an overview of the most recentHigher Education R&D Survey results, including two-yeartrend data from some of the new variables. The session willalso provide an update on recent changes to the surveyincluding the new long form/short form methodologyinitiated in FY 2012. Finally, the presentation will include ademonstration of how to create custom tables in WebCASPAR.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will have an improved knowledge andunderstanding of the data available from the HigherEducation R&D Survey.

• Participants will learn how to create custom tables inWebCASPAR to aid in institutional benchmarking.

RONDA BRITT*, Survey Statistician, NSF National Center forScience and Engineering StatisticsSAMUEL L. PETERSON, Institutional Research Analyst, Officeof Research, University of Missouri



88* Lead Presenter

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

THE FALSE CLAIMS ACT AND THE IMPACT ONFEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCHCome along on a journey through history to take a closerlook at the False Claims Act and its use as an enforcementtool by the federal agencies to combat fraud. Participantswill discuss examples of these enforcement actions andcome to appreciate the intricate factors involved in whatmany consider the most powerful tool at the government’sdisposal.

Learning Objectives: • Lessons to be learned for all federally funded academicinstitutions highlighted by various enforcement actions.

• Participants will have an increased awareness of howenforcement agencies use the False Claims Act.

• Participants will learn examples of corrective actionstaken by institutions facing enforcement.

Prerequisites: A basic understanding of common terms andacronyms used in research administration.JEFF M. SEO*, Director, Office of Research Compliance,Harvard University Medical School



POST-AWARD

PROJECT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN THE POST-AWARD WORLD Program Level: BasicJoin us for an introductory discussion on using projectmanagement software as a post-award projectmanagement tool. Timothy Povenski, StrategicManagement Analyst, West Virginia University HealthScience Center, will cover the definition of projectmanagement and how research administrators can adoptthis tool. He will briefly review how to input tasks andsubtasks for an award based on the submitted goals/aims,objectives, activities and timeline. Mr Povenski will alsoprovide tips on getting program director buy-in. Sarah Ott,Grants and Budget Specialist, West Virginia Clinical andTranslational Science Institute (WVCTSI), will discuss thebenefits of project management systems for progressreporting, effort monitoring and financial resourcemanagement. Both presenters will follow with a discussionon the translation of logic models into a projectmanagement system and how this approach can aid inprogress reporting.

Learning Objectives: Participants will leave with the abilityto: • Summarize features of project management.• Interpret the use for project management systems intheir day-to-day post award management.

• Execute basic task and subtask development based on anaward’s set out goals, objectives and activities.

• Explain the benefit of project management systems toprogram directors/PIs.

• Understand how project management systems can beused for progress reports to funding agencies.

• Understand the usefulness of using project managementsystems to further inform staff effort.

• Summarize uses of project management systems todelegate/monitor financial resources.

• Understand the synthesis of logic models and projectmanagement systems.

SARAH OTT*, Grants and Budget Specialist, WV Clinical andTranslational Science Institute, West Virginia UniversityHealth Sciences CenterTIM POVENSKI, Strategic Management Analyst, WestVirginia University Health Science Center



89* Lead Presenter




CREATING, IMPLEMENTING, AND EVALUATING ANINTERNAL GRANT COMPETITION ON A PUI CAMPUSProgram Level: OverviewHow do you promote research at a predominantlyundergraduate teaching institution? How can you introducefaculty members to the complexities of the proposal writingprocess? How can you ensure an increase in the number ofproposals submitted to external funding sources? How canyou engage university administration to support the effortsof a pre-award office? One approach is to implement aninternal grants completion on your campus. In 2011, BarryUniversity implemented its first-ever Faculty Incentive GrantProgram whereby faculty members could compete forresearch awards of up to $5,000. Beginning with theconcept, participants will then be guided through the entirelife process of the program, including: developing theeligibility criteria and the application guidelines, creating theelectronic grants application system, forming a peer reviewcommittee and defining the review procedures andmanaging faculty grant awards. The presenter will also share“lessons learned” and identify some pitfalls encounteredduring the first three years of the program.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how to obtain the backing andfinancial resources from university administrators.

• Participants will learn how to develop the eligibilitycriteria and application processes for an internal grantscompetition.

• Participants will learn how to collect and manageproposals using a web-based application system.

• Participants will learn how to market the programamong the faculty.

• Participants will learn how to design a formal reviewprocess to evaluate process.

P ATRICK LYNCH*, Director of Grants and SponsoredPrograms, Barry University

PRE-AWARD

SUBAWARDS: THE BASICS AND BEYONDProgram Level: BasicThis interactive session will focus on the basics of preparingand issuing subawards, including the characteristics of asubaward, pre award risk analysis, monitoring and close out.Subaward preparation, cost analysis, special considerationsfor high risk and international subrecipients, andsubcontracting under clinical trials agreements will beexplored. Roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders willbe examined. Strategies and practical guidance will beshared.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn to prepare and administersubawards.

• Participants will learn strategies for effective subrecipientmonitoring.

• Participants will be able to identify key issues and specialconsiderations for working with high risk subrecipients,international subrecipients, and subcontracting underclinical trials agreements.

NANCY LEWIS*, Director, Sponsored Projects Administration,University of California, IrvineSOHEIL JADALI, Principal Contracts and Grants Officer,Sponsored Projects Administration, University of California,Irvine



90* Lead Presenter


DISCUSSION GROUPS

BIOMEDICAL

TEAM SCIENCEResearch institutions are facing emerging challenges of thefunding environment and complexities of researchprograms. There is an increasing emphasis oninterdisciplinary research, collaboration with industry, andprojects that span multiple units, institutions and countries.Successful proposals require realignment of priorities,resources and skills across the academic institution. “TeamScience” session will describe the challenges and barrier atthe institutional, faculty and research administration level,as well as approaches to overcome the barrier. Topics thatwould be discussed are resources of funding opportunitiesfor collaborative programs, research-networking tools,strategies for facilitating the formation of cross-disciplinaryteams, developing large complex proposals, and Science ofTeam Science, a new field aimed at understanding andenhancing the processes and outcomes of collaborative,team-based research.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain an understanding of “Team Science”and “Science of Team Science.”

• Participants will learn about the complexities of “TeamScience” at the institutional, faculty and researchadministration levels.

• Participants will engage in a discussion about strategiesto overcome the barriers to “Team Science.”

• Participants will learn about available resources fortraining, facilitating and implementing “Team Science.”

Discussion Group Leaders: FRUMA YEHIELY*, Director ofResearch Development, Northwestern UniversityANDREA MINOGUE, Associate Director of Administration,Northwestern University Clinical and Translational SciencesInstitute (NUCATS)

BIOMEDICAL

LIVING IN A WORLD WITH LESS NIH FUNDINGIs the sky really falling or are we living with a temporarypause in funding? Discussion will focus on what you (andyour investigators) can do to prepare proposals that canabsorb the impacts of 10% cuts, delays in funding, impactsof sequestration, and the like. We will also talk aboutstrategies that can help the research administrator be amore effective intermediary between the PI and thesponsor. Let’s take some of the stress out of an alreadystressful situation.Learning Objectives:• Participants will gain an understanding of the federalbudget process and the meaning of a continuingresolution.

• Participants will understand the impacts of budgetsequestration and impacts on research portfolios.

• Participants will learn what measures can be taken bothpre- and post-award in dealing with budget impacts.

Discussion Group Leader: DAVID LYNCH*, Executive Director,Northwestern University



91* Lead Presenter


WHAT DOES EVERY GRADUATE STUDENT NEED TOKNOW ABOUT RCRThis session will briefly describe the nine core competenciesthat fall under Responsible Conduct or Research (RCR). Thesession will involve an interactive simulation call “The Lab”where participants will discuss and decide what thesimulated character should do next and the possible resultsof those decisions. The objective of the session is todemonstrate how to help educate graduate students ofwhat areas constitute RCR and to engage in a decision-making process through a simulated scenario. The labsimulation is available at no charge from the Office ofResearch Integrity.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will review the nine core areas of responsibleconduct of research.

• Participants will discuss the critical role of the researchadvisor/mentor in RCR.

• Participants will participate in a demonstration of theinteractive simulation “the Lab.”

Discussion Group Leaders: JO ANN SMITH*, Director,Assistant Professor, University of Central FloridaGRISELLE BÁEZ-MUÑOZ, Conflict of InterestOffice/Coordinator, University of Central Florida



FEDERAL

WHAT IS SciENCV AND WHERE IS IT GOING?Learning Objectives: • Participants will understand the soon to be launchedSciENcv project.

• Participants will learn how SciENcv will reduce the burdenof applying for and maintaining federal research grants.

• Participants will learn what kinds of new informationSciENcv will provide on the impact of federal scienceinvestments.

Discussion Group Leaders: WALTER SCHAFFER*, SeniorAdvisor, National Institutes of Health, Office of the DirectorBART TRAWICK, Literature Resources Lead, Public ServicesSection, NCBI, National Library of Medicine (NLM), NationalInstitutes of HealthAMY NORTHCUTT, Chief Information Officer, NationalScience Foundation

FEDERAL

COUNCIL ON GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS (COGR)UPDATECOGR is an association of 190 U.S. research universities andtheir affiliated academic medical centers and researchinstitutes, concerned with the influence of federalregulations, policies, and practices on the performance ofresearch and other sponsored activities conducted at itsmember institutions. This discussion group will provide aforum for research institutions to discuss the significantresearch policy and regulatory issues that institutionscurrently face.

Discussion Group Leaders: ALEXANDRA ALBINAKMcKEOWN*, Associate Dean for Research Administration,The Johns Hopkins UniversityROBERT HARDY, Director, Contracts and Intellectual PropertyManagement, Council on Governmental Relations (COGR)



92* Lead Presenter

agenda

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

HUMAN SUBJECT PROTECTION: IRB ROUTINE REVIEWSAND OTHER POST APPROVAL MONITORINGJoin your colleagues for a discussion of post approvalmonitoring of human subjects’ research. We will begin bydiscussing the use of routine reviews by the QualityImprovement Program of the Medical College of Wisconsin.We will discuss the purpose of the routine review, how toprepare for a routine review, and the review process. We willalso discuss the post approval monitoring program by theClinical Neurology & Neuroscience Research Department ofthe Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicineand the post approval monitoring program at Washington University-St. Louis. Join your colleagues in discussing thestate of post approval monitoring of human subjects‚research at your institution.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will contribute to a discussion of post-approval monitoring of human subjects‚ researchincluding IRB routine reviews.

• Participant will understand the purpose of the routinereview of a research project involving human subjectsand understand what it takes to prepare for a routinereview.

Discussion Group Leaders: DEBORAH EPPS*, ResearchCoordinator, Medical College of WisconsinWENDY A. TROCCHIO,Manager of Research Administrationfor Clinical Neurology & Neuroscience Research,Northwestern University Feinberg School of MedicineDENISE McCARTNEY, Associate Vice Chancellor for ResearchAdministration, Washington University in St. Louis



POST-AWARD

STRENGTHENING INTERNAL CONTROLS: THE KEY TOSURVIVING AN A-133 AUDITWe will have a discussion of the internal controls describedin Part 6 of the A-133 Compliance Supplement, and themethods being employed to strengthen these controls.

Discussion Group Leader: LEE PETTIT*, Senior Grant &Contract Officer, Arizona State University

INTERNATIONAL

COPYRIGHT AND INTERNATIONAL RESEARCHOpen access policies are implemented in US and EUuniversities. Requirements of funding bodies have to betaken into account in university copyright policies andcopyright agreements with their employees.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will experience exchange on how totransform policies into practice.

• Participants will learn about university copyright policiesand university/employee agreements will be discussedtaking into account different starting points in US and EUin the requirements of funding bodies, especiallyrequirements for open access.

Prerequisites: It is recommended to have previousknowledge of copyright policies and agreements. Discussion Group Leaders: MARIA REHBINDER*, LegalCounsel, Aalto University CATHY INNES, Director, Business and Innovation, Collage ofVeterinary Medicine North Carolina State University



93* Lead Presenter

PRE-AWARD

A DEEPER DIVE INTO GRANT V. GIFT CLASSIFICATIONThis is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldat 1:30 pm: Is this Check a Gift or a Grant?

In this session, we will use case studies to examine anddiscuss the difficulties and challenges that arise duringextramural funding classification. The discussion group willalso seek to identify strategies that may be employed at the participants’ institutions to overcome differences inperspectives between key stakeholders in the classificationprocess. The discussion leaders will have cases studiesbased on real-world examples to help facilitate thediscussion and participants are encouraged to bring theirown case studies to share with the group.

Discussion Group Leaders: BRUCE MORGAN*, Assistant ViceChancellor for Research Administration, Office of ResearchAdministration, University of California-IrvineANTHONY F. VENTIMIGLIA, Associate Director, Office ofSponsored Programs, Auburn University


4:00 – 5:00 • SPARK SESSIONS



STRENGTHENING THE RESEARCH ENTERPRISE:STRATEGIES FOR HBCUs AND MSIsDoes your institution have a comprehensive approach tostrengthening the research enterprise? Does your officehave a strategy for aligning faculty talent, academicprograms and institutional priorities withnational/state/local funding opportunities? Are youbuilding lasting partnerships with corporations to supportyour institution’s research agenda? Session leaders willprovide proven strategies for addressing these and otherissues related to strengthening the research enterprise atHBCUs and MSIs.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how to develop a comprehensiveapproach to strengthening the research enterprise.

• Participants will learn how to develop a strategy foraligning faculty talent, academic programs andinstitutional priorities with national/state/local fundingopportunities.

• Participants will learn how to develop and maintaincorporate partnerships.

Discussion Group Leaders: PHYLLIS DANNER*, Director ofResearch and Sponsored Programs, Tennessee StateUniversityVALERIE WILLIAMS, Interim Director, Center of Excellence forLearning Sciences, Tennessee State University



4:00 – 4:20 pmFEDERAL CONTRACTING ENVIRONMENT” –WEATHERING THE STORMS OF INCREASEDREGULATORY SCRUTINY & COMPLIANCE EXPECTATIONSLILLIE RYANS-CULCLAGER*, Director of Contracts, SRI International

4:30 – 4:50 pmPRE-AWARD AND DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATORS,WHY ALL THE DRAMA?BRENDA KAVANAUGH*, Associate Director, Office ofResearch and Project Administration, University of RochesterGLENDA BULLOCK, Manager of Business Operations, Divisionof Hematology, Washington University in St. Louis



94* Lead Presenter

CAREER SKILLS

HOW TO EFFECTIVELY REWARD AND RECOGNIZEYOUR EMPLOYEES AND ASSOCIATESProgram Level: OverviewGallup states that 72% of US workers are not engaged intheir work, essentially sleep walking throughout their day.The lost productivity of actively disengaged employeescosts the US economy $370 BILLION annually. Effectiverecognition can help even in tough economic times. Thissession will discuss ways in which you can reward andrecognize behaviors creating a “culture of recognition.”

Learning Objectives: • Participants will leave with effective methods and toolsfor recognizing and rewarding employees.

• Participants will hear best practices for creating a “cultureof recognition.”

SCOTT DAVIS*, Associate Director, University of Oklahoma,Health Sciences CenterMIKE KETCHERSIDE, Vice President, MTM RecognitionCorporation

CORE CURRICULUM

ALPHABET SOUP: DECODING THE JARGON OF COMPLIANCEProgram Level: BasicRCR, COI, HIPPA, ITAR, OHRP, IACUC, IRB, IBC, EAR...oh my! Thissession will continue the introduction to the basic conceptsand topics related to research administration during thelifecycle of an award. It will pick up where FinancialManagement stopped. Understanding the vast array of non-financial research compliance areas is an undertaking madeeven more difficult because it actually requires understandinga second language-compliance-ese. This session will providedescriptions of some of the most common of the non-financialresearch compliance programs, background on developmentof compliance regulations, and the agencies responsible foroversight. This session is intended for anyone new to researchadministration or unfamiliar with non-financial researchcompliance. It is intended as a "survey" session. A case studywill be presented and discussed at the end of the session toensure that the key concepts and ideas were comprehended sothat the attendees who are new to the researchadministration community have a solid understanding of themost relevant points along the spectrum from start to finish inregards to the lifecycle of an award.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will become more familiar with non-financialresearch compliance programs.

• Participants will have an understanding of why theseregulations were developed.

• Participants will learn what kinds of research projectsneed compliance oversight.

TONI SHAKLEE*, Assistant Vice President for Research,Oklahoma State University


CONCURRENT SESSIONS



95* Lead Presenter


INTEGRATED DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATORTRAINING: UNITING RESEARCH ADMINISTRATIONACROSS COLLEGES AND ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS Program Level: IntermediateDecentralized universities create challenges for researchadministration. Department administrators, as theadministrators most familiar with the PIs, are tasked withassisting PIs with spending grant funds and monitoringprojects. Sometimes these administrators are not aware thatgrants are part of their responsibilities, or are unfamiliar withgrants management techniques. Training in grantsmanagement, in addition to and distinct from management of general and development funds, is vital to ensuring properadministration of sponsored funds. Department administratorsneed the institutional perspective of centralized researchadministration coupled with the procedural and policyperspectives of their colleges, but crossing institutional andcollege silos can make development of such training difficult.Centralization of services and redeployment of existingdepartmental staff create new training challenges. We providethe perspective of the experiences at both The Ohio StateUniversity and Bowling Green State University, which areindependently developing grants management trainingprograms to raise awareness of the management needspeculiar to research administration and to break down the silosthat prevent effective grants management. Topics discussedinclude staff training across units, training new faculty,encouraging staff to learn about emerging issues, encouragingconsistent messaging from central units, and pitfalls.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn key components of a successfuldepartment administrator training program in grantsmanagement, as well as strategies for fosteringcollaboration between colleges and centraladministration to maximize efficiency of delivery andcontinuity of messaging.

• Participants will also learn components of a new facultytraining program.

ANDREA R. WARD ROSS*, Assistant Dean, The Ohio StateUniversity Main CampusKARLA GENGLER-NOWAK, Assistant Director, College ofMedicine, Office of Research, Health Sciences Office, Office ofSponsored Programs, The Ohio State University Main CampusAIMEE NIELSEN-LINK, Director, Health Sciences Office, Office ofSponsored Programs, The Ohio State University Main CampusTOM KORNACKI, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs andResearch, Bowling Green State University



FEDERAL

OPEN GOV: GOOD NEWS & BAD NEWSProgram Level: UpdateThe last five years have seen many changes that promotepublic transparency of Federal spending and encourageOpen Government. This session will walk through keyaspects of current Open Government policies at NIH and adiscussion of potential future initiatives impacting manyother agencies within the government. But since all thesechanges will require efforts by both Federal agencies as wellas grantees, we will also discuss possible ways to reduce theburden on grantees while increasing the accuracy andusefulness of reported data.

DAVID CURREN*, Grants Policy Analyst, NIH, Office of Policyfor Extramural Research Administration



96* Lead Presenter

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

REDUCING REGULATORY BURDENS IN YOUR ANIMALCARE AND USE PROGRAM Program Level: BasicWhat are some common things we do that are self-imposedrather than regulation-based? How much effort is thisadding to our work load, our IACUC members’ work loads,our researchers’ work loads? How much time is this addingto the review process?

Learning Objectives: • Participants will identify common procedures that arepart of many Animal Care and Use programs that are notrequired by the regulations.

• Participants will estimate the burden this adds toadministrators, IACUC members, and researchers.

• Participants will evaluate if the process is adding enoughvalue to your program to offset the burden.

KASEY STRICKLAND*, Director, Regulatory Compliance &Safety, Mississippi State UniversityCARPANTATO (TANTA) MYLES, Director & ResearchCompliance Officer, Office of Research Compliance, TheUniversity of Alabama



INTERNATIONAL

FULBRIGHT AND YOUR INSTITUTION:UNDERSTANDING HOW IT WORKS BESTProgram Level: OverviewThe Fulbright Program is the flagship internationaleducational exchange program sponsored by the U.S.government and is designed to “increase mutualunderstanding between the people of the United Statesand the people of other countries.” There are opportunitiesthat enable faculty and administrators to consult, teach, orconduct research abroad. While awards are disburseddirectly to faculty recipients, what role do sponsoredprograms offices play in promoting and facilitatingapplications for these opportunities? Where is the campusrepresentative on your campus? What support mightfaculty find at your institution either prior to applicationsubmission or upon receipt of award? Come learn moreabout Fulbright awards for faculty and administrators and discuss ways in which sponsored programs offices are involved in the process of promoting the program and supporting applicants.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be provided a brief overview of Fulbrightawards for faculty.

• Participants will discover how various institutionspromote or assist with Fulbright or fellowships that areawarded directly to faculty members.

• Participants will learn ways in which sponsored programsoffices work with deans and other administrators toencourage participation.

Prerequisites: Some knowledge of Fulbright opportunitiesand institutional procedures/policies for faculty who receiveawards would be helpful but is not required.JOHN CARFORA*, Associate Provost for ResearchAdvancement and Compliance, Loyola Marymount UniversityANDY RIESS, Assistant Director of Outreach, Council forInternational Exchange of Scholars, Fulbright ProgramALEXANDRA MARMION ROOSA, Director, Research andSponsored Programs, Pepperdine UniversityMELISSA UMBRO TEETZEL, Sponsored Programs Officer,Pepperdine University



97* Lead Presenter

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

WRITING INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH POLICIES ANDSOPs: DON’T SET YOURSELF UP FOR FAILUREProgram Level: AdvancedThis session will explore the “art” of drafting policies andprocedures that ensure compliance with regulations butwithout making it difficult (or for some institutionsimpossible) to comply with policy requirements. It willtouch upon stakeholder involvement, essential policycomponents, approval process, education plan andimplementation.

Learning Objectives: At the end of the session participantsshould have tools to develop, draft and implement policiesand procedures, in addition to the components of acommunication and education plan.Prerequisites: This session is intended for individualsresponsible for policy development and implementation.MARY MITCHELL*, Director of Compliance, PartnersHealthcare

POST-AWARD

CORE RESEARCH FACILITIES & SERVICE CENTERS FORTHE NEW ADMINISTRATORProgram Level: IntermediateThis session is for those Interested in talking about servicecenter successes, failures, problem with rate settings,compliance or accounting. This session is meant for thosewho monitor, audit, or work in a service center or who may becontemplating starting one. We will discuss the creation ofnew service centers, rate setting and policies and procedures.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how to define a service center.• Participants will identify what to include in the billingrate.

• Participants will learn about important policies andprocedures to develop and to identify key complianceissues.

ZACHARY BELTON*, Director, Huron EducationLYNN MCGINLEY, Assistant VP, Sponsored Projects Accountingand Compliance, University of Maryland, Baltimore

PRE-AWARD

BRIDGING THE GAP: RESEARCH ADMINISTRATIONAND PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENTProgram Level: OverviewProposal Development is an emerging field, with its ownprofessional organization (NORDP) and its own increasinglydefined set of skills and best practices. Yet it remains closelyintertwined with Research Administration. Someinstitutions incorporate Proposal Development functionsinto their Research Administration operations. Others havea separate Proposal Development Office. At times, the sameperson may engage in activities that bridge bothprofessions! This session will look at the interface betweentraditional Research Administration and the emerging fieldof Proposal Development, and provide ideas and strategiesfor bridging the gap between the two.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will be able to identify tasks and rolescommon to research administration and proposaldevelopment.

• Participants will be able to identify opportunities forprofessionals in each field to adopt best practices.

• Participants will be able to identify ways that RA and PDcan work together to provide more robust services tofaculty researchers, graduate students, and otherresearch professionals.

TRISHA SOUTHERGILL*, Director of Grant Support Services,Clemson UniversityBRIGETTE PFISTER, Director of Sponsored Programs forHumanities & Sciences, Virginia Commonwealth UniversityJESSICA VENABLE, Grant Research Analyst, VirginiaCommonwealth University





98* Lead Presenter




USING TECHNOLOGY TO ENHANCE RESEARCHPRODUCTION WITHOUT BREAKING THE BANK AT PUIsProgram Level: OverviewCan technology empower a small scale office at a PUI toincrease the volume of proposals submitted by their PI‚s?Several companies have been marketing grant managementprograms to assist Research Administrators with pre-awardfunctions. Many large universities use such programs as KualiCoeus, Cayuse and InfoEd Global to manage their pre-awardprocess. For a small university the decision to purchase a grantsmanagement program has always been a matter of cost. TheOffice of Academic Research at St. Mary‚s University hasresearched whether to hire an assistant to help with pre-awardgrant processing or to purchase one of several grantmanagement programs. The office has also looked for ways tomake the internal grant submission process more efficient,reduce time spent by the PI’s to search and apply for grants, andsimplify the report generating process. Anything that could bedone to simplify the grant submission process for the facultyshould increase their production. For our university and those ofus managing a PUI office a conundrum exists because of ourbudgets; we have a hard time justifying the cost of thetechnology tools to aid us in proposal development andtracking. In this session, the results of a partnership betweenthe public and private sector will be showcased in order toquantify results of a technology tool and a small department.Through a unique set of communications and inspirations, acorporation decided to turn their attention to a market thatdeserved support and custom pricing. The University of StMary’s embarked on their journey in the Fall of 2012 and inpartnership with InfoEd Global. This session will share theresults of this project as well as provide valuable advice anddata for PUIs to use when considering purchasing a grantsmanagement system.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will evaluate results from a nearly year-longstudy, of the effects of a grants management tool on asmall scale Office of Sponsored Research Department.

• Participants will be provided with suggestion forevaluation techniques and tools to help support self-assessment in their own departments.

• Participants will be able to take this information back totheir respective institutions in order to make crucialdecision around FTE and grants management technology.

MARK H. ROLTSCH*, Executive Director, Office of AcademicResearch and Sponsored Projects, St. Mary’s UniversityCINDY BELLAS, Director of Business Development, InfoEdGlobal



99* Lead Presenter

CAREER SKILLS

YOU’RE IN CHARGE OF YOURSELF – SELF-GUIDEDPROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENTThis discussion session will focus on content presented inthe concurrent session, “You’re in Charge of Yourself - Self-Guided Professional Development”

Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to engage in amore in depth conversation related to strategies thatempower them to take charge of their professionaldevelopment.Discussion Group Leaders: LISA MOSLEY*, Executive Director,Research Operations, Arizona State UniversitySAMANTHA WESTCOTT, Manager, Sponsored Projects Team,Children’s Hospital, Los AngelesJOSIE JIMENEZ, Associate Director, Office of Grants andContracts, New Mexico State University


INTERNAL AUDIT AND DEPARTMENTAL RESEARCHADMINISTRATION: WORKING TOGETHERThis discussion will give departmental research staff andinternal auditors an opportunity to discuss ways in whichthey can collaborate for the benefit of the departments.Items that may be discussed include risk assessments,specific compliance issues and communication needs.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain insights on how to work with theirinternal audit staff.

• Participants will learn how to approach risk andcompliance issues.

Discussion Group Leaders: JEAN CODY*, Director, ResearchService Center - Downtown Campus, University of Texas atSan AntonioKEVIN ROBINSON, Executive Director, Department of InternalAuditing, Auburn University


DISCUSSION GROUPS

CORE CURRICULUM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENTThis is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldheld Tuesday at 2:45 pm: Lifecycle of an Award – FinancialManagement

A follow-on to the earlier concurrent session, this discussiongroup will offer participants the opportunity to posequestions, find solutions, and offer support to one anotherin the financial management of awards.

Discussion Group Leader: TIM REUTER*, Director, Post Award,Stanford University

FEDERAL

NSF/HHS AUDIT PLANSSenior officials from HHS and NSF Offices of the InspectorGeneral will discuss recent developments and upcomingaudit initiatives and what these can mean for the researchcommunity. Presentation will cover NSF and HHS OIG auditplanning and approaches for grant oversight. Material willalso cover data analytics and government-wide topics beingaddressed in the Federal audit community.

Learning Objectives: Upon completion of this session,participants should be able to describe the NSF and HHSOIG approaches to operational and grant oversight, use ofdata analytics, and identify current topics being addressedin the Federal audit community.Discussion Group Leaders: BRETT M. BAKER*, AssistantInspector General for Audit, Office of the Inspector General,National Science FoundationKAY DALY, Assistant Inspector General for Audit Services,Department of Health and Human Services



100* Lead Presenter



INTERNATIONAL

BILAT-USA 2.0Background The US Government and the EuropeanCommission with the Member States have fostered theirresearch and innovation systems to be highly productive,driven by excellence, geared towards answering societalneeds and increasing economic productivity. It is proventhat international cooperation in research and innovationhas the potential to multiply the return on investmentgained from domestic public expenditure. One instrumentsupporting EU-U.S. research cooperation is the BILAT USA2.0 project that has been launched by the EuropeanCommission in November 2012. The project has four main goals: • To spread among EU and US-American researchers andinnovators information on funding possibilities withinthe research framework programme in the US and USfunding programmes in Europe.

• To facilitate the cooperation between scientists andinnovation actors through a number of workshops.

• To support the policy dialogue within the framework of the Science, Technology & Innovation CooperationAgreement between the EU and the USA.

• To analyse the state-of-the-art and the progress ofscience and technology cooperation.

Learning Objectives: About half of the session will be devotedto give “incentive” presentations by the session leaders givinga quick overview of the most relevant aspects related to onethematic area. The other half is planned to be interactive,reply to direct questions and challenges you encounter whencooperating internationally and receive feedback from thesession participants. Our learning objectives will include: • To give you an overview and a better understanding of theEuropean Framework Programme and its’ possibilities forUS-Researchers.

• To inform you on how your students and research caneasier and better find excellent European researchcooperation partners.

• To explore technical, financial and legal issues in order tofacilitate the application process for U.S. researchers. Oneof our objectives is the facilitation of EU-U.S. researchcooperation. In order to be able to give an accuraterecommendation on how to improve such cooperationframework, we are dependant on your feedback and onyour experiences.

• An exchange of what difficulties/challenges you encounterwhen cooperating as well as your ideas of improvements istherefore envisaged and welcomed.

Discussion Group Leader: OLAF HEILMAYER*, BILAT-USA 2.0Project Coordinator, International Bureau of the FederalMinistry of Education and Research at the ProjectManagement Agency

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY - HOW WILLEXPORT CONTROL REFORM AFFECT MY UNIVERSITY?�Export control reform is already underway. Both Commerceand State have recently published Federal Register Noticesthat are sure to affect universities, and more changes are onthe way. Please join a discussion on what is happening inthe world of export control reform and how those changeswill impact our university export control programs.Solutions will be discussed for handling potential issuesbrought about by the changes in the EAR and the ITAR.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will discuss export control reform and howthe changes to the regulations will impact universities.

• Participants will discuss solutions for handling potentialissues brought about by the changes in the EAR and the ITAR.

Discussion Group Leader: KAY ELLIS*, Export Controls Officer,University of Arizona



101* Lead Presenter

9:00 pm • REGIONAL HOSPITALITY SUITES OPEN



PRE-AWARD

SUBAWARDS: THE BASICS AND BEYOND-CASESTUDIES AND DISCUSSION Please join us for a lively and informative session that willexplore the topics presented in the Subawards: The Basicsand Beyond session. Case studies will be presented that areintended to facilitate discussion as well as demonstrate andreinforce concepts and topics covered. Attendees are invitedto bring questions as well as share experiences and bestpractices for subaward management.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn key concepts and techniques foreffective management of subawards.

• Presenters and participants will share experiences andbest practices.

Discussion Group Leaders: NANCY LEWIS*, Director,Sponsored Projects Administration, University of California,IrvineSOHEIL JADALI, Principal Contracts and Grants Officer,Sponsored Projects Administration, University of California,Irvine


WHAT ONE PUI LEARNED WHEN TRYING TOMOTIVATE FACULTY TO GET INVOLVED WITH GRANTSThis session will highlight the obstacles and successes onePUI has encountered in motivating faculty to engage insponsored programs. Attendees are encouraged to sharetheir experiences with the group and come prepared towork through some common issues in stimulatingsponsored programs growth.

Learning Objectives: To share and discuss ways to increasefaculty involvement in sponsored research. Discussion Group Leaders: MAJA MARJANOVIC*, Director ofSponsored Programs, Purdue University CalumetKRISTIN SARVER, Pre-Award Manager, Purdue UniversityCalumet

POST-AWARD

MANAGING ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE FOR SPONSORED PROJECTSJoin us to share strategies on successful management ofAccounts Receivable (A/R). We’ll discuss A/R coordinationand communication, evaluate A/R processing, shareeffective analytical tools and identify realistic benchmarksfor timely management of collections.

Discussion Group Leader: JENNIFER DUNCAN*, Director,Sponsored Programs Administration, University of Missouri

6:00 – 10:30 pm • TUESDAY NIGHT EVENT

Fun in the summertime! Tuesday night at 6:00 pm stop by the courtyard on the Heights level for something cool to drinkand enjoy the sounds of a steel drum band, before summertime fare and dancing begin in the ballroom at 7 pm. Drink ticketsfor both events are in your packet, and your badge is your entrance ticket. The outside lawn, accessible by the terrace levelentrance, will be open from 6 - 8 pm with space for families with children to run off some steam, enjoy some cool lemonadeand play games on the lawn.


Wednesday, August 7, 2013

102* Lead Presenter

BIOMEDICAL

INTERFACING EMR ACTIVITY TO YOUR CLINICAL TRIALSDATABASE: A PERFECT WORLDProgram Level: UpdateThe ability to leverage information available in ElectronicHealth Record (EHR) systems and combine it with theresearch enterprise requires seamless integration with aClinical Research Management System (CRMS). Thisworkshop will focus on sharing lessons learned fromintegrating the two systems, including how to identifypriorities and develop an implementation strategy, how tocollaborate across the institution and with vendors, andhow to overcome the inevitable challenges that arise whenintegrating IT platforms across an institution.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will have a better understanding how to setpriorities when integrating systems.

• Participants will have a better understanding how to planfor integration.

• Participants will have a better understanding technical,ethical and logistical challenges.

Prerequisites: Advanced level of understanding of clinicaltrials. This session will build on standard operatingprocedures and best practices.TESHEIA JOHNSON*, Associate Director of Clinical Researchfor Yale School of Medicine COO, YCCI, Yale UniversityRICK ROHRBACH*,Managing Director, Huron ConsultingGroup

BIOMEDICAL

NEW MODELS FOR RESEARCH ADMINISTRATIONProgram Level: AdvancedConcern continues in Academic Medical Centers (AMCs)around sponsored research funding, compliance, andadministrative structures to support the research faculty.The old business model within AMCs will need adjusting as the administration in these organizations continue to be reviewed, changed, and reduced. Working with variousuniversities, new business models for researchadministration have been implemented. Shared servicemodels are important to many dean’s, chairs, and healthaffairs executives. This session will review some of theresults of studies completed in reviews of sponsoredresearch offices, at the central medical school level and indepartments. These models can be used by non-medicalunits since the underlying principle is sharing resources andcreating expertise in functional units. Implementationchallenges and guidance will also be introduced to theattendees. The session will be interactive and discussion isencouraged to provide guidance to all attendees.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain insight into the findings of a reviewof research administration in a prominent AMC.

• Participants will understand some new models for thestructure of research administration shared services.

KERRY PELUSO*, Associate Vice President for ResearchAdministration, Emory UniversityJOHN CASE, Healthcare and Education Practice Leader,PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP

7:30 am – NoonAM55 CONCIERGE

7:30 – 8:30 amANNUAL BUSINESS MEETING AND CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST


CONCURRENT SESSIONS



103* Lead Presenter



CAREER SKILLS

THERE IS NO “I” IN TEAM, BUT THERE IS A “U” INSUCCESS. HOW TO BECOME A SUCCESSFUL MANAGERAND LEAD IN RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION?Program Level: OverviewOne of the most important functions performed by seniorresearch administrators is managing people. While there areno fool-proof methods for supervising staff, there are plentyof good practices that have evolved over the years. Thissession will provide an opportunity to share examples ofwhat has worked, and what has not worked in the researcharena. It will confront the day-to-day human resource issuesthat administrators have to respond to on a daily basis whiletrying to manage their department effectively.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will understand the role of a manager.• Participants will learn how to improve on their peopleskills in the workplace.

• Participants will learn how to handle difficult people toproduce positive outcomes when managing conflict.

• Participants will explore successful strategies formotivating your staff.

TOLISE MILES*, Senior Grants and Contracts Specialist, Grantsand Contracts Administration and Finance, Children’sNational Medical CenterDEBORAH BASSARD, Human Resources Director, GeorgetownUniversity Medical CenterSONYA SIMS, Human Resources Manager, The Johns HopkinsUniversity

CAREER SKILLS

CHANGE MANAGEMENT IN RESEARCHADMINISTRATION: IMPLEMENTING SYSTEMS, PEOPLE, AND CULTURE CHANGE Program Level: OverviewManaging change is a challenge in research administration.Although changes implemented are designed to reduceanxiety and frustration and improve processes, often thechange process itself is stressful and requires a significantchange in culture. This presentation describes changemanagement in research administration using examples of implementing a new eRA system and a staffreorganization. Presenters will describe approaches tochange management and provide suggestions for realizingand managing a culture of change while fosteringcommunication and collaboration between relevantstakeholders. The presenters will describe how tounderstand and accommodate key stakeholders andcommon steps to prepare for and facilitate successfulchange projects. Presenters will share their experiences andlessons learned.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will prepare for and structure institution-wide change activities.

• Participants will identify needs of target groups.• Participants will foster collaboration between allstakeholders.

• Participants will manage change on an institutional level,including culture changes.

• Participants will identify how to sustain changes.JENNIFER PELT WISDOM*, Associate VP Research, GeorgeWashington UniversityBARBARA INDERWIESCHE, Kuali Coeus Administrator, UCIOffice of Research, University of California, Irvine

CAREER SKILLS

YES, THAT REALLY DID HAPPENProgram Level: OverviewA discussion of strange occurrences in research administrationduring the careers of the panel of seasoned researchadministrators.

PATRICK GREEN*, Executive Assistant Director, Office of Contractand Research Administration, Vanderbilt University; STEVEN H. SMARTT, Associate Dean, Graduate School, andAssistant Provost for Research, Vanderbilt UniversityBARBARA GRAY, Director of Sponsored Programs & ResearchAdministration, Valdosta State UniversityPAM WHITLOCK, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,University of North Carolina at Wilmington (Emeritus)JAMIE CALDWELL, Director of the Office of Research Services forthe Health Sciences, Loyola University Chicago

CORE CURRICULUM

LIFECYCLE OF AN AWARD – REPORTING, CLOSE-OUTAND AUDIT Program Level: BasicThis session will continue the introduction to the basicconcepts and topics related to research administrationduring the lifecycle of an award. It will pick up wherefinancial management stopped and focus on the reportingaspects that exist during the life of an award and then goon to look at what is involved to close out an award when itis over. In addition, a good overview will be provided forwhat to expect and how to effectively manage an auditwhen one occurs on a sponsored program. The attendee willleave with a good introduction to what processes and bestpractices are critical to the successful management of theirsponsored programs as it specifically relates to reporting,close-outs and audits. A case study will be presented anddiscussed at the end of the session to ensure that the keyconcepts and ideas were comprehended so that theattendees who are new to the research administrationcommunity have a solid understanding of the most relevantpoints along the spectrum from start to finish in regards tothe lifecycle of an award.

Learning Objectives: Participants will gain a better insighton key processes for sponsored programs related toreporting and close-outs as well as an overview of what’sentailed when sponsored programs get audited.MICHELLE VAZIN*, Director, Contract and Grant Accounting,Vanderbilt UniversityMICHELE CODD, Associate Director, Sponsored ProjectsAdministration, George Washington University



104* Lead Presenter




QUICK GET THEM WHILE THEY ARE YOUNG:MENTORING JUNIOR FACULTY IN PURSUINGRESEARCH FUNDINGProgram Level: IntermediateThis session will discuss how to mentor junior faculty inlearning how to successfully pursue and obtain researchfunding. The session will define and describe what juniorfaculty are and how to build a relationship on mutualunderstanding, respect, and trust. In addition, the sessionwill discuss how to assess the needs of junior faculty andthe types of support and information typically provided thatwill help them become a successfully funded researcher.The session will end with questions and open discussion.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will be able to appraise the benefits ofworking with junior faculty.

• Participants will be able to define and describe juniorfaculty and their roles and challenges.

• Participants will be able to apply steps that will buildtrust between them and junior faculty.

• Participants will be able to assess and identify specificneeds for junior faculty.

• Participants will be able to follow-up with junior facultyto continue a legacy of new successful faculty.

• Participants will be able to evaluate positive outcomesfrom mentoring junior faculty at their institution.

RANDI WASIK*, Director, Administration and Finance,Department of Urology, University of WashingtonJO ANN SMITH, Director, Assistant Professor, University ofCentral Florida

FEDERAL

PREPARING AN NSF PROPOSAL: THE GOOD, THE BAD,AND THE UGLY...�Program Level: UpdateThis session will provide the dos and the many don’ts ofpreparing an NSF proposal. An indepth review of the sectionsof the proposal and what NSF staff and reviewers consider intheir review. Many painful lessons learned will be provided!!

Learning Objectives: Participants will gain actionableknowledge to assist faculty in preparing NSF proposals, and,even more importantly, understanding the reasons whyproposals are returned without review. JEAN FELDMAN*, Head, Policy Office, Division of Institution &Award Support, National Science Foundation



105* Lead Presenter



POLICY/COMPLIANCE

CRACK THE CODE: MAKING SENSE OF ACRONYMSProgram Level: BasicAre you in JEOPARDY of being overcome by acronyms?Acronyms have traditionally been a very important staple inthe research administrator community, but they are oftenmore complex to decode than a word puzzle on Wheel ofFortune. For research administrators new to the field,understanding acronyms can help you feel Smarter than aFifth Grader and (hopefully) avoid a possible Family Feudwith colleagues when they speak in this sometimes foreignlanguage. The goal of this session will be to demystify anumber of those acronyms that have become prevalentwithin the realm of research administration. Don’t be theWeakest Link as this is your Chance of a Lifetime to join usfor this highly interactive session to advance yourknowledge and understanding of our Lingo.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain a basic understanding of some ofthe acronyms used in research administration.

• Participants will gain confidence in their knowledge andusage of these acronyms.

TONY VENTIMIGLIA*, Associate Director, Education andCommunication, Auburn UniversityROSEMARY MADNICK, Assistant Vice President, ResearchAdministration, Los Angeles Biomedical Research InstituteROBYN B. REMOTIGUE, Assistant Director, Mississippi StateUniversity

POST-AWARD

IMPLEMENTING PRE/POST AWARD GRANTMANAGEMENT SYSTEMS - WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOWProgram Level: AdvancedExperiences with Pre- and Post-Award Grant ManagementSystem implementations are as varied as life itself. Theyrange from horror stories to great successes. What is thereason for this? Not all situations are the same. There aredifferences in system functionality and complexity,institutional size and requirements, the players involved, andmore. However, beyond the obvious, what else accounts forthis difference? Generally it is has to do with theimplementation process itself. A process that starts withneeds assessments but also includes reviewing options,planning and executing the implementation. A process thatwhen followed correctly, can lead to great success. In thissession, we will discuss how to approach an implementationto insure success. Success in not just obtaining systemfunctionality, but in creating opportunities to provide thebackbone for change and driving force for more appropriatepolicies and procedures and increased employeeproductivity. We will share experiences of using the processof implementing a grant management system to initiatepositive organizational growth and change; and become anadvocate for change at your institution in the process.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn the fundamental components thatlead to successful implementation.

• Participants will learn how to be a change agent.• Participants will learn how to monitor the process toavoid pitfalls and maintain implementation momentum.

JIM WRENN*, President, IT WorksJENNIFER MOREHEAD, Deputy Director, Office of SponsoredPrograms and Research, Governors State University



106* Lead Presenter



POLICY/COMPLIANCE

SERVICE CENTER SUBSIDIES—THE COMPLIANCE,OPERATIONAL AND FINANCIAL CONCERNSSURROUNDING SUBSIDIZED SERVICE CENTERSProgram Level: OverviewIn concept, pricing service centers (and SSFs or corefacilities) is straightforward: fees should recover actualcosts based actual usage. In practice, staying compliantmay be complicated by shared instrumentation grants,direct Federal support, other subsidies, and the institution’sdesire to subsidize the price for certain users. Participants will share experiences in an interactive forumon how best to navigate the complex world of servicecenter pricing, and will gain insight on how to subsidizeprices while complying with of Federal guidelines A-21, A-122, and the newly issued “NIH Guidance for Costing ofNIH-Funded Core Facilities.”

Learning Objectives: Participants will share experiences onhow best to navigate the complex world of service centerpricing, and will gain a deeper understanding of Federalguidelines A-21, A-122, and the newly issued “NIH Guidancefor Costing of NIH-Funded Core Facilities.”JOE O’BRIEN*, Manager, Attain, LLCMARTIN SMITH, Director, Sponsored Accounting and CostAnalysis, Stevens Institute of Technology



107* Lead Presenter



PRE-AWARD

BUDGETING 101 Program Level: BasicThis session will lay the basic framework for budgeting insponsored research. It is intended that this will besomewhat interactive and the participants will be given theopportunity to build the budgets themselves or run somequick numbers through handheld calculators that will beavailable for the participants to utilize.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn about A-21 general costingprinciples (reasonable, allowable, allocable, consistent).

• Participants will learn about direct vs. indirect costs.• Participants will discuss the mechanics of building abudget (with special attention to be paid to the variousbases used for F&A calculations and how sponsorlimitations on F&A are dealt with).

• Participants will learn tips and tricks for commonbudgeting problems.

TINA CUNNINGHAM*, Assistant Director, Mississippi StateUniversityCARLY LYNN CUMMINGS, Assistant to the Dean, ResearchCollege of Arts and Sciences, Mississippi State University


LEND ME YOUR EARS (AND ITAR, AND OFAC):OVERVIEW AND EXCHANGE OF BASIC EXPORTCONTROL STRATEGIES FOR PUIsProgram Level: OverviewThis interactive session will provide a high-level overview ofEAR, ITAR and OFAC Export Control regulations, and willinclude some examples of how PUI research administratorshave identified and managed an EC “situation.” A livelyexchange of real-life experiences is anticipated!

Learning Objectives: Following a refresher of basic ExportControl concepts and terminology, we will share some ECnarratives, and participants will be invited to participate in adiscussion of current practices employed at PUIs. The goalof the session is to support research administrators indeveloping a sense of what strategies and practices mightbe most appropriate for their home institutions.ROBERTA TRUSCELLO*, Director of Sponsored Programs,Hobart and William Smith CollegesCAROLYN ELLIOTT-FARINO, Director, Grants and ContractsAdministration, Kennesaw State University

DISCUSSION GROUPS

CORE CURRICULUM

LET’S CHAT ABOUT NON-FINANCIAL RESEARCHCOMPLIANCE This is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldheld Tuesday at 4:00 pm: Alphabet Soup: Decoding theJargon of Compliance

This session will offer participants the opportunity to posequestions, find solutions, and offer support to one anotherin the arena of non-financial research compliance.

Learning Objectives: Participants will expand theirunderstanding of non-financial compliance issues. Discussion Group Leader: TONI SHAKLEE*, Assistant VicePresident for Research, Oklahoma State University



108* Lead Presenter



FEDERAL

OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH UPDATEONR representatives will discuss current agency and DoDpolicy initiatives that impact Navy and DoD funding touniversities. Topics to be discussed include the effect ofOMB’s Reform Proposal on the awarding and administrationof Navy and DoD awards, Indirect Cost Rate Negotiations,Audit Resolution processes, updates on ONR/DoD paymentprocesses, and current Navy/DoD R&D funding challenges.

Discussion Group Leader: DEBBIE RAFI*, Acting Director,University Business Affairs, Office of Naval Research

INTERNATIONAL

NSF/NIH OUTSIDE THE U.S.Do you receive NIH grants at an international institution?Do you manage a collaborative project with foreign sub-recipients funded by Federal grants? This discussion sessionwill focus on the challenges you may face in ensuringcompliance with agency regulations and the successfulpolicies and procedures various institutions haveimplemented to overcome them. Please join your colleaguesfrom U.S and international institutions and share yourexperiences on this topic.

Learning Objectives: Participants will learn how to identifykey issues, adapt their policies and adopt best practices thathas been tested in Federally funded projects atinternational institutions.Discussion Group Leader: PATRIQ FAGERSTEDT*, US GrantsCoordinator, Karolinska Institutet

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

ASSESSING YOUR OPERATION: DIFFERENTAPPROACHES TO A COMMON GOAL Operational improvements in research administration arean increasingly visible and expected part of doing business.There are many techniques and approaches to assessingeffectiveness, functionality, and new business models. Thisdiscussion will walk through different approaches forassessing operations, whether it is self assessment,institutional or faculty based assessment, or an externalreviewer assessment and benefits and challenges withdifferent approaches. Part of the discussion will include howthe assessment process or outcomes is used by theoperation, how the institution’s community participates inthe assessment, and how to use assessment to help informand engage leadership.

Discussion Group Leader: PEGGY LOWRY*, ProgramManager, NCURA Peer Review, National Council of UniversityResearch Administrators

PRE-AWARD

ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY BUILDING WITH A PRE-AWARD FOCUS FOR EMERGING RESEARCHINSTITUTIONS (ERIs)Come join your colleagues in an interactive discussiongroup session to share challenges/barriers your institutionis facing in pre-award administration in accessing researchopportunities, supporting researchers and developinginfrastructure. This session will discuss how variousinstitutions have overcome or are proposing solution toovercome these challenges/barriers given either limitedstaff, lack of infrastructure or systems or resources. Thissession will discuss the challenges/barriers and impartstrategies to overcome some of the challenges/barriers. Avariety of models will be discussed that attendees will beable to comment on, share lessons learned, and adapt andadopt possible best practices and systems.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will have an enhanced awareness of capacitybuilding strategies and models.

• Participants will learn best practices to address emergingresearch institution needs generational to develop andsupport a robust administration.

Discussion Group Leaders: DENISE WALLEN*, ResearchOfficer and Senior Fellow; Research Assistant Professor,University of New MexicoJOSIE JIMENEZ, Associate Director, Office of Grants andContracts, New Mexico State University



109* Lead Presenter



POST-AWARD

PROGRAM INCOMEPlease join us in discussing program income. We will discussidentifying and defining program income. In addition wewill discuss how to utilize, account for, and report programincome to our sponsors.

Discussion Group Leaders: CRAIG DAVID*, Team Lead,University of MissouriDAVID O. SCHMIDT, Assistant Vice President for Research &Economic Development, University of North Dakota


PUI HOT TOPICSWe will talk about current topics, trends, and issues nearand dear to Predominantly Undergraduate Institutions(PUIs). Come and meet others who are at institutions likeyours.

Learning Objectives: Participants will explore various topicsat PUIs and offer support and suggestions to each otherthrough the group discussion.Discussion Group Leader: ANGIE ROCHAT*, Director ofSponsored Research & Federal Relations, Fort Lewis College




110* Lead Presenter

CAREER SKILLS

SPANNING THE DECADES: HOW TO PLAN ANDPERSONALIZE YOUR CAREERProgram Level: BasicMany of us "wandered" into our careers in researchadministration without really knowing how we got here,often remarking "this opportunity came along and I took it."We all know that career planning is important, but how doyou set the course for your career when you are in your 20s,30s, 40s, or 50s and even beyond? A panel of researchadministrators spanning the decades will discuss strategiesfor setting your career compass, navigating your career ateach stage, and mapping goals to achieve the best resultsand keep on your path.

Learning Objectives: Learn how to set goals and achievecareer objectives, regardless of where you are in your career.SUE KELCH*, Research Senior Financial Specialist, Universityof MichiganMICHELLE SCHOENECKER, Senior Technical Grant Writer,University of Wisconsin-MilwaukeeBONNIEJEAN ZITSKE,Managing Officer, University ofWisconsin-Madison


CONCURRENT SESSIONS

CAREER SKILLS

USING TRAINING EFFECTIVELY: THE IMPORTANCE OF ONBOARDINGProgram Level: IntermediateTraining is crucial for organizational development and success.Research Administrators are hard to recruit, so many of us arerelying on our skills of hiring great people, and training them.Most of us have also identified super performers in ourgroups, and want to offer them training to move to the nextlevel. Or, maybe you want to move an employee from averageto excellent. What we know for sure, the lack of an effectivetraining program can lead to the loss of good employees andthus cripple the organization.Developing an effective research administrator trainingprogram is vital to the long term success and growth of yourorganization. By taking an organized approach to training,you can achieve an excellent return on your training.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will be able to identify your essential trainingrequirements for onboarding.

• Participants will be able to decide on the training goalsand objectives.

• Participants will be able to create a training program.• Participants will be able to monitor and evaluate thetraining.

ROSEMARY MADNICK*, Assistant Vice President, ResearchAdministration, Los Angeles Biomedical Research InstituteRIDDICK SMILEY, Assistant Director, Office of SponsoredPrograms, East Carolina UniversityKIRSTEN YEHL, Division Administrator, Institute forHealthcare Studies, Feinberg School of Medicine,Northwestern University



111* Lead Presenter



CORE CURRICULUM

THIS IS GOING TO BE A REALLY GOOD GRANT...Program Level: BasicFaculty put many long, sleepless hours into writing a grantproposal. The writing process has its highs and lows andmany gray hairs develop during the process. And, with alittle luck - and a really great idea - the proposal is funded.Come hear from funded faculty about how their projectsare impacting society and how administrators on theircampus have aided in the process.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how departmental and centraladministrators can positively affect a research project.

• Participants will listen to how an incomprehensible grantproposal becomes an exciting research project.

MONIQUE ANDERSON*, Assistant Director, Team Lead,University of Maryland, College ParkANNE E. SIMON, Professor, Department of Cell Biology &Molecular Genetics, University of Maryland, College ParkPAMELA J. LANFORD, Program Coordinator, ADVANCEProgram, University of Maryland, College Park


BUILDING A BRIDGE FROM CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIONTO THE DEPARTMENT, CENTERS, AND INSTITUTESProgram Level: BasicIn the research administration arena, even thoughdepartments, institutes, centers, offices of sponsoredprograms and central administration offices have differentinterests and responsibilities, we are all on the same teamand ultimately responsible for advancing the research,instruction and outreach mission of our universities. Thissession brings together the department and central officesto discuss the complexities in our various roles withinresearch administration and to explore new strategies andideas to facilitate collaboration throughout the process.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will examine some of the obstacles inworking together.

• Participants will examine how best to use differentmethods of communication.

• Participants will explore frameworks for collaboration.• Participants will learn effective techniques that centraladministration can use when engaging departmentadministrators.

MARY SCHMIEDEL*, Associate Dean for ResearchAdministration & Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,Georgetown UniversityREBECCA HUNSAKER, Assistant Director, College ofBehavioral and Social Sciences, University of Maryland,College ParkMARY GLASSCOCK, Assistant Vice President and ChiefBusiness Officer, Georgetown University

FEDERAL

EXTREME MAKEOVER: OMB CIRCULARS EDITIONProgram Level: OverviewThis session will describe OMB’s plans for issuance of thenew Omni-Circular which will combine eight administrativecirculars into one document. NSF/NIH representatives willprovide high level plans for agency implementation andtheir proposed interaction with the research community.

Learning Objectives: Participants in this session will gaininsight into the development of the Omni-Circular andcurrent status.VICTORIA COLLIN*, Policy Analyst, Office of Federal FinancialManagement, Office of Management and BudgetJEAN FELDMAN, Head, Policy Office, Division of Institution &Award Support, National Science FoundationMICHELLE G. BULLS, Deputy Director, OER, OPERA, NationalInstitutes of Health



112* Lead Presenter



POLICY/COMPLIANCE

CASE STUDIES IN THE RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OFRESEARCH (RCR)Program Level: IntermediateThe proper conduct and reporting of research is ofparamount importance to our institutions. Noncompliancecan result in severe penalties to the organization, theindividual(s), and their reputations. The modern definition ofresearch misconduct however, in the context of responsibleconduct of research training, reflects an evolution ofhundreds of years of social and ethical issues that havearisen in the practice of scientific research. What may havebeen acceptable practice a century ago may be consideredunacceptable practice by today’s standards. An examinationof the global history of biology, chemistry, physics andmedicine provides some insightful examples of bothresponsibly and irresponsibly conducted research by manyfamous scientists. In this highly interactive session,participants will become familiar with an international casehistory of research misconduct and will engage in discussionof how these prominent cases have shaped contemporaryperspectives on the responsible conduct of research.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain a better understanding ofresponsible conduct of research (RCR) standards, and willbe able to apply these governing principles to a variety ofhistorical cases involving research integrity.

• Participants will discuss the relevant rules andregulations of responsible conduct of research (RCR) andwill be able to better identify, assess and work throughresearch integrity and compliance issues.

Prerequisites: A basic working knowledge and fundamentalunderstanding of responsible conduct of research. TONY ONOFRIETTI*, Director of Research Education,University of Utah

INTERNATIONAL

WHAT WE DIDN’T KNOW: INTERNATIONALADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT FOR RESEARCHCOLLABORATIONSProgram Level: OverviewAs U.S.-supported biomedical research continues todiversify into international settings, collaboratinginstitutions are dealing with new issues around compliance,contracting, human resources and risk management, sub-recipient monitoring, and more. We will present the historyof a multidisciplinary research program in Uganda as a casestudy to these issues, exploring the roles andresponsibilities of the PI, department administrator, andcentral offices at the home and international institutions ateach stage of program development and sharing lessonslearned. There will be a Q&A at the end of the session, soplease bring questions you’ve always wanted to askregarding international research administration.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will learn what to know before gettinginvolved in international research.

• Participants will understand the risk involved ininternational collaborations and how to best manage it.

• Participants will learn about subcontracts - differenttypes (cost-reimbursable, milestone, etc) and associatedrisks.

• Participants will learn about currency and exchange ratefluctuations.

Prerequisites: Experience with international collaborationsis helpful but not required.PEGGY BARTEK*, Senior Grants Administrator, MassachusettsGeneral HospitalDAVID BANGSBERG, Director, MGH Center for Global HealthBOB STEMPLE, Associate Director for Research Revenue,Partners Research ManagementSTEPHANIE STONE, Manager, Post-Award and Contracts,Partners HealthCare



113* Lead Presenter



PRE-AWARD

WHAT IS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY?�Program Level: BasicThis session will introduce copyright, trademark and patentlaws as applied to intellectual property terms in sponsoredresearch agreements. Key concepts that arise whilenegotiating intellectual property will be highlighted,including the Bayh-Dole Act. This session will also focus onintellectual property terms and conditions commonly foundin sponsored research agreement and their potential effectson both the research and the technology transfer functionsof the institution.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be Introduced to patent, copyright andtrademark laws

• Participants will be provided a brief overview of the Bayh-Dole Act and its impact on research institutions

• Participants will highlight issues which arise whennegotiating intellectual property rights in sponsoredresearch agreements.

ALEXANDRA ALBINAK McKEOWN*, Associate Dean forResearch Administration, The Johns Hopkins UniversityCHARLES BARTUNEK, Contracts Associate, Johns HopkinsBloomberg School of Public HealthGREGORY C. SLACK, Director Research and TechnologyTransfer, Clarkson University

POST-AWARD

F&A CONFIDENTIAL: THE PRINCIPLES, THE PROPOSAL,AND....THE POLITICS!Program Level: BasicIn this session, we will cover the F&A rate itself, the basics ofhow to calculate the rate, and what types of costs go intothe rate. This session will also provide you with the keyprinciples and foundation for what goes into an excellentF&A proposal. You will learn how to speak intelligentlyabout F&A so that you can impress your campuscustomers! You will also learn how senior leadership viewsF&A funds and some of the politics that surround it at thecampus level. If you are new to the proposal developmentprocess, this is a critical session for you to attend since everyaward proposal involves F&A.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be able to identify the components ofthe F&A rate and what drives the rate.

• Participants will be able to create a high level project planand timeline for the development of a proposal.

• Participants will be able to explain the purpose of F&Aand how it benefits the university.

JOSH ROSENBERG*, Director of Cost Studies, Office of Grantand Contract Accounting, Emory UniversityWILLIAM M. LAWLOR, Director of Financial Compliance andCost Analysis, University of Nebraska Medical Center


114* Lead Presenter




CAREER SKILLS

THERE IS NO “I” IN TEAM, BUT THERE IS A “U” INSUCCESS. HOW TO BECOME A SUCCESSFUL MANAGERAND LEAD IN RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION?This is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldWednesday at 8:30 am:“There is No “I” in Team, but There is a“U” in Success.

How to become a successful manager and lead in ResearchAdministration? “. The session will provide good practicesand policies that research administrators can us in theirday-to-day routine.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will be able to set clear objectives and learnhow to discuss them with staff before implementation.

• Participants will improve business performance bylearning how to effectively communicate with your staff.

Discussion Group Leaders: TOLISE MILES*, Senior Grants andContracts Specialist, Grants and Contracts Administrationand Finance, Children’s National Medical CenterDEBORAH BASSARD, Human Resources Director, GeorgetownUniversity Medical CenterSONYA SIMS, Human Resources Manager, The Johns HopkinsUniversity

CORE CURRICULUM

LIFECYCLE OF AN AWARD – REPORTING, CLOSE-OUTAND AUDIT This is a follow-up discussion to the concurrent session heldWednesday at 8:30 am: Lifecycle of an Award – Reporting,Close-out and Audit

Participants are welcome to come join or continue thedialogue on the award lifecycle as it specifically relates toreporting, close-outs and audits. Bring your questions orissues to the table that you would like to hear morediscussion around.

Learning Objectives: Participants will be able hear andparticipate in a interactive discussion to gain better insighton key processes for sponsored programs related toreporting and close-outs as well as talking about what’sentailed when sponsored programs get audited.Discussion Group Leaders: MICHELLE VAZIN*, Director, Officeof Contracts and Grants, Vanderbilt UniversityMICHELE CODD, Associate Director, Sponsored ProjectsAdministration, George Washington University

DISCUSSION GROUPS


THE TRANSFORMATIVE POTENTIAL OF RESEARCHDEVELOPMENT AT A PUIProgram Level: OverviewPredominantly Undergraduate Institution leaders discussresearch development as the change agent that it can befor a PUI's research environment.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will learn how research development at a PUIis different.

• Participants will discover tools and innovative methodsfor changing the research environment.

• Participants will identify specific tactics that will meetthe audience’s need to address research development.

ALFREDO MEDINA, JR.*, Assistant Vice President for AcademicAffairs, Sienna CollegeANNE PASCUCCI, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs,Christopher Newport UniversityCAROL BRODIE, Assistant Dean, Research & Graduate Studies,University of the PacificPAUL TUTTLE, Grants Consultant, Hanover Grants


115


* Lead Presenter



INTERNATIONAL

LIMITATIONS OF INTER-CONTINENTALCOLLABORATIONA key feature of the research landscape is its growinginternationalisation. Researchers are working increasinglywith collaborators around the world, pooling knowledgeand resources to address global research challenges. Manyinstitutions are diversifying their funding portfolio in theface of a constrained domestic funding environment. Whatare the implications of this internationalisation for those ofus who support research? How are we responding to thechallenges and opportunities? Where are the limitations,how do we identify them, how can we overcome them,should we overcome them? The presenters will examinesome of the trends and give case studies, which exploreefforts to enhance access to international funding,managing a major international collaborative researchproject, and developing institutional research alliancesbetween global partners.

Learning Objectives: Participants will be able to define andidentify key-performance indicators for complex inter-continental institutional proposalsDiscussion Group Leaders: AGATHA KELLER*, Co-Director EUGrantsAccess, ETH Zurich & University of ZurichDENISE WALLEN, Research Officer and Senior Fellow;Research Assistant Professor, University of New MexicoFELIX MOESNER, Director, Consul, swissnex Boston, Consulateof Switzerland


PROJECT MEETINGS – FROM KICK OFF TO CLOSE OUT,WHO MEETS, WHEN DO YOU MEET, AND WHAT DOYOU TALK ABOUT?How many projects are on your list? What type of projects areon the list - developing a new policy? Implementing a changein process? Preparing a complex proposal or administrating acomplicated award? This discussion group will focus on theimportance of project meetings, who meets, how often andwhat do you talk about? Common pitfalls and strategies forsuccessful meeting management will also be discussed.Participants should be prepared to discuss success storiesand lessons learned from past experience.

Learning Objectives: Participants will learn the importanceof and share best practices for project meetings. Discussion Group Leaders: LISA MOSLEY*, Executive Director,Research Operations, Arizona State UniversityJEREMY FORSBERG, Assistant Vice President for Research,University of Texas at Arlington


116

POLICY/COMPLIANCE

FEDERAL INFORMATION SECURITY MANAGEMENT ACT (“FISMA”) COMPLIANCE FISMA compliance effects those institutions that collect,store, process, transmit or use information on behalf of afederal agency. In this discussion group, we will explore bestpractices for FISMA compliance, including development ofFISMA security plans and governance structure. We will alsodiscuss FISMA compliance coordination and monitoring forprojects that involve subrecipients. Attendees are invited toshare their institution’s experiences and best practices forFISMA compliance.

Learning Objectives:• Participants will review FISMA’s requirements and itsapplicability to non-federal organizations.

• Participants will learn about FISMA considerations forsubawards.

• Participants will learn about FISMA Complianceconsiderations.

Discussion Group Leader: NANCY LEWIS*, Director, SponsoredProjects Administration, University of California, Irvine

* Lead Presenter




POST-AWARD

MANAGING PROJECT CLOSEOUTSA smooth and thorough closeout of a sponsored project isessential as it is the last step to ensure all awardrequirements have been met. The consequences of aninaccurate closeout can be costly, both monetarily andpotentially in reputation. This discussion session will providean opportunity to discuss best practices when completing acloseout. There will also be a discussion around challengesthat department and central offices face during the closeoutprocess. Participants will be exposed to helpful tools (such aschecklists), techniques and approaches currently being usedat other institutions and benefit from real life examples andlessons learned by their peers.

Learning Objectives: Participants will be exposed to helpfultools, techniques and approaches currently being used atother institutions and benefit from real life examples andlessons learned by their peers.Discussion Group Leaders: SUSAN ZIPKIN*, ConsultantDAVID BARNETT, Senior Post Award Financial Specialist, Tufts University

PRE-AWARD

NEWCOMERS TO PRE-AWARD: STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESSCongratulations on your new position in pre-award researchadministration! Now what do you do? Whether you are justentering the research administration field or transitioningfrom another area of the field, this discussion group willoffer some ideas about how to get started and stay on theright track for pre-award administrators. We will explorevarious topics, including where to focus your efforts inlearning new information, ways to take control of your ownprofessional development, and how to cultivate positiverelationships with your cohorts outside the pre-award office.

Learning Objectives: • Participants will gain a better understanding of whichtechnical areas are most beneficial for new pre-awardadministrators to focus upon.

• Participants will gain perspective regarding “soft” skillslike professional development and building relationshipswith those outside the pre-award office and how theseskills can make you a stronger pre-award administrator.

Discussion Group Leader: AMANDA SYNDER*, AssistantDirector, Sponsored Programs Administration, University ofMaryland, Baltimore

Noon • CONFERENCE ADJOURNS

kiddieCorpNCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC

117

KIDDIECORP is pleased to provide a children’s program during the NationalCouncil of University Research Administrators 55th Annual Meeting. KiddieCorpis in its twenty-seventh year of providing high quality children’s programs andyouth services to conventions, trade shows and special events. We take watchingyour children very seriously. KiddieCorp has enjoyed a long-time partnershipwith the American Academy of Pediatrics, which has helped to establishKiddieCorp as a premier provider of event children’s program services.

SPACE IS LIMITED!

For further information on the program, visit the NCURA website(www.ncura.edu) and click on the 55th Annual Meeting.

118* Lead Presenter


nCuRa Regions 2013

INTERNATIONAL REGIONChairperson: Agatha Keller

ETH Zurich/University of ZurichVice-Chair: (open) Treasurer: Susanne Rahner

YGGDRASILSecretary Annika Glauner

ETH Zurich/University of Zurich

REGION IChair: Karen Woodward Massey

Harvard UniversityChair-Elect: Jeff Seo

Harvard UniversityTreasurer: Donna Smith

Massachusetts General HospitalTreasurer-Elect: Robert Stemple

Partners HealthcareSecretary: Peter Hague

Massachusetts General Hospital

REGION IIChair: Brian Squilla

Thomas Jefferson UniversityChair-Elect: Leerin Shields

University of Maryland, BaltimoreTreasurer: Gregory Slack

Clarkson UniversityTreasurer-Elect: Debra Murray

Georgetown UniversitySecretary: Magui Cardona

University of Baltimore

REGION IIIChair: Rodney Granec

University of West AlabamaChair-Elect: Laurianne Torres

Duke UniversityTreasurer: Kay Gilstrap

Georgia State UniversityTreasurer-Elect: (open)Secretary: Laura Letbetter

Kennesaw State University

REGION IVChair: Jeremy Miner

University of Wisconsin-Eau ClaireChair-Elect: Sue Kelch

University of MichiganTreasurer: Shannon Sutton

Western Illinois UniversityTreasurer-Elect (Vacant until 2014)Secretary: Michelle Schoenecker

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

REGION VChair: Scott Davis

University of Oklahoma Health Science Center

Chair-Elect: Hollie Schreiber Oklahoma State University

Treasurer: Brenda Garner University of Texas at Austin

Secretary: Hollie Schreiber Oklahoma State University

REGION VIChair: Katherine Ho

Stanford UniversityChair-Elect: Samantha Westcott

Children’s Hospital, Los AngelesTreasurer: Tim Mildren

Seattle UniversityTreasurer-Elect: Sharon Elenbaas

Loyola Marymount UniversitySecretary: Sinnamon Tierney

Portland State UniversitySecretary-Elect: Derick Jones

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

REGION VIIChair: Tony Onofrietti

University of UtahChair-Elect: Karen Henry

Boise State UniversitySecretary/Treasurer: Lisa Jordan

Boise State University


119* Lead Presenter

nCuRa LeadershipNCURA 55th ANNUAl MeetiNg | AUgUSt 4-7, 2013 • WAShiNgtON • DC

2013 OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORSPRESIDENT

PATRICIA HAWK, Oregon State University VICE PRESIDENT

VIVIAN HOLMES, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard TREASURER

ROBERT ANDRESEN, University of Wisconsin – MadisonSECRETARY

GEORGETTE SAKUMOTO, University of HawaiiIMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT

DAN NORDQUIST, Washington State UniversityEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

KATHLEEN M. LARMETT, National Council of UniversityResearch Administrators BOARD OF DIRECTORS

ANNE ALBINAK, The Johns Hopkins UniversityJAMES CASEY, JR., University of North Carolina at Chapel HillVICKI KRELL, Arizona State UniversityDAVID LYNCH, Northwestern UniversityKRIS MONAHAN, Providence CollegeBRUCE MORGAN, University of California – IrvineDENNIS PAFFRATH, University of Maryland, BaltimoreDAVID RICHARDSON, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign SUZANNE RIVERA, Case Western Reserve UniversityLILLIE RYANS-CULCLAGER, SRI InternationalMICHELLE VAZIN, Vanderbilt UniversityANTHONY VENTIMIGLIA, Auburn UniversityDENISE WALLEN, University of New MexicoMARIANNE WOODS, The University of Texas at San Antonio

PAST PRESIDENTS1967 WILLIAM WHEADON, Syracuse University1968 DONALD MURRAY, University of Pennsylvania1969 RAYMOND WOODROW, Princeton University1970 SIDNEY ROTH, New York University1971 GEORGE R. HOLCOMB, University of North Carolina at

Chapel Hill1972 DAVID BACON, Stanford University1973 JOHN F. ADAMS, Georgia State University1974 CLARK A. MCCARTNEY, University of Southern

California1975 PERRY B. HENDRICKS, JR., Pacific Lutheran University1976 ERIC R. RUDE, University of Wisconsin1977 HAROLD B. HUNNICUTT, Arizona State University1978 MARGERY E. HOPPIN, University of Iowa1979 TRUMAN F. COOK, Southern Methodist University1980 DENNIS W. BARNES, University of Virginia1981 FREDERICK SUDERMANN, Wichita State University1982 ANTHONY MERRITT, University of Pennsylvania1983 MARK ELDER, University of Oklahoma1984 EDWARD L. MACCORDY, Washington University1985 EARL J. FREISE, University of Nebraska - Lincoln1986 MARY ELLEN SHERIDAN, SUNY at Binghamton1987 ALLEN J. SINISGALLI, Princeton University1988 JULIE T. NORRIS, University of Houston1989 JANE A. YOUNGERS, University of Rochester1990 C. FREDERICK BENTLEY II, Stanford University1991 STEPHEN ERICKSON, Harvard University1992 ARDIS M. SAVORY, University of South Carolina1993 HENRY O. HOOPER, Northern Arizona University1994 STEVEN H. SMARTT,Vanderbilt University1995 RICHARD P. SELIGMAN, University of California,

Los Angeles1996 KIM MORELAND, University of Kansas1997 STEVE HANSEN, Southern Illinois University at

Edwardsville1998 MARY HUSEMOLLER, University of Nevada, Reno1999 CHERYL LEE HOWARD, The Johns Hopkins University2000 NANCY WILKINSON, Emory University2001 REGINA H. WHITE, University of Vermont2002 F. JOHN CASE, University of North Carolina at

Chapel Hill2003 ROBERT J. KILLOREN, JR., Pennsylvania State University2004 PATRICK W. FITZGERALD,Massachusetts Institute

of Technology2005 JERRY FIFE, Vanderbilt University2006 LAURA WADE, University of Houston2007 PAMELA WHITLOCK, University of North Carolina

at Wilmington2008 DAVID MAYO, California Institute of Technology2009 DENISE CLARK, University of Maryland, College Park2010 DAVID RICHARDSON, Pennsylvania State University2011 JUDY FREDENBERG, University of Montana2012 DAN NORDQUIST, Washington State University

55th annual meeting program

Documents

investment commitment

sponsors investment

andcontinued investment

future investment

insignificant investment

investment andthank

ncura members

successof ncura