All grant proposals to external (outside of OSU) sponsors are to be submitted through the Research Support Team unless other arrangements have been approved (e.g., another arrangement has been documented in a memorandum of understanding signed by the Dean). Proposals to internal opportunities do not require submission through the CPH Research Support Team or the OSU Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP); however, the principal investigator (PI) can opt to ask their grants manager (GM) on the CPH Research Support Team for assistance with the submission. Even if the PI decides to submit an internal proposal without their GM’s assistance, the PI still notifies their GM of any internal proposals, and any resulting awards, to ensure that they are included in our college metrics and communication materials.
The PI ensures that the Research Support Team is engaged in all externally-funded proposals that meet any of these criteria: 1) funded by federal dollars (direct and/or passthrough), 2) require the use of University regulatory boards or panels (IRB, IACUC, HIPAA Privacy Board, Export Control, etc.), 3) have documented cost share, 4) have subcontracts, 5) are likely for the proposed work to produce publishable research and/or new knowledge or inventions, or 6) contain a technology access fee (TAG) as part of the budget.
Notification of Intent to Submit a Proposal
The Research Support Team maintains a proposal worklist to track all proposals (external and internal; lead and subawards) led by CPH PIs. The PI notifies their GM as soon as they begin to consider submitting as the lead for a proposal (Table 1) or for a subaward (Table 2). It is better to provide early notification, rather than delay in notifying, even if the plans for submission are not certain. The PI provides the funding opportunity announcement (FOA) (e.g., request for applications or program announcement) with the notification. Occasionally, FOAs are released with short lead times and the decision to submit a proposal is made close to a deadline; the Research Support Team will do their best to accommodate these. However, late notifications may result in the inability to accommodate the proposal submission and may require its delay until the next standard due date. If there is not another standard due date, the Team will try to accommodate the proposal but cannot guarantee this.
The timeline strikes a balance between flexibility for the PI and sufficient time for the GM and SPOs to ensure quality review and submission. The Director of Research Support will consider requests for exceptions to the timelines on a case-by-case basis by assessing the team’s workload and whether the proposal can be accommodated without jeopardizing other proposals in the worklist that have followed the timeline deadlines. Among the exceptions to the timeline, submissions from untenured faculty and those responding to new FOAs that did not provide 6 weeks of lead time will be prioritized over others.
| Week* | Activities |
|---|---|
| Week 6 |
PI notifies GM of intent to submit and provides FOA. GM adds proposal to worklist, reviews FOA, prepares checklist and timeline, and sets up a proposal kickoff meeting with PI. GM and PI meet for kickoff and PI provides details of the budget and names of internal and external collaborators. GM queries regarding compliance areas, resources/examples, guidance needed by the PI and reviews the required documents and specifics from the FOA with the PI, due dates of the proposal documents, and party responsible for each document. GM sets up optional check in meetings with PI throughout the timeline. |
| Week 5 | GM drafts budget and sends to PI for review and to respond with edits. GM reaches out to internal and external collaborators for documents. GM finalizes budget and justification with PI, sends budget information to SPO for approval. |
| Week 4 | Due from PI: ancillary documents (e.g., facilities, equipment, biosketch, multi-PI plan). GM reviews all documents for compliance in accordance with FOA and requests edits (if any) from PI. PI provides revisions to GM. GM routes e-PA005 (approval to submit by PIs, Co-Is and Department/College Administrators). |
| Week 3 | Due from PI: compliance and some technical (e.g., human subjects, data management plan). Documents due from internal and external collaborators. GM reviews all documents for compliance in accordance with FOA and requests edits (if any) from PI and internal and external collaborators. PI and internal and external collaborators provide revisions to GM. |
| Week 2 | Due from PI: main technical documents (e.g., specific aims, strategy, references, abstract, narrative). GM reviews all documents for compliance in accordance with FOA and requests edits (if any) from PI. PI provides revisions to the GM. |
| Week 1 | GM enters all remaining data and documents into online submission portal and sends to PI for final review and final edits. PI. PI returns revisions (if any) to GM. GM and PI finalize the proposal. GM routes final proposal to the SPO. No further edits to the proposal unless requested by the SPO. Review and Submittal period by the SPO; 5 business days prior to the published deadline in the FOA. |
| Week 0 | Proposal submitted by SPO the day before the published deadline. This allows for any corrections to any errors caught by the online submission platform. |
*Prior to sponsor deadline
ADR = Associate Dean of Research; FOA = Funding Opportunity Announcement; GM = Grants Manager; PI = Principal Investigator; SPO = Sponsored Program Officer
| Week* | Activities |
|---|---|
| Week 3 | PI notifies GM of intent to submit a subaward proposal and provides contact at the lead submitting entity. GM adds proposal to worklist. GM contacts lead entity for FOA, requirements and due date of subaward package, proposal title, budget specifics. |
| Week 2 | GM provides guidance on the specifics of the FOA to the PI. GM reviews the required components of the subaward package requested by the lead entity with the PI and provides resources, examples and guidance to the PI. PI provides budget information to GM. GM drafts budget and sends to PI for review. PI provides budget edits to GM. GM finalizes budget and justification with the PI. GM sends budget and justification to SPO for approval. GM routes e-PA005 (approval to submit by PIs, Co-Is and Department/College Administrators). |
| Week 1 |
ALL Documents due from PI (e.g., statement of work, biosketch, facilities, equipment, letter of intent). GM reviews documents from PI for compliance with the FOA and converts documents to PDF format and routes final subaward package to the PI for final review and edits. PI returns edited documents (if any) to GM. GM reviews subaward package for compliance with the FOA and converts final documents to PDF format and completes any data entry into required forms and routes final subaward package to the SPO. No further edits to the proposal unless requested by the SPO. Review and Submittal period by the SPO; 5 business days prior to the requested deadline by the lead entity. |
| Week 0 | Subaward package submitted by SPO the day before the requested deadline of the lead entity. This allows for the lead entity to review and request any edits prior to the published due date in the FOA. |
*Prior to sponsor deadline
ADR = Associate Dean of Research; FOA = Funding Opportunity Announcement; GM = Grants Manager; PI = Principal Investigator; SPO = Sponsored Program Officer
Principal Investigator (PI) Status
Tenure track faculty automatically have PI status. Students, staff, and non-tenure track faculty who want PI status to submit a grant proposal for external funding contact the Director of Research Support for information and to coordinate the request. Additional information on PI Status Eligibility is available on the OSU Office of Research site.
The CPH Research Support Team facilitates the PI affiliations that are required for the grant submission systems, including requesting an eRA Commons ID for NIH submissions and a profile for Cayuse (i.e., the system used for many federal grant submissions).
Research Support Team
PIs are assigned a GM on the CPH Research Support Team. The GM supports the PI by providing timelines, checklists, and guidance on the FOA to prepare for proposal submissions, adhering to the required timeline (Tables 1 or 2). The GM periodically reminds the PI of upcoming deadlines based on the timeline; the PI is responsible for meeting those deadlines. If the PI does not meet the deadlines, the Team may not be able to accommodate the proposal submission.
If requested and available, the GM provides examples of documents. With the PI’s input, the GM creates the budget. Once the PI finalizes the budget, the GM drafts the budget justification shell.
The GM collects the biosketches and any required subaward documents from the collaborators. The GM reviews all documents to ensure adherence to sponsor-specific formatting requirements, such as margins, font size, and page limits. The GM uploads the final documents, completes the online forms, and coordinates the release of the final submission to the SPO in OSP for review and submittal. Note that the Team cannot assist with writing or editing proposals or sections of proposals.
If a CPH investigator is seeking to participate as a subaward entity for a proposal led by an institution external to Ohio State, the investigator provides the GM with a contact at the other institution. The GM reaches out to the other institution to obtain the list of the required OSU documents and their due dates. The GM then facilitates the creation of the subaward package with the OSU researcher and the SPO. The SPO submits the subaward package to the other institution via email.
ePA-005
The Authorization to Seek Off-Campus Funds form (referred to as the ePA-005 form) documents the allocation of award and expenditure credits at Ohio State. The fully approved ePA-005 serves as OSP’s authorization to submit the proposal; it is the driving mechanism to give the PI credit for a submission and provides the distribution breakdown of the Indirect Costs (IDC) Recovery generated by the project, if awarded, to the various cost centers involved in the submission. (IDC is sometimes referred to as Facilities and Administration [F&A] or overhead.) IDC Recovery is the revenue returned to the college units based on the expenditure allocation percentage listed on the ePA-005 for the cost center in the college. IDC Recovery also is used to calculate payments for the CPH Faculty Incentive Plan for Increasing Indirect Cost Recovery.
Expenditure credit reflects how various university resources would be utilized by the proposed study and should correspond to how direct and indirect cost expenditures are allocated across departments, or divisions, if more than one unit is involved. Ultimately, the expenditure credit allocation determines how the following are distributed or shared between participating units: 1) indirect cost recovery, 2) cost overruns, and 3) approved residual funds at a project’s closeout. While award credit allocations are often equal to expenditure credit allocations, that is not always the case. Both percentages are negotiated by the participating units to reach a balance that is acceptable to all involved.
CPH expects and requires that all faculty involved in a sponsored project be listed on the ePA-005 and receive an appropriate portion of the award and expenditure credit commensurate with their degree of involvement/responsibility in the proposed project. Tenure-initiating units for PIs and coInvestigators must be listed even if the credit allocations are 0%.
If CPH is the submitting unit, the GM creates and routes the ePA-005 electronic form and communicates with the PI and other OSU units involved to gather all the data necessary to complete the form. CPH calculates Award and Expenditure Allocations based on how much of the proposed budget belongs to each investigator listed on the budget, accounting for any relevant requirements from MOUs, joint appointments, and Discovery Theme designations of the investigators involved. Once the budget is split between the investigators, the amount is then divided by the Direct Costs line on the budget to provide the percentage for each investigator.
Note: Currently, OSU does not have a standardized method for calculating award and expenditure allocations. Each college or unit has their own method of calculating allocations. In the case of uncertainty about how another unit has calculated the Award and Expenditure Allocations, the PI confers with the Director of Research Support.
The PI reviews the entire ePA-005 form before approving, paying close attention to the award and expenditure allocations and whether the appropriate cost centers associated with the approving investigator are listed. Many investigators have joint appointments with multiple cost centers, have a MOU that outlines research allocations, or have their research activities tracked as Discovery Theme Faculty.
All investigators listed on the ePA-004 complete the form’s items related to Foreign Affiliations. This step is required to comply with the university’s policies on disclosure of international engagements and policies related to participation in foreign talent recruitment programs. If necessary, the International Engagement Team is notified to follow up with investigators
The Director of Research Support reviews the ePA-005 form and requests corrections as needed for all CPH investigators before approving at the college level. If a PI is uncertain about anything on the form, the PI delays in approving the form until after consulting with the Director.
Office of Sponsored Programs Review and Submission
OSP requires that the GM send the final proposal to the SPO to review at least 5 business days before the published deadline (Tables 1 and 2). After reviewing, the SPO may request corrections to the submission. Once the proposal no longer needs corrections, the SPO submits the proposal on behalf of the PI. In the event that the SPO has less than 5 business days for reviewing the proposal, the SPO will provide the PI with 1) an email disclaimer noting the inadequate period of time for review and that only the budgetary information will be reviewed and 2) the option to proceed without a full, proper review or to delay submission to the next standard due date. After submission of an NIH grant application into eRA Commons, the SPO and PI monitor to ensure that no errors or warnings appear that requiring action.
Policy Against Accepting Tobacco Money for Research
CPH will not accept funds directly from the tobacco industry. Further, any auxiliary, joint or adjunct faculty member that accepts such funding will immediately forfeit their CPH faculty appointment. Read the full policy
