Sponsored Projects Administration Meeting (SPAM)

Minutes

Date/Place: April 22, 2010 10:30 am-11:15, Stout B/182

Attendees: Amy Russell, Petra Bartella, Yvonne Rumbaugh, Lycia Ronchetti, Vicki Hansen-Marks, Elaine Gustafson, Richard Swanson, Jim Romaggi, Jenny Frayer, Karen Stewart-Carrico, Steve Salaber

Item/Lead/Notes

1. Approval of Minutes from 3-18-10-Jenny Minutes were reviewed and no changes were indicated.

2. Discuss Executive Order 12372-(Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs) and checking box on SF424-Amy Until we have official confirmation from that state that we are exempt from all state review, when an rfp indicates that it is subject to EO 12372 we will: Send a pdf of the 424 to the state clearing house and mark box 19a indicating the date sent. Or mark box 19b if we have heard back from the state that the program has not been selected for state review.

3. Cost Share Policy-Jenny Jenny still working on the policy but reported that she has spoken with John W. and he hears our concerns about some of the cost share and will be providing some ARI funds to use for those items where we have the most concern. And she reported that she has spoken to Paul Nacon about the ICR rate to use when a subawardee is providing cost share. Paul Nacon indicated that we should use the subawardee ICR rate for their cost share and can include ours as well up to the $25,000 limit.

4. Review In-Kind Cost Contribution Form/Instructions-Richard Richard presented the in-kind cost contribution by a third party forms and instructions. With one minor change, we all agreed to start using them immediately. Jenny will post the forms to the SPO website under the forms tab.

5. Other a. Amy brought up for discussion the idea of requesting that Cleve include in the ICR letter he sends each year a designated rate for non profits and to include the CESU rate in the letter as DRI policy. Discussion ensued. The rate currently used for non profits is the 75% rate, but since most non profits don’t pay ICR or limit the ICR to a very small number we usually request waivers anyway. And for CESU, sometimes the rate is different than the 17.5%. So we decided no change is necessary. b. Richard is looking for feedback on the 8-9 monthly reports currently sent to the DBM’s. Are there too few, too many? It was unanimous that the 85% report is not used and can be eliminated. Give Richard any additional feedback off line. c. Petra discussed the need to include invoice templates to subrecipients so that they understand the information we need to process an invoice. Amy suggested we indicate that the subrecipient can use their own format so long as it contained all the information on the template. We talked about the template requiring names and dollar amounts per person and that we can request more detailed backup information as necessary. Vicki to send the business managers a blank invoice template for their use when desired. d. Richard thanked everyone for helping with the ONR visit and indicated that we should be receiving a very good report. Jenny indicated that there is language in the DOD FY10 Appropriations Bill to again limit the ICR to 35% of total PROJECT costs(not MTDC) for awards made for BASIC research-so be on the look out for that. And the way to get late reports off of the ONR monthly report is to send CC a copy of the report as neither NASA or DoD do that.