~ National Council of University Research Administrators ~
2009 Video Workshop Series
CLICK HERE TO REGISTER
TOPIC: Audits and the Audit Process
DATE: January 13,2009
LOCATION: Psychiatry Auditorium (1st floor)
The audit process can be intimidating to those inexperienced with it, especially when an auditor shows up unexpectedly: How should you respond? Do you have to respond? What if the auditor presents an inspector general’s badge? In this session we will discuss the audit process and the differences between audits, reviews, inspections and investigations. We will also look at how auditors approach an audit, and the various institutional roles including that of the institutional audit and compliance officer, the central research administrator, and the departmental research administrator.
Learning Objectives:
- Participants will be able to describe the differences between the various types of audit, review and inspection
- Participants will be able to discuss the audit process and how an auditor approaches an audit
- Participants will be able to explain the roles and responsibilities of both the agency and institutional players in an audit Moderator: David Mayo, Director of Sponsored Research, California Institute of Technology
Panel: Denise Clark, Assistant Vice President for Research Administration and Advancement, University of Maryland, College Park; Thomas Cooley, Chief Financial Officer and Director, Office of Budget, Finance and Award Management, National Science Foundation; Lillie Ryans-Culclager, Director, Engineering Research Administration, School of Engineering, Stanford University
TOPIC: Cost Sharing - Why No Good Deed Goes Unpunished
DATE: March 10, 2009
TIME: 11:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m.
LOCATION: Basic Science Building, Room 302
Cost sharing is an issue that affects all institutions, and its implications are often the cause of confusion. The program will include a review of the types of costs that qualify for cost sharing, the accepted categories of cost sharing, and the requirements for documenting and reporting it. The panel will discuss the various pressure points with cost sharing, from proposal to award to project closeout. In addition, the relationships among cost sharing, effort reporting, and indirect cost rates create the need for sophisticated systems to manage the complexities, and the panel will discuss the key points of intersection. Finally, the panel will seek to clarify important risk areas arising from a heightened emphasis on cost sharing in recent audits.
Learning Objectives:
- Participants will acquire an understanding of the applicable federal policies, the OMB Clarification Memo of January, 2001, and expectations for reporting and documentation
- Participants will learn scope of cost sharing responsibilities on a university campus
- Participants will learn how cost sharing affects F&A rates and effort reporting responsibilities
- Participants will learn about recent Federal audits and new developments relating to cost sharing Moderator: Kim Moreland, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research Administration, University of Wisconsin – Madison
Panel: Richard Seligman, Associate Vice President for Research Administration, California Institute of Technology; Stephen Hansen, Associate Provost for Research and Dean, Graduate School, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville; Mark Daniel, Vice President, Research Administration and Finance, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. TOPIC: F&A Rates for the Non-Accountant
DATE: June 9, 2009
TIME: 11:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m.
LOCATION: Basic Science Building, Room 402
Facilities & Administration (F&A) revenue is critical to supporting the research infrastructure at universities and colleges. Simply put, our scientists and institutions would not be able to sustain research activities with out this source of revenue. Universities and colleges have experts that calculate and negotiate our F&A rates, however every level of research administrator should have a basic understanding of what comprises the rate, and the variables that can drive its calculation, such as cost-sharing, waivers or coding. Whether you are from a research intensive university or a PUI, whether you are pre-award, post-award, central or a departmental administrators, you have a role to play in order to ensure the correct and optimal development of the F&A rate. This session will take away some of the “mystery” of the F&A rate preparation process, and give the viewer a greater appreciation of the institutional processes and policies that can impact your rate. You don’t need to be a costing expert to explain the importance of the F&A rate to your faculty! Learning Objectives:
- Participants will gain an overview of the F&A rate preparation process, including the “long form” and the “short form”
- Participants will gain an understanding of the interrelationship of proposals to the F&A rate proposal (e.g., categorizing proposals as research, instruction, other sponsored activities)
- Participants will learn the departmental perspective for space inventories, cost sharing and effort reporting, and how those pieces fit into the F&A rate proposal process
- Participants will learn how pre-award, post-award, and departmental administrators all have responsibilities in this process Moderator: Gunta Liders, Associate Vice President for Research Administration, University of Rochester
Panel: Jerry Fife, Associate Vice Chancellor for Business Services and Research Finance, Vanderbilt University; Ann Holmes, Assistant Dean, Administration and Finance, College of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park; Jane Youngers, Assistant Vice President for Research and Sponsored Programs, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio TOPIC: Subrecipient Monitoring: Assessing Risk
DATE: September 15, 2009
LOCATION: Psychiatry Auditorium (1st floor)
As the research world becomes more collaborative and complex, the issue of subrecipient monitoring is one that your institution needs to be fully aware of. A plan for maintaining compliance is paramount to your institution’s research enterprise. This session will provide an in-depth discussion, starting with the OMB Circular A-133 compliance supplement, risk assessments and how they’re used, and the different models used for monitoring (e.g., all done centrally in one office, shared responsibility between central and departmental offices). Issues such as monitoring large for-profit organizations, start-up companies, and foreign subagreements will be addressed. Learning Objectives:
- Participants will gain an overview of the subrecipient monitoring section of OMB Circular A-133’s compliance supplement, including what is “required” versus what is “nice to have” in a monitoring process;
- Participants will gain an understanding of both the central and departmental roles in subrecipient monitoring;
- Participants will have different subrecipient monitoring programs described and a discussion of risk assessment will be included. Moderator: Rob Barbret, Director of Sponsored Programs, Controller’s Office, University of Michigan
Panel: Pamela Webb, Associate Vice President for Research Administration, Sponsored Projects Administration, University of Minnesota; Bruce Morgan, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Research, Office of Research, University of California, Riverside; Samantha Westcott, Grant Manager, Division of Biology, California Institute of Technology.
You can register below or contact Jennifer Hutson 792-2696 or hutsonj@musc.edu Register Here for the NCURA Broadcasts Past Workshops Available on Videotape |
