Grants.gov and Research.gov
at NSF & Government-wide
Grants Initiatives
Andrea Norris
Division Director IRM/DIS
Mary Santonastasso
Division Director BFA/DIAS
November 9, 2006
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
Government-wide Grants
Initiatives
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
2
Background
• Grants.gov
– Government wide Policy and Implementation Governing
Structures for e-Grants Initiatives
– Grants.gov’s Purpose and Goals
– Current and Future Status
– How NSF has Implemented Grants.gov
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
3
Background (Cont.)
• Grants Management Line of Business (GMLOB)
– What is the Grants Management Line of Business?
– GMLOB Purpose and Goals
– Current and Future Status
– NSF’s Diverse Roles in the GMLOB:
Leading and Implementing
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
4
The Federal Grant
Streamlining Program
National Science and
Technology Policy Council
The Chief Financial Officers Council
Committee on Science
Grants Policy Committee
National Science Foundation and Energy
Co-Chairs
Research Business Models
Subcommittee
Pre-Award Work Group
Department of Defense Chair
Interagency Committee on
Debarment and Suspension
EPA Chair
CCR Team
EPA Chair
P.L. 106-107 PMO
HHS
Mandatory Work Group
Vacant Chair
Audit Oversight Work Group
HHS Chair
Training and Oversight
Work Group
HHS Chair
Payment System Issues
NSF Chair
Compliance
Supplement Team
HHS Chair
Training
Curriculum Team
NSF Chair
Reporting Forms Team
NOAA Chair
Audit Quality Team
Education Chair
Competencies Team
Education and DOI
Co-Chairs
Cost Principles Team
OMB Chair
Audit Policy Issues
NSF and Education
Co-Chairs
Post-Award Work Group
DOC/NOAA Chair
Indirect Cost Uniform
Guidance Handbook Team
HHS Chair
FAC Study (next steps)
Energy Chair
Certification Team
DOE Chair
Database Team
Chair
Improper Payment Issues
DOT Chair
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
5
Organizational Structure
Key
Governance
OMB
To be launched
Governing body
P.L. 106-107
Work Groups
GMLOB PMO
ACF
Consortium
DoED
Consortium
Future
Consortium
NSF
Consortium
Future
Consortium
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
Work Groups
Grants.gov
PMO
Grants.gov
Find and Apply
Grants Policy
Committee
Grants Executive
Board
Service
Providers
Execution team
Execution Teams
Existing entity
6
What is Grants.gov?
• A single source for finding grant opportunities
• A standardized manner of locating and learning more about
funding opportunities
• A single, secure and reliable source for applying for Federal
grants online
• A simplified grant application process with reduction of
paperwork
• A unified interface for all agencies to announce their grant
opportunities, and for all grant applicants to find and apply for
those opportunities
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
7
Grants.gov
Current Status and Next Steps
• All 26 grant-making agencies are required to post all
discretionary grant programs in the Grants.gov Find
• OMB has directed agencies to post in Grants.gov Apply:
– 75% of their funding opportunities in FY 2006;
– 100% of their funding opportunities in FY 2007.
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
8
Grants.gov at NSF
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
9
NSF Grants.gov Experience
• Started Integration in June 2005
– Proposal submitted via Grants.gov look the same as a proposal
submitted via FastLane to programs and reviewers
• FY 05
– 100% Posted on FIND
– 25% Posted on APPLY (25% goal)
• FY 06
– 100% Posted on FIND
– 80% Posted on APPLY (75% goal)
• FY 07
– 100% Posted on FIND
– 100% Posted on APPLY (100% goal)
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
10
NSF Grants.gov Experience (Cont.)
• NSF has received 597 application submissions through Grants.gov
since June 2005.
• This count includes applications submitted to:
– Four programs requiring submission through Grants.gov; and
– 174 programs in FY 06 where submission through Grants.gov
was optional.
• When submission through Grants.gov was an option, 1% of the
applicants chose to submit through Grants.gov.
• Of the 597 submissions, 325 applications were successfully inserted
into FastLane (54% success rate).
• The 272 applications or 46 percent of applications that were not
successful required the applicant to correct problems and resubmit.
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
11
Success Factors
• Outreach to the community
• NSF’s Grants.gov Application
Guide includes step-by-step
instructions
• Help Desk Support – received
almost 100 calls/e-mails
requesting assistance
• 35 training sessions to NSF
staff given by DIS and Policy
office
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
12
Lessons Learned
• Applicants submitting applications with attachments that are
not in PDF.
• The PI or Co-PI typed their name differently in various
portions of the application and the software could not tell if
this was the same person or another individual.
• Problems with organizational registration if institution and its
branches share the same DUNS
• Mac and UNIX issues – PureEdge solution being tested
• Applicants had varying success in submitting proposals, some taking as many as four attempts
before successful insertion into FastLane.
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
13
Grants.gov Implementation
7. NSF downloads submitted
application packages and
validates and inserts the
information into FastLane
1. Applicant* navigates
to Grants.gov Website
2. Applicant searches for
program
announcements
3. Applicant finds a
program announcement
and downloads
application package
(PureEdge forms) and
instructions
5. AOR submits
application
package to
Grants.gov
4. Applicant completes
application package
* Applicant or Researcher
= NSF Activity
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
6. Grants.gov sends
confirmation to AOR
8. NSF sends confirmation
to AOR and PI
14
NSF’s Grant Application Package
• SF 424 (R&R) Forms
• NSF Mandatory Forms
– NSF Cover Page
– NSF CheckList
• NSF Optional Forms
– NSF Deviation Authorization
– NSF Suggested Reviewers
– NSF FastLane System Registration
• Coming Soon…
– Biological Sciences Classification Form
– Division of Undergraduate Education
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
15
NSF Implementation in 2007
• Those programs designated required in 06 will remain
required in 07
• Unless otherwise specified, optional submission for the vast
majority of NSF programs
• Will not be used until a Grants.gov solution has been
developed for:
– Separately submitted collaborative proposals
– Fellowship programs that require submission
of reference letters
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
16
Required to be submitted through
Grants.gov in 2007
• Antarctic Artists and Writers (OPP)
• Scientific Computing Research Environments for the
Mathematical Sciences (MPS)
• Living Stock Collections (BIO)
• Advanced Learning Technologies (CISE)
• CEDAR, GEM, and SHINE Postdoctoral Research (GEO)
• Research in Disability Education (EHR)
• Infrastructure Materials Applications and Structural Mechanics
(ENG)
• Geography and Regional Science (SBE)
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
17
Not Accepted Through Grants.gov
• NSF also does not accept applications
through Grants.gov for:
–
–
–
–
–
Submission of Letters of Intent and Preliminary Proposals
Changed/Corrected Applications
Revisions
Continuations
Supplemental Funding Requests
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
18
What is GMLOB?
• A government-wide solution to support end-to-end grants
management activities that promote citizen access, customer
service, and agency financial and technical stewardship.
• System consolidation
• Interoperability
– Streamlined processes
– Standardized nomenclature
– Common interface touchpoints
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
19
Why GMLOB?
• Transparency and efficiency in the grants decision
making process
• Improved access to grants-related programmatic and
financial information
• Enhanced ability to report on award-related
accomplishments
• Improved post award monitoring and oversight
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
20
How?
• Grants management community will process
grants in a decentralized way using common
business processes supported by shared
technical support services.
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
21
Roles and Responsibilities -
GMLOB PMO
Roles
• Program planning, management and reporting
• Consortia activity coordination and support
• Consolidate GMLOB reporting and capital
planning
Responsibilities
• Conduct PMO activities – communication,
governance support, planning
• Coordinate and support Consortia activities,
service center implementation, and agency
migration
• Facilitate work groups for government wide
standardization and streamlining
• Gather and share lessons learned, best
practices, and templates across Consortia
Implementation
Consortia Leads
• Consortia activity direction and
management
• Common solution development
• Provide planning, leadership,
business, and program direction
• Establish and execute Consortium
governance structure
• Manage Consortium resources
• Define requirements
• Provide acquisitions, implementation,
and migration planning and support
• Identify risks and issues for resolution
Consortia Member Agencies
• Consortia participation
• Common solution development
• Define agency business and
technical requirements
• Contribute to the development and
delivery of work products
• Contribute resources (funding and/
or FTEs) for program/project
management, planning, development,
and implementation
• Represent agency needs to the
Consortia Leads and working groups
or escalation
• Conduct research and analysis
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
22
FY 2006 Activities
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
23
Current Status
• Department of Education (ED)
– ED’s core competency is administering and managing thousands
of grants that provide educational and vocational opportunities
for all citizens.
– ED’s approach is unique in that consortium members will have
the opportunity to participate in the design of a new, full lifecycle,
end-to-end grants management system from the ground up.
– ED’s system will be built to work with a large volume of
information and transactions suitable for larger grant-making
agencies.
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
24
Current Status (Cont.)
• Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Administration for Children and Families (ACF)
– Seven agencies and over 80 grant programs already use HHS
ACF’s Center of Excellence (COE), including USDA FSIS, HHS
HRSA, and Treasury CDFI.
– HHS ACF’s systems incorporate all 14 GMLOB grant award
processes both for awarding agencies and recipients as well as
extensive and flexible post-award reporting mechanisms.
– HHS ACF’s systems can manage all types of grants and
cooperative agreements, including “earmarks” and noncompetitive projects.
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
25
Current Status (Cont.)
• National Science Foundation (NSF)
– NSF will offer the Research.gov web portal that leverages its
experience with Grants.gov and the Research and Related
(R&R) initiative to provide access to functionality that benefits
the research community.
– Research.gov focuses on the needs of the grantees by providing
them with greater access to the government, streamlined
functionality, and flexibility to account for differing agency
research missions.
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
26
Research.gov at NSF
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
27
Grants Management
Line of Business (GMLoB)
NSF GMLoB CONSORTIUM TIMELINE
• NSF submits
declaration of
intent
• will study
being a
consortium
lead
2005
• 1st round:
NSF picked,
along with
HHS/ACF, and
Dept of Ed.
• charter
consortium
• recruit
agency
partners
• NSF does
market
research,
submits
business case
2006
• deploy services
• sign MOUs
2007
2008
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
28
NSF GMLoB Consortium:
Why Lead?
NSF Benefits
Research Community Benefits
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
29
NSF Environmental Considerations
Community
Needs and
Expectations
Funding and
Other
Resource
Constraints
Mission
Impact
Political
Pressures
Research
Grants
Management
and
Administration
Governmentwide Policy
and
Standards
Agency
Needs and
Priorities
Increasing
Complexity
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
30
NSF GMLoB Consortium
Guiding Principles
 Research community must
directly benefit from this initiative.
 Services offered must provide a
measurable benefit to NSF.
 The approach will be deliberate,
modular, conservative, and
research community focused.
 The initiative must focus on
improvement; cost avoidance,
not just cost savings.
 Low cost, high impact offerings
that deliver value to grantees will
be implemented first.
 Whatever we do, we are going
to do it well.
 Capital investments in IT
infrastructure will be minimized;
intellectual investment in
FastLane will be fully leveraged.
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
31
Research.gov Concept
NSF will lead a research-oriented consortium based upon GMLoB
goals and the business needs of both partnering agencies and the
grantee community.
• a collaborative agency partnership
will govern the consortium and its
resources
• Research.gov portal to provide a
menu of services for conducting
electronic grants business with
Federal research agencies
• focuses on the needs of grantees
while providing maximum flexibility
to agencies
• recover O&M costs using a feefor-service arrangement
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
32
Research.gov Portal
Research.gov Portal is A new Web portal for research institutions to
conduct business with Federal research agencies
Initial capabilities may include:
• Proposal status
• Project reports
• Federal financial reporting and
payments
• PI profiles
• Research Focused “Find and
Apply” services
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
33
Research.gov Timeline
TIMELINE
• GMLoB Pilot with
USDA/CSREES
deployed
• Pilot demonstrates
joint grant
application status
Conceptual service rollout plan
• Establish hosting
environment
• Gained both
technical and
business lessonslearned
2006
• Pilot portal and
initial set of services
2007
• Portal and initial set
of services
deployed as
production system
2008
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
34
Research.gov
Research.gov is important
• Continues our leadership in advancing eGrants management initiatives
• Allows us to continue to evolve our grants management systems and work
processes
• Tremendous support in community for improved “e-services” tailored to research
community
Current Status
• CSREES Pilot
• OMB 300 Business Case
Future Initiatives
• Develop Research.gov portal
• Release of grant application status module involving 2 or more
research agencies
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
35
Research.gov (Cont.)
• Leverages next generation of FastLane and GMLoB to fulfill vision of a
single Web portal
• Provides grantee community greater access to the government and
streamlined functionality
• Allows federal research agencies to sign up and offer services to their
grantees using Research.gov tools
• Uses portal approach for maximum flexibility (helps account for differing
agency strategies)
• Allows the best tools to be offered from any agency in the consortia
• Leverages proven functionality and expertise with minimal capital investment
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
36
FY 2007 Goals
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
37
Next Steps
• Institutionalize GMLOB initiative government-wide
• Deliver quality service to the grantee community
• Establish and maintain strong service provider/customer
partnerships
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
38
FY 2007 Priorities
• Standards and Streamlining
–
–
–
–
Develop standard roles and taxonomy
Define FM/GM interface standards
Define functions and subfunctions
Develop strategy for common post-award reporting services
• Communications and Outreach
– Execute communication strategy to communicate GMLOB status
and direction to grant-making agencies
• Migrating Agency Support
– Provide migrating agency guidance
• Identify Full Landscape of Consortia Leads
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
39
FY 2007
Consortia Recommendation
• To name additional Consortia Leads that will provide grant management
technical services to the 26 grant-making agencies.
Scope
• To give the 26 grant-making agencies a voice in recommending
additional Consortia Leads that will provide grant management technical
services to them.
• Transparent process for recommending consortia
Outcomes
• Recommendation based on ability of recommended consortia to fill existing
gaps in the consortium landscape
• Viable consortia with named partner(s)
Key Dates
9/22/06
February 2007
Recommendation submitted to OMB
OMB announces new Consortia Leads
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
40
Backup Slides
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
41
Federal Grants Milestones
Milestone
NSF Role
PL106-107 passed to streamline and
standardize grants process (1999)
NSF led and participated in multiple PL106-107
workgroups
Grants.gov initiated with a focus on Find and
Apply (2002)
NSF provides leadership and resources to the effort
Standard funding opportunity developed and
approved by OMB (2003)
NSF helped lead effort to develop standard format –
used NSF Format as basis
SF 424 (Research and Related) developed and
approved by OMB (2005)
NSF led effort to develop and coordinate among
research agencies
CFO Council creates Grants Policy Committee
(2005)
NSF Chairs Grants Policy Committee
Research project reports standard format
launched under NSTC/RBM (2004)
NSF had significant role in format development, and
now leads the effort
GMLoB establishes grants process flow and
Consortia approach (2005)
NSF is co-managing partner for the GMLoB
OMB selects Consortia Leads (2006)
NSF, HHS ACF, and DoED selected
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
42
Current Status
Milestone
Due Date
NSF develops grants strategy and business case for implementing
GMLoB Consortia Lead role
June-August, 2006
Agencies submit GMLoB survey that provides detailed information
on their grants management systems
August, 2006
NSF submits OMB 300 and FY08 budget submission
September, 2006
2nd round of Consortia Selection commences
September, 2006
NSF completes CSREES pilot
September, 2006
Agencies declare intent to be a Consortia Lead or Member
FY2006 Q4
OMB announces selection of 2nd round Consortia Leads
February, 2007
Migrating agencies execute an MOU with Consortia Lead
FY2007 Q1
NSF and Government-wide Initiatives
43