_________________________________________________________________
SPONSORED
PROGRAMS OPERATIONS GUIDE
Proposals Requiring Approval. Any formal proposal requesting project support from an external funding organization must be approved before it is submitted. Funding organizations include all federal, state, county and local government agencies; foundations; nonprofit organizations; private corporations; and private groups and individuals who award grants to universities, contract with universities or otherwise enter into agreements with universities to provide funds to support specific projects, for the performance of a specific scope of work. Formal proposals include all final submissions to governmental grant programs, proposed contract and proposed cooperative agreements which formally propose specific obligations or commitments of the University. Informal or preliminary proposals need not be routed.
Proposals being submitted to a funding organization which are renewal applications or continuation applications must be approved before they can be submitted, as well as proposals which are being revised and re-submitted to a funding organization.
Requests for no-cost time extensions will, at a minimum, be routed through the appropriate department head to the Office of Grants and Contracts Administration for approval.
Proposal Approval. A proposal must be reviewed and approved by the appropriate University administrators, including the Division Director, Dean, Director of the Office of Research Development and the Associate Vice President for Graduate Studies and Research.
The final version of the proposal must be approved. No changes will be permitted in proposals after they have received final approval, except when specifically authorized by the Director of the Office of Research Development. If a proposal is submitted to a funding organization with changes that were made after the proposal was approved and that were not authorized by the Director of the Office of Research Development, the University may withdraw the proposal.
Proposals which have not been fully approved may not be delivered to a funding organization. Any proposals delivered to a funding organization which have not been fully approved by the University may be withdrawn by the University.
Approval Deadline. The Office of Research Development is required to check all proposals for conformity to applicable University policies and State and Federal regulations related to grants prior to the proposal being submitted to an external funding organization. Therefore, it is important to submit proposals as far in advance of a sponsor's deadline as possible. At a minimum, proposals which involve a request for waiver of indirect costs, a request for matching funds or a request to submit to a foundation must be forwarded to Research Development at least two working days before the sponsors deadline; all other proposals must be forwarded at least one working day before the deadline.
Proposal Retention. A pending proposal will remain on file for a period of one year awaiting acceptance by the sponsor. If the sponsor fails to accept the proposal within that year, the proposal will be removed from the files and returned to the principal investigator. Should a notice of nonacceptance be received within that one-year period, such notice will be coordinated with the principal investigator and the Office of Research Development and the proposal will be returned.
Proposals Not Approved or Conditionally Approved. Proposals not receiving approval at any level of review will be returned, with appropriate explanation, to the principal investigator or person in charge of the project for revision and if applicable, subsequent resubmission. Under no circumstances should a proposal be approved at a higher review level without having been approved at all preceding levels.
Under certain circumstances, proposals may be conditionally approved by the Associate Vice President for Graduate Studies and Research specifying certain changes must be made by the principal investigator prior to submitting the proposal to the sponsor. Failure of the principal investigator to effect such specified changes prior to submission will cause the proposal to be considered an unauthorized submission.
Withdrawal of Formal Proposals. Under certain circumstances prior to award, a principal investigator or project director may determine a proposal should be withdrawn from the intended sponsor's review. Notification to the sponsor should be made through the Office of Research Development with appropriate approvals from all review offices.
Negotiations & Unusual Requirements.
UTSA Policy. All grant and contract awards are negotiated by the Director of the Office of Research Development. Faculty and staff are not authorized to negotiate the terms or costs of an agreement.
All negotiated budgets that differ from the original budget that was submitted with the request for funding must be approved by the appropriate University administrators.
A grant or contract proposal with unusual procedural, reporting, or billing requirements beyond the normal policies or practices of the University detailed in this manual, should not be accepted or recommended for approval until the Director of the Office of Research Development has cleared the requirements with appropriate University officials.
Issues for Consideration During Proposal Review
Eligibility of the Investigator. Is the individual initiating the proposal eligible to direct the program?
Contribution to Instruction, Research or Public Service Functions. Will the program contribute to either or all as part of the overall mission of the University?
Percentage of Effort. Is the amount of effort committed by the investigator(s) realistic and consistent with their other duties?
Human Subjects. If the proposed research involves the use of human subjects, has it been reviewed and approved by the University's Standing Committee on Human Research.
Care of Laboratory Animals. If animals are to be used in the conduct of the research, have provisions been amended to ensure adequate and humane care in accordance with prescribed standards of the University's Standing Committee on Animal Care & Utilization.
Budgets. Is the budget sufficiently detailed and consistent with the accounting procedures and system to be used to determine actual costs? Have all potential cost items been covered in the estimated budget?
Staff Benefits and Indirect Cost Rates. Have the University's staff benefits and indirect cost rates been included and properly applied in the proposed budget?
Title of Equipment. Does the sponsor allow for equipment title to vest in the University? Does the proposal contain a petition for vestment of title? Are all items specifically identified?
Patents, Copyrights, and Rights in Data. Have the sponsor's terms for these subjects been considered?, are they acceptable? Do they conform to University policy statements?
New Staff. Will the proposed activity require new staff? Would such expansion be consistent with University plans?
Facilities and Equipment. Can the project be accommodated within existing space? Is it adequately equiped? If not, are requirements for additional space, or new facilities, and equipment consistent with University plans and procurement policies?
Cost Sharing. Is any cost-sharing commitment made in the proposal accurate and consistent with the University's policy and budgets?
Security and Confidentiality. If there is a security restriction, or a statement requiring the protection of confidential information, does this statement conflict with University procedures or the Texas Freedom of Information Act?
Long-Term Commitments. Does the proposal commit the University to continue the proposed activity beyond the period of sponsor funding? If so, are such commitments consistent with University plans and funding resources?
Hazardous Materials. Have provisions been made to ensure compliance with University and federal guidelines?
Subcontracts. It may be necessary to contract for services of private companies or other institutions of higher education for support of a portion of the project effort. The proposed costs for such service should be established through a written quotation from the company and be included for internal review with the proposal. A proposal from a collaborating university signed by its authorized official should be attached or included as part of the proposal.
Freedom of lnformation Act (FOIA) Disclosure. A recent court decision held that NSF proposals may qualify as prior art. The court determined a particular NSF proposal was prior art because it was catalogued in a retrievable manner and accessible under FOIA. Proposals may be exempt from disclosure by exercising rights available under FOIA 5 USC 552(B)(3)(4) to prevent disclosure.
It is prudent to examine early in the proposal development any potential for the research program to yield concepts, ideas, processes, or systems that could be potentially patentable. If a department or faculty member believes this might be the case, steps should be taken to protect the University's rights. Therefore, if the intellectual property block on the research proposal transmittal form is checked, the Office of Research Development will work with the principal investigator to ensure the proper language is inserted in the transmittal letter and the proposal is marked "confidential" at the time it is submitted.
Given UTSA's continuing space deficiency, any requirements for space must be clearly articulated early in the proposal preparation process so that such needs can be evaluated by the Vice President for Business Affairs in cooperation with appropriate academic personnel. The resolution of any space requirements should be handled prior to submitting the related grant proposal.