[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 61 (Friday, March 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19329-19330]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07313]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Request for Information (RFI): Reducing Investigator's
Administrative Workload for Federally Funded Research
Key Dates
Release Date: March 25, 2013.
Response Date: May 24, 2013.
Issued by
National Science Foundation (NSF).
Purpose
This RFI offers principal investigators with Federal research
funding the opportunity to identify Federal agency and university
requirements that contribute most to their administrative workload and
to offer recommendations for reducing that workload. Members of the
National Science Board's Task Force on Administrative Burdens do not
wish to increase your administrative workload with this request and you
may choose to answer only those questions that are most pertinent to
you. Your responses will provide vital input so that we can implement
agency-level changes and offer recommendations to reduce unnecessary
and redundant administrative requirements.
Background
Over the past decade two Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP)
Faculty Workload Surveys (2005 and 2012) indicate that administrative
burdens associated with Federal research funding are consuming roughly
42% of an awardee's available research time, a figure widely cited in
numerous articles and reports. To help address these issues, the
National Science Board (Board) recently created a Task Force on
Administrative Burdens. The Task Force is charged with examining the
burden imposed on Federally-supported researchers at U.S. colleges,
universities, and non-profit institutions. Responses to this RFI will
be considered as the Board develops recommendations to ensure
investigators' administrative workload is at an appropriate level.
Request for Information
The Task Force is seeking a response to the questions below. In
your response, please reference the question number to which you are
responding.
Sources of Administrative Work and Recommendations for Reducing Work
1. What specific requirements associated with your Federally-funded
grants require you personally to do the greatest amount of
administrative work? Where possible, please indicate whether the origin
of that administrative work is a requirement at your institution, a
Federal requirement, or a requirement from another institution. What
recommendations would you offer that might help to reduce the level of
work?
2. Principal investigators responding to the FDP's 2012 Faculty
Workload Survey identified the following sources of administrative
work, in addition to human subject protection and animal care treated
below, as particularly burdensome for Federal grantees:
[ssquf] Grant progress report submissions;
[ssquf] Finances (e.g. managing budget-to-actual expenses,
equipment and supplies purchases, and other financial issues/
requirements);
[ssquf] Personnel management, hiring, and employee evaluation, and
visa issues;
[ssquf] Effort reporting;
[ssquf] Conflict of interest;
[ssquf] Responsible conduct of research;
[ssquf] Lab safety/security;
[ssquf] Data sharing; and,
[ssquf] Sub-contracts (e.g. overseeing: progress toward project
goals and deadlines; budget expenditures, invoices, and other financial
matters; and, compliance and safety/security issues).
If not addressed in question 1, for any of the areas listed, do you
believe that the associated requirements significantly increase the
amount of administrative work you personally need to perform? Where
possible please indicate whether the source of the required
administrative work is a requirement at your institution, a Federal
requirement, or a requirement from another institution. What
recommendations would you offer that might help to reduce the level of
work?
3. Do you receive administrative support from your institution for
Federal grants? If yes, for what specific preparation, reporting, and
compliance requirements do you receive administrative support? Is the
amount of support excellent, good, adequate, poor, or non-existent?
Where does your administrative support come from within the institution
(e.g. office of the
[[Page 19330]]
vice president for research, office of sponsored programs, a
department, a laboratory, others)? What additional administrative
support would you like to receive from your institution?
Institutional Review Boards (IRB)/Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committees (IACUC)
4. If you are conducting human or vertebrate animal research
requiring IRB or IACUC approval, what requirements (e.g. preparing
protocols for initial review, annual reviews and re-writes, completing
revisions requested by reviewers, and satisfying training and other
Federal requirements) create the most administrative work? Is the work
completed primarily by you or others? Are there particular practices
used by your university's IRB/IACUC process that contribute to or
subtract from the administrative work you must perform to meet Federal
and Institutional requirements? What recommendations would you offer
that might help to reduce the level of work?
Proposals
5. Investigators responding to the FDP 2012 Faculty Workload Survey
indicated that 15 percent of their research time associated with a
Federal award is devoted to proposal preparation. Are there
administrative tasks associated with proposal preparation that increase
your personal administrative workload? Please provide specific
examples. What recommendations would you offer Federal agencies for
reducing the level of administrative work necessary to submit a grant
proposal while maintaining the details needed to evaluate the merit and
feasibility of the proposed research?
Agency Specific Requirements and Multiple Agencies
6. From which agencies do you receive Federal funding? In your
opinion, have you observed outcomes related to data or information that
you have provided at the request of Federal agencies? If you receive
funding from multiple agencies do you believe that there are
overlapping or redundant interagency requests or requirements that
increase your administrative workload? How might these requirements be
streamlined across Federal agencies?
7. If you receive funding from NSF, are there NSF-specific
requirements that you believe create significant administrative work
for you? What steps would you suggest NSF take to reduce the level of
work necessary to comply with the requirement(s)?
Reform Efforts
8. The Office of Management of Budget (OMB) has recently proposed
reforms to administrative requirements for Federal awards, including:
(a) Guidance that clarifies the circumstances under which
institutions may charge administrative support as a direct cost under
certain conditions, including where the support is integral to a
project or activity, can be specifically allocated to it, is explicitly
included in the budget, and is not also recovered as indirect costs.
(b) Reforms to effort reporting, including using employee payroll
reports from institutional automated payroll systems to comply with
effort reporting requirements.
What if any effect do you believe these proposed reforms would have on
your administrative workload? Would you utilize direct charging if the
guidance is finalized? To what extent would you utilize it (i.e., what
% of funds)?
Professional/Institutional Information
The following information will allow us to assess the influence of
institution size/administrative capacity, academic rank, and field of
study on the level and type of administrative work reported but is not
required.
9. What is your academic rank? What is your field of study? Please
indicate which of the following best describes your institution:
[ssquf] Public research institution with medical school
[ssquf] Public research institution without medical school
[ssquf] Private research institution
[ssquf] Public master's institution
[ssquf] Private master's institution
[ssquf] Primarily undergraduate institution
[ssquf] Minority-serving institution
[ssquf] Non-profit/for profit institution
How to Submit a Response
All responses and should be submitted by email to: [email protected].
Responses to this RFI will be accepted through May 24, 2013. You
will not receive individualized feedback on any suggestions. Individual
or aggregate responses may be referenced in a final report; however the
Board will not attribute any comments by name. Email addresses will be
anonymized and responses kept confidential consistent with our
obligations to comply with a judicial or administrative subpoena, or a
FOIA request pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552. Please note that any personal
information contained within the body of the email/response (i.e.
signature lines) will be retained if not deleted by the sender. No
basis for claims against the U.S. Government shall arise as a result of
a response to this request for information or from the Government's use
of such information. Any questions or inquiries should be sent to:
[email protected].
Ann Bushmiller,
Senior Legal Counsel, National Science Board.
[FR Doc. 2013-07313 Filed 3-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P