Skip to Content

AA/PPS 03.01.01 - Contracts and Grants of an Academic Nature

Contracts and Grants of an Academic Nature

AA/PPS No. 03.01.01 (5.01)
Issue No. 2
Effective Date: 2/08/2018
Next Review Date: 10/01/2019 (ONY)
Sr. Reviewer: Associate Vice President for Research and Federal Relations

  1. PURPOSE

    1. The following information establishes criteria and procedures for development and submission of contract and grant proposals of an academic nature. This includes proposals submitted to state, federal and private agencies. For purposes of this policy, please note the following: Office of Research and Sponsored Programs (ORSP); UA - University Advancement and the Development Foundation.

    2. The principal investigator (PI), who may also be the project director, bears the primary responsibility for the accuracy of all the material in the proposal and for compliance with all applicable regulations including those found in UPPS No. 02.02.01, Applying for Sponsored Programs.

    3. The PI is responsible for informing the department chair or school director and dean of intention to submit and of proposal content.

    4. The PI is responsible for the completion of the grant or contract proposal application according to the specifications in the application guidelines and within the university’s proposal management system.

    5. The PI checks all financial data with Pre-Award Support Services prior to the submission of the grant or contract proposal through the university’s internal approval process.

    6. The PI ensures that the proposal meets all compliance requirements (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), Institutional Review Board (IRB), Bio-Safety and others as applicable) comply with the Affirmative Action regulations, if applicable, significant financial interest disclosures as found in UPPS No. 02.02.07, Researcher Conflicts of Interest in Research and Sponsored Program Activities and UPPS No. 02.02.08, Conflicts of Commitment in Research and Sponsored Program Activities; and meets any other regulations which might apply, such as export controls and rules mandated by the Office of Safety and Health Administration, State Department, etc.

    7. The PI ensures that the proposal itself represents the highest quality in purpose, scope, and plan of operation and reflects credit upon all departments involved.

    8. At least two weeks ahead of the submission deadline, the PI notifies Pre-Award Support Services if the proposal will be sent to a private source or foundation to ensure coordination of efforts. Pre-Award Support Services is responsible for managing the foundation submission clearance process with UA. These prior approvals require extra time and as such, the PI should plan accordingly.

    9. The PI ensures that a single proposal is not submitted to several funding sources simultaneously without prior notification to Pre-Award Support Services and all funders.

    10. The PI informs Pre-Award Support Services if the targeted funding program allows only a limited number of submissions from the university. If multiple proposals are targeted at a program to which the university submissions are limited, it is the responsibility of the ORSP to implement an internal review process to recommend the proposal for submission to the program as noted in AA/PPS No. 03.01.02, Limited Submissions for Certain Sponsored Programs.

    11. The PI keeps department chairs and school directors up to date on expenditures, and clears all hiring of staff (student or otherwise) with them.

  2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT CHAIR AND SCHOOL DIRECTOR

    1. The department chair or school director or a named designee checks the proposal for accuracy of content.

    2. The chair or director or a named designee verifies that the proposal purpose, scope, and plan of operation represent the best interests of the department.

    3. The chair or director or a named designee verifies that the proposal itself is of high quality and reflects credit on the department or school and its members.

    4. The chair or director or a named designee verifies that he or she approves of all requests for released time, equipment purchases, information technology support, funds for clerical assistance, use of facilities, proposed cost sharing, and expenditures for travel.

    5. The chair or director or a named designee verifies that any requests for additional staff lines have been discussed with the appropriate authority.

    6. The chair or director or a named designee checks expenditures of funded grants and contracts on a periodic basis and, when student assistants are hired, ensures that the regulations regarding nepotism (UPPS No. 04.04.07, Nepotism and Related Employment) are followed both literally and in the spirit of the rules.

    7. Upon approval, the proposal is forwarded to the school dean.

  3. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEAN OF THE COLLEGE

    1. The dean or a named designee reviews each proposal, paying particular attention to commitments incurred and to the quality of the document.

    2. The dean or a named designee verifies that the proposal represents the best interests of the college.

    3. The dean or a named designee verifies the proposal is of the highest quality and reflects credit on the college and its faculty.

    4. The dean or a named designee verifies that he or she approves of all requests for released time, equipment purchases, information technology support, funds for clerical assistance, use of facilities, and expenditures for travel and other uses of university resources such as proposed cost sharing.

    5. The dean or a named designee verifies that any requests for additional staff lines have his or her full approval.

    6. The dean or a named designee approves and forwards proposals of quality and returns all others to the chair or director for subsequent discussion and possible re-writing with the PI.

    7. The dean or a named designee answers questions concerning programmatic commitments.

    8. Upon approval, the proposal is forwarded to Pre-Award Support Services.

  4. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND SPONSORED PROGRAMS

    1. ORSP reviews each proposal submitted for completeness and accuracy to the best of its ability.

    2. ORSP may return the proposal if there are any questions regarding the quality of the proposal or with factual accuracy.

    3. Upon approval by the required parties, the proposal is submitted for consideration to the potential sponsor.

    4. ORSP offers technical assistance in proposal development for all sponsored program funding requests.

  5. RESPONSIBILITIES OF UNIVERSITY ADVANCEMENT

    1. UA reviews each proposal requesting non-deliverable grants (gifts) from corporations, foundations, and the private sector and pays particular attention to all institutional commitments incurred and to the technical quality of the document.

    2. UA will notify ORSP in writing of the approval to submit.

  6. SPONSORED PROGRAM PROPOSAL ROUTING PROCEDURES

    1. Requests for approval of proposals and applications for contracts and grants of an academic nature must be made by utilizing the university’s proposal management system. The system will route electronically the proposals to be approved to all appropriate parties which include the following (not in any order):

      1. department chair or school director;

      2. dean of the academic college;

      3. ORSP;

      4. IRB committee;

      5. IACUC committee;

      6. Graduate College;

      7. center directors;

      8. vice president for Institutional Technology, or designee;

      9. associate vice president for Research and Federal Relations;

      10. Texas State University System associate general counsel, or designee;

      11. director, Risk Management, or designee;

      12. director, Physical Plant, or designee;

      13. vice president for Student Affairs, or designee;

      14. vice president for University Advancement, or designee;

      15. vice president for Finance and Support Services, or designee; and

      16. others as needed.

      An e-mail notification will be sent to the individuals who are required to approve. Please note: Not all individuals above will see all proposals.

    2. The following calendar should be adhered to as closely as possible:

      Activity and Suggested Timelines for Internal Routing Approval

      1. Submit complete proposals to chair or director five days before mailing

      2. Processing by chair or director - up to one day

      3. Processing by dean - up to one day

      4. Processing by others in approval process - up to two days

      5. Processing by ORSP - three days

  7. FISCAL APPROVAL

    1. The associate vice president for Research and Federal Relations or a named designee is responsible for certifying that the proposal is within institutional, state, and federal financial guidelines.
  8. LIAISON FUNCTIONS FOR RESEARCH

    1. The ORSP is responsible for liaising with all state, federal, and private sector funding services regarding all aspects of sponsored programs.

    2. University Advancement is responsible for liaising with all corporations, foundations, and private sector funding sources as regards all aspects of gifts.

    3. Pre-Award Support Services and the associate vice president for Research and Federal Relations will continually assess the advantages associated with the university’s membership in research-related agencies and organizations and annually will recommend initiation, renewal, or termination of such membership.

  9. ANALYSIS AND REPORTING

    1. Post-Award Support Services will furnish the associate vice president for Research and Federal Relations with a report about funded grant expenditures annually. The report will consist of data gathered to complete the annual National Science Foundation and The Higher Education Coordinating Board research reports. Other reports will be available on an as-needed basis.
  10. REVIEWERS OF THIS PPS

    1. Reviewers of this PPS include the following:

      Position Date
      Associate Vice President for Research and Federal Relations October 1 ONY
  11. CERTIFICATION STATEMENT

    This PPS has been reviewed by the following individuals in their official capacities and represents Texas State Academic Affairs policy and procedure from the date of this document until superseded.

    Associate Vice President for Research and Federal Relations; senior reviewer of this PPS

    Provost