Research Work of Sparc by xjl11347


More Info
									               UNC Sponsored Programs and Research Council (SPARC)*
               Spring Meeting 2003, Quality Inn / Conference Center, Boone, NC

                                           Monday, March 17, 2003

VOTING MEMBERS:                                              Mattie McLaurin, Fayetteville State University
Judith Domer, Appalachian State University                   Beverly Warren, Fayetteville State University
Emilie Kane, East Carolina University                        Linda Jackson, North Carolina State University
Patricia Gibbs, Elizabeth City State University              Louis Toms, UNC at Asheville
LaDelle Olion, Fayetteville State University                 Bob Lowman, UNC at Chapel Hill
John Stevens, UNC at Asheville                               Scott Blackwood, UNC at Chapel Hill
Rosemary Wander, UNC at Greensboro                           Ellen Zavalla, UNC at Charlotte
Russ Lea, UNC, Office of the President                       Beverly Maddox-Britt, UNC at Greensboro
Gene Brayboy, UNC at Pembroke                                Carol Smith, UNC at Greensboro
Pam Whitlock, UNC at Wilmington                              Sharon Kiser, UNC at Charlotte
                                                             Amy Roberts, UNC at Charlotte
                                                             Jamie Garriss, UNC, Office of the President
OTHER PARTICIPANTS:                                          Chris Brown, UNC, Office of the President/NCSU
Beverly Christiam, Appalachian State University              David Harrison, UNC, Office of the President
Jo Harris, Appalachian State University                      Sarah Smith, UNC, Office of the President
Bob Johnson, Appalachian State University                    Lisa Hunt, UNC at Pembroke
Scott Stubbings, East Carolina University                    Carol Simrel, Winston Salem State University
                                                             Mae Witherspoon, Winston-Salem State University

I. Welcome and Introductions (Judith Domer, Bob Johnson)
Dr. Judith Domer, Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, welcomed the participants, and thanked Dr. Bob
Johnson and Ms. Jo Harris for all their hard work putting the meeting together. Appalachian State is pleased to
host this meeting. Bob Johnson, thanked Jo Harris and Lisa Bingham, the membership for the agenda topics,
and the presenters. Dr. Johnson announced that Tuesday’s breakfast is included with the cost of the room, the
evening’s reception is at 5:00 pm at the Appalachian Cultural Museum, and that dinner is in the hotel after the
Introductions were made by the above listed participants.

II. Implications for Financial and Technical Late Reporting (Scott Blackwood)
Scott Blackwood stated he would not be making a formal presentation, but would attempt to lead a discussion
on reporting - financial and technical reporting, as well as patent and invention reporting.
        Most reports are due 90 days after project end date (final financial/technical reports). The requirement
        to maintain a positive cash flow is driving this need to manage reporting.
        Consequences of non-reporting include: non-payment of costs, suspension of awards to the delinquent
        investigator or the institution, or worse, institutional debarment or suspension.
        Generally, an office has ten days to respond to formal notification of delinquencies in reporting
        including progress, final, technical and financial reports. As an example, a recent letter from EPA cited
        a number of delinquent reports, and all but one was less than 30 days late. The National Cancer
        Institute is also taking a strong stand, including disallowance of all costs, requirement of a corrective
        action plan, and suspension of awards to the PI or institution.

        Russ Lea asked if UNC-CH had a system (tickler) for reporting? UNC-CH sends a notice to all PIs
        thirty days prior to end date of a project asking if there will be a delay in delivery of the technical report
        or if they will request a no cost extension. COEUS will accommodate multiple reporting dates. UNC-
        CH plans to send via email notice to PI and departmental administrators. Staffing limits prohibit more
        comprehensive monitoring of reports.
        Russ Lea said to beware of DOD agencies relative to last minute no cost extension requests, as they are
        not always granted. Linda Jackson added that it’s not just final reporting, but also on annual progress
        reports. This is problematic if faculty members leave the institution or if the report has been submitted
        to, but perhaps not logged in right at the agency. At NCSU, the final technical report is to be filed with
        Sponsored Programs and Research. Central repository is the key to successful report management.

      LaDelle Olion indicated FSU faced some particular challenges as there is a disconnect between finance
      and sponsored programs. Finance does not understand sponsored programs. Russ Lea added that the
      new emphasis on compliance renders the old pre-award/post-award model less effective – there is a
      need for something in the middle (account create / compliance / reporting) between proposal
      submissions / financial management. Emilie Kane commented that at ECU good, regular
      communication and a sense of teamwork has made it easier for the pre- and post-award sides to work
      together. It also helps that they are in the same building. Pam Whitlock said UNC-W now has a
      combined office, but communication is still a challenge. UNC-W includes accounting staff in
      departmental training which helps change the mindset from straight accounting to research
      administration. Pam Whitlock also sits in on the staff meetings of the associate vice chancellor for
      Scott Blackwood emphasized that co-location alone is not enough. All areas should report to the Vice
      Chancellor for Research. At UNC-CH, staff are aligned around specific agencies. The pre-/post-
      groups meet regularly. In the future, the agency-specific groups will be “cradle to grave”. UNC-CH is
      also recruiting for a new training position, with emphasis on the researcher, the department manager and
      sponsored research / contracts and grants staff.

      Russ Lea stated that some campuses now require PIs to be certified. Dr. Wander asked if UNC-OP
      would help campuses develop such a model as efficiencies can be gained through centralized
      development and distribution. Scott Blackwood commented that the motivation for compliance
      reporting is not just good stewardship, but also to avoid major audit findings. Scott thought it was a
      good idea to pool our resources in this area. Emilie Kane pointed to the successful models for on-line
      IRB training and asked if perhaps UNC could pursue on-line training for faculty. Rosemary Wander
      added that faculty activity loads (teaching/advising/research) just don’t leave much extra time for more
      Linda Jackson said contract conditions must be explained thoroughly to PIs, especially those that
      contain potentially difficult reporting requirements. These days, a faculty member may not fully
      recover, professionally, from a major desk audit. Russ Lea recounted NCSU’s experience with a
      termination for cause from NC DENR for failure to report. NCSU was required to certify with each
      proposal that it had been terminated. The certification often resulted in more questions. Termination
      for cause is very serious.

Scott Blackwood has been working with a Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP) committee to explore
reducing the administrative burden of financial reporting within 90 days by possibly extending the deadline to
120 days. One reason reporting seems to be chronically late is the pervasive extent of subcontracting. The
whole reporting process is no more complex. Scott will keep SPARC current on the FDP effort.

Dr. Gene Brayboy asked Scott to clarify the motivating factors for timely reporting, including return of interest
on advances. Dr. Brayboy wanted to know if F&A receipts are deposited into the University money market
account. Sharon Kiser indicated that they are deposited as institutional trust funds and that interest is earned.

Distribution of interest varies by campus. Russ Lea added that UNC-Office of the President now submits an
annual F&A expenditure report to the NC Legislature to show that those funds are spent on scholarly activities.

III. Coordination and Management of Collaborative Research Projects Among the UNC-System
Institutions (Russ Lea)
Russ Lea discussed the challenge of measuring inter-institutional collaborations.
        UNC used to measure collaboration by the number and dollar value of subcontracts. In today’s
        environment, there is a need to be more proactive and to capitalize on the areas in which we have
        collective strength / expertise.
        Today, research projects are driven by interest from faculty and/or state / federal level interest.
        Researches can be stimulated by an informal or a more formal process. An example of an informal
        process is the Southeast Atlantic Coastal Ocean Observing System (SEA-COOS), which started with a
        good idea from an assistant professor, featured a multi-institutional/multi-state collaboration, with the
        possibility for federal support.
        An example of a formalized process is the Expansion Budget Request, a biennial budget request for all
        16 campuses which includes requests for all activities, enrollment growth, student services, IT, capital
        improvement. Previously, research was not included, but now it is one of six stated priorities of the
        University, and for the first time, research was included in the expansion budget. In 2001, the
        legislature made an appropriation for research with a three-year funding reoccurrence. Russ Lea
        determined the areas of priority: Marine Sciences, optoelectronics/photonics and genomics. In 2002,
        the chancellors had to determine top priorities for their campuses and research often dropped off their
        list. What does work is when the Chief Research Officers can determine collectively the priority areas
        under which a system wide request can be floated and convey this to their chancellors.

        Judith Domer asked if this process might be more successful if chancellors get the first shot, then have
        the Chief Research Officers (CRO) prioritize it. Russ Lea indicated that research is the only faculty
        driven item in the budget. Even CROs don’t know where the good ideas are, and depend on faculty to
        report to them. On each campus, it is important to ferret out the good ideas, determine how several
        campuses can work together in the way of research.

        UNC Federal Agenda – The UNC federal agenda is voted on by the BOG and is generated out of UNC-
        Office of the President. Several institutions decide this is what they want, UNC-OP writes the white
        paper and takes it to the feds. Some items are purely defensive, to prevent individual campuses from
        pursuing an earmark for a single campus, e.g. all campuses with a transportation request submitted one
        request for transportation (something vs. nothing). Rosemary Wander commented that the formal
        process is getting the idea to the feds, but the idea generation itself is more informal.

        Examples - Russ Lea mentioned an unsuccessful informal opportunity for collaboration, which was the
        Army Research Office (ARO), non-medical biotechnology center notice. An email was sent to the
        SPARC and CRO list serves and only three offices replied with interest. The Office of Research does
        not manufacture the ideas or write the proposals. A successful example is when UNC submitted a
        proposal to The Centers for Oceans and Human Health. The proposal involved UNC-W, ECU, NCSU,
        UNC-C and Duke University with UNC-W taking the organizational lead. There was interest from
        several campuses with faculty who were very active in the proposal process. A grant-writer helped put
        it together, and the proposal went out from UNC-OP.

        Rosemary Wander asked about the proposed funding of the bioprocessing training facility. Dr. Lea
        reported that industry representatives came to UNC with the complaint that UNC graduates were not
        properly trained for the biotechnology industry. What industry wants is a full size training facility so
        the graduates can walk into a plant ready to go. A higher education needs assessment, a workforce
        assessment and a facilities assessment were conducted. UNC received minimal funding and was given a
        three-week period to complete the needs assessments. The NC Community College System got $100K
        in November 2002, plus a consultant to do its needs assessment. NCSU wrote the facility assessment
        and NC Biotechnology Center wrote the industry assessment. All reports will be rolled into one to go to

        the Golden Leaf Foundation for funding the facility, with operating costs coming from the State budget.
        Bob Lowman expressed some concern that Bioprocessing seemed to be defined primarily from an agri-
        based concept.

        Russ Lea presented the Hot Topics Report, which highlights projects (pre-award and post-award) that fit
        into the UNC strategic priorities, or are in line with state, regional or national trends. This report goes to
        UNC-OP leadership. Because it features projects that are still in the proposal stage, it’s not exactly
        designed for wide-scale distribution.

IV. Federal Relations Update (Russ Lea for Bob Samors)
The message from Bob Samors is that this year, more than ever, it is critical to get faculty up to Washington DC
to talk to legislators and staff. Each agency will have less discretionary funding. Good ideas need to get to the
delegation and it is important to have faculty do the selling. Especially if the United States goes to war,
Congress is interested in maintaining a semblance of the ordinary, and they want business to appear that it is
business as usual. Gene Brayboy asked if Bob Samors thinks there will be more pork funds now? Russ Lea
said some mission-based agencies (DOT, NOAA, etc.) would have less to work with while other agencies, like
DOD, may have more. Russ Lea reviewed the PowerPoint handout. The budget FY2004 will be impacted by
the war and deficits. The Department of Homeland Security has a relatively small research budget now, but it
will grow in the future. Record deficits will flatten funding for certain agencies.

V. HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) (Bob Lowman )
Dr. Bob Lowman said he would post his presentation to the SPARC list serve for distribution. Congress did not
take research into account when it crafted this legislation; however, research is affected through the privacy
aspects of the legislation. The HIPAA regulations apply to covered agencies (at UNC-CH, the agencies will be
UNC Health Care Systems and the School of Medicine). Also, student health services are covered entities.
Private Health Information (PHI) is demographic, financial or health related information. HIPAA governs how
entities release PHI data to researchers. HIPAA takes effect April 14, 2003. Because of HIPAA, some entities
are no longer willing to release data to researchers. IRBs must ensure that the researchers using PHI are in
compliance. Russ Lea said this was the first HIPAA presentation that he understood and thanked Bob Lowman.

                                      Minutes Tuesday, March 18, 2003

Bob Johnson welcomed the group back and introduced Ms. Jane Helm, the Vice Chancellor for Business Affairs
at Appalachian State University (ASU).

VI. Welcome (Ms. Jane Helms, Vice Chancellor for Business Affairs)
Ms. Helms gave welcoming remarks and an overview on ASU. The main campus, 64 acres, is experiencing a
wave of new construction. Special consideration is being given to blending new buildings into the existing
environment. Although ASU is limited in terms of places to expand, they were able to acquire a local church to
house the visual arts center.

ASU’s first priority is teaching, and most faculty teach a 4-course load. Scholarship (research) and service are
complementary. ASU has many programs through which it serves the community including LEAs/teachers, the
community college system, private colleges, cities/towns, and other community-based programs (e.g. summer
reading program). The ASU freshman retention program and the Watauga College programs are of particular
pride and importance. ASU is working to increase diversity (faculty and students) on campus.

Capitol Improvement Projects
        Library and Information Commons, including a parking deck will be completed in 2006.
        Rankin Science Annex will house biology, geology, geography and planning.
        Living Learning Center combines learning center and residence hall.

        Parking Deck and Offices – There are 750 parking spaces, with police department and campus
        transportation/parking in the lower levels.
        Bookstore Renovation and Addition will double in size.
        Student Union Solarium and the Dougherty Administration Building.
        Student Recreation Center (including an indoor pool and climbing wall) will be paid for by student fees.
        Founders Hall, Smith-Wright Hall, Walker Hall. Renovations are funded under the bond program.
        Doughton Residence Hall - Part of a $50 million dollar renovation process for all dorms.
        Turchin Center for the Visual Arts will be housed in the old Methodist church.
        Student Union Screening Room Theater (77 seats).
        Regional Chillers – Most buildings do not have air conditioning and it is needed.

VII. Certified Research Administrator Professional Training Program (Pam Whitlock)
The Research Administrators Certification Council (ARCC) manages the certification process. Certification
brings professional recognition, credibility and indicates the person has expertise in a body of knowledge.
Requirements for certification include a combination of education, experience and examination. Recertification
requires demonstration of continued involvement in the profession through publications and presentations. For
more information see:

Dr. Lea commented on the importance of certification for SPA employees. CRA provides a means for
employees to benchmark required skills (even if research administrators duties are <100%). It is important to
demonstrate to Human Resources that there is a body of knowledge against which employees can be measured.
It is important to show employees that there’s an end-point to the profession, one that leads to certification like
accounting. Without certification opportunities, research administration will continue to face high turn over-
rates. Bob Lowman added that now there is a certification track for IRB as well.

VIII. University of North Carolina – Office of the President Update (Russ Lea)
The participant folders contain information for participants to take back to the campus and to share with
administrators who oversee research and sponsored programs.
        FFIS issue brief on Homeland Security - On the last page, is a good diagram of what areas are now part
        of the Department of Homeland Security

        NC Security Advisory System - Describes what an orange level mean for campuses. This information
        should be shared with the appropriate people on each campus. President Broad has mandated that each
        campus develop a disaster recovery plan, including a business continuity plan. No additional funds
        have been allocated for this activity, although the state has provided some software for planning. Some
        campuses are farther along than others. In the future, UNC-OP will audit the campus plans.

        NASULGC Eco and Animal Rights Terrorism Report - Please share this with the appropriate parties.

        Annual Report to the President - This information is used daily at UNC-OP. President Broad and others
        use it in presentations to outside bodies, the State and others. The report is important in showing how
        research impacts economic development and public service. Annually, UNC is growing at the capacity
        of an entire Research I institution. It takes resources to manage this level of growth, and is important to
        retain F&A.

        The SPARC Database - Problems are being identified, and fixed and the Office of Research is
        proceeding with data feed from NCSU, UNC-CH, ECU, UNCW and UNC-C. The customized
        reporting module that allows access to post-award information to campuses and the public is being
        developed. The system itself is “dumb” and is a tool for reporting out, but has no analysis capability
        If the data is wrong, the campus needs to go in a fix it. The Office of Research will run some internal
        error checking, but routine qualitative and quantitative reviews are a campus responsibility. UNC will
        report what campuses provide, based on the agreed upon data elements. The SPARC data system is
        used to report to the University stakeholders (legislators, etc.). Russ Lea noted that UNC is recruiting
        for John Hardin’s positions, which will now require someone with a masters degree with database

        experience and someone who can also prepare information/reports about research activities. Dr. Lea
        reminded the campuses that we need data feeds from NCSU, UNC-W, UNC-C and UNC-CH.
        ACTION: Email Sarah Smith when transmitting data so that Office of Research can monitor the
        feed and test for bugs.

IX. News on Select Agents (David Harrison)
Regulations on Biohazardous Research - The Patriot Act brought forward problems in research including use of
research results and select agents. Use of select agents are now restricted to select persons. The Bioterrorism
Act brought the notion of restricted agents and restricted persons into focus. Now the federal government will
determine what constitutes research with select agents and how to monitor select persons. The NACUALERTS
provides information on the calendar of implementation, the requirement to demonstrate levels of security of
physical plants, and registration of people, including background checks, for anyone who has access to the
facility. Universities can be held liable if they provide material support/access to people affiliated with terrorist
groups. Consistent review of lab safety plans is a good place to start in compelling faculty to comply with the
new regulations. Identify who is using/possessing what agents, and if they’re not using it, dispose of it.
Everyone has to be aware, above and beyond the campus Environmental Health and Safety Officers.

X. Campus Updates
Carol Simerll, WSSU – The work unit is focusing more on providing assistance to faculty, including a proposal-
writing workshop. WSSU hosted a federal agency symposium, and had nine agencies attend (DOD, DoeD,
DOJ, NASA, NSF). As a result, more proposals are being written. Many key positions are vacant, but plans are
in place to recruit new employees.

Gene Brayboy, UNC-P – FY 2002 was UNC-P’s best year in history. The university has been targeted as a
growth institution, which should impact proposal submissions and awards. UNC-P will have over 200 faculty
members this fall. There is more construction on campus to accommodate the growth in students and growth in
new subject areas including biotechnology. Gene Brayboy is concerned about potential security issues around
the relocation of the science building. UNC-P is working with the NC legislative delegation to obtain
designation as a tribal college, and if successful, the university will be the only tribal college east of the

Ellen Zavalla, UNC-C – Dr. Steve Mosier is now Vice Provost for Research and Public Relations and is more
involved in federal relations. UNCC’s new office of proposal development, with a person to lead that office,
will be focusing on large inter-disciplinary proposals. Sharon Kiser’s office, Sponsored Programs is now down
the hall from Research Services. The pre- and post-award offices enjoy a great relationship and are exploring
joint archiving of files. The Research Office is revising its campus process for CIL creation, including a
standing campus committee to review requests and a standardized process for reviews. Sharon Kiser is
recruiting for a cost accounting position. This person will be working on developing an F&A rate for centers.
Pre-award has also requested a compliance position. The Center for Optoelectronics has been approved by the
UNC BOG and recently received a federal earmark. The Center collaborates with MIT and Duke University.

Beverly Warren, FSU – An outside evaluator is scheduled to aid with strategic planning for the Office of
Sponsored Research.

Linda Jackson, NCSU – NCSU is looking for a GAMS site-coordinator and a senior negotiator. The office is
handling more proposals and awards.

Beverly Maddox-Britt, UNC-G – UNC-G is also looking for a compliance officer. The Office of Research
Services recently held a faculty grant-writing workshop. The office has also launched an intensive one-year
program to support multi-disciplinary faculty activities. Dr. Rosemary Wander has invested $5000,000 in this
effort. The proposals were reviewed externally, and they will fund nine of the eighteen proposals submitted.
The idea is that external proposal applications will result from the seeding of these multidisciplinary activities.

Pam Whitlock, UNC-W – UNC-W is not recruiting for positions. The office just added a compliance officer
(IRB/IACUC). However, the University will have a new chancellor, a new provost, and a University attorney.
The Office of Sponsored Programs is exploring decentralizing some post-award approvals, and is developing
programs to address responsible conduct in research. The office is also working with UNC-P on developing a
comprehensive grant-writing workshop. Email Pam Whitlock if your faculty would like to attend the grant-
writing workshop. UNC-W is registered for the NCURA televideo series and anyone who wants to come to
UNC-W to attend is welcome.

Bob Johnson, ASU – ASU’s primary mission is teaching but research is incredibly important. The Research
Office enjoys a great working relationship with Business Services. Submissions and awards have increased, as
has the average dollar value of applications. ASU has rewritten its IRB procedures and are currently working on
their IACUC procedures. With the new Rankin Science Annex, the University will have a real animal facility.
ASU has launched a technology transfer effort including the creation of a task force to assess what’s happening
on a regional basis, and to learn how ASU can impact the region. The campus is preparing for the Technology
Transfer workshop (presented by UNC-OP), which is scheduled for April 1, 2003.

Bob Lowman, UNC-CH – UNC-CH is recruiting an Associate Vice Chancellor for Research, an Executive
Director of the Office of Research Services and a Director of Pre-award Services. The Executive Director
search is on hold until the Associate Vice Chancellor is hired. The Office of Technology and Development is
seeking a licensing manager. Mark Crowell, the director of OTAD, is moving into a position with
responsibility for economic development on Campus North. The Office of Research Services will eventually
move to campus north. Alison Rosenburg is the new federal relations person for UNC-CH. Bob Lowman
recently led a campus committee to develop an institutional policy for embryonic stem cell research, and they
are still dealing with the aftermath of PETA infiltration. Bob Lowman will be convening a new policy
committee, an ad hoc committee on data management and use. So many activities are collaborative or multi-
institutional now, the result is an increasing numbers of questions being raised about data use, sharing,
custodianship, retention and the rights of students and collaborators. Finally, UNC-CH is reorganizing its IRB
function (they have eight boards) and is looking to co-locate these groups. The Chancellor is seeking to have
the IRB programs accredited through AHARP.

Emilie Kane, ECU – In the last 18 months, there has been great reorganization at the top level. The Office of
Sponsored Programs is now in the Division of Research, Economic Development and Community Engagement.
Sponsored Programs now receives many calls from the chancellor asking for information about what ECU is
doing. ECU subscribes to the NCURA video satellite series and can accommodate others who want to
attend. ECU also received the SRA video on HIPAA and Confidentiality. Dr. Kane thought that Bob
Lowman’s presentation on HIPAA was much better than the one presented by SRA; however, the SRA
presentation on confidentiality was very good. ECU just contracted with DMG Maximus on a T/E system,
automated across all units. Tomorrow, Sponsored Programs will host a departmental administrator’s brown bag
lunch. There is increasing interest in developing a campus policy, and in better tracking of committed cost
sharing. The biggest challenge will be convincing leadership that there is a need for better management.
Clinical Trials office is still under reorganization as is the IRB.

John Stevens, UNC-A – John Stevens and Louis Toms are still in their first year in research administration. The
Office of Sponsored Scholarships and Programs has been focused on creating a change in the campus culture.
While the primary campus responsibility is teaching, good scholarship is the foundation for quality teaching.
The Office is emphasizing the importance and visibility of scholarship. In a few weeks, Bob Lowman will be
presenting a faculty grant-writing workshop. The Office has realized some initial successes in increased number
of awards, including an increase in dollar amount. UNC-A is exploring ways to raise the intellectual capitol at
the University and is developing partnerships through the creation of centers. Dr. Stevens shared information
with the group about the PARI facility (Pisgah Atmospheric Research Institute) and the recent discussions
around the proposed National Environmental Modeling and Analysis Center, which is a three-way collaboration
between the university, government and industry.

XI. North Carolina Space Initiative (Chris Brown)
Chris Brown opened his presentation with the question “Why is there room for growth in the UNC system to get
more NASA funding?” NASA funding has remained relatively flat, but its funding to universities has increased.
North Carolina ranks 21st in the nation in NASA funding, but could be receiving more funds. In North Carolina,
three universities in the system receive most of the NASA funding. Dr. Brown thinks that the capabilities and
strengths at other campuses are largely untapped.

The goal of the North Carolina Space Initiative (NCSI) is to establish networks to facilitate collaborative
projects. Multidisciplinary, multi-institutional efforts are a priority for NASA (across research, education and
outreach). Education is the new enterprise (strategic priority) within NASA. The focus on space-related
activities, which started at NCSU, can and should extend to other campuses. NCSI can help with proposal
development, development of a space seminar series, a senior fellows program, and a space research consortium
(with paying members).

Examples of current activities include:
      National Institute of Aerospace (NIA) – a partnership with Langley Air Force. Involves NC A&T and
      NCSU in addition to other collaborators across a five-state, southeast region.

        North Carolina Space Grant Consortium – an eight university collaborative that includes seven UNC
        campuses and Duke University. North Carolina is a phase II state. NCSI will pursue phase I funding in
        FY 03-04 and wants to expand to more affiliates in the eastern and western part of the state.
        Administration of this consortium may move to UNC-OP.

        NSCORT in Plant Gravitational Genomics (NCSU and WFU) – funding this year is under a federal
        earmark, thanks to the efforts of David Price and Bob Ethridge. If a project is working under a federal
        legislative “earmark”, quality research is key to maintaining agency interest and support. NASA is not
        particularly fond of “earmarks”.

        Oxygen Micro sensors for Space – NCSI wrote and is administering this grant through the Kenan
        Institute of Engineering, Science and Technology.

        Gravitational and Space Genomics Center of Excellence – wants to development something that would
        be sellable to NASA.

        Environmental Systems Commercial Space Technology Center – any technology that could be used for
        spaced station life support (TRL5 and beyond) and commercializing these technologies.

        International Space Station (ISS) Research - funded through a Non-governmental Organization
        Currently, North Carolina is not one of the partner universities, but NCSI is trying to position UNC to
        be a bigger player in this effort.

        Minority University and College Education and Research Partnership Initiative in Space Science
        (MUCERPI-2003) – partnerships between HBUs and other institutions.

        Pisgah Atmospheric Research Institute (PARA) – a joint effort between UNC-A, ASU, NCSSM and

        Action: Chris Brown will post his presentation to the SPARC homepage and will keep it updated.
        Check the website for current information on Space Initiative efforts.

XII. Master Agreements with State Agencies (Sarah Smith)
Sarah Smith has been working for almost a year with the UNC General Counsel and NC Deputy Attorney
General to develop the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) master agreement. Agencies like DPI still treat
the universities as vendors and use a procurement model. The priorities for this agreement were flow- through

of F&A, reduced administrative burden, and better information on awards. Having the UNC Master Agreement
as a model has helped considerably. NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) will be
the next agency targeted to adopt the UNC Master Agreement. Sarah Smith will start with the ideal for
Intellectual Property and the termination language. Ms. Smith is developing canned training materials for
distribution to faculty to prepare for Master Agreement implementation. The Task Order form for DENR is
undetermined, but will contain at a minimum the critical data elements featured in the DPI Task Order.

XIII. Beverly Maddox-Britt - IRB Procedures and Tracking (Beverly Mattox Britt)
UNC-G has a select set of college/departmental representatives that review Internal Review Board applications,
suggest revisions if necessary, recommend the type of review needed, sign the applications and forward them to
the Office of Research Services (ORS).

Once at ORS, the applications are logged into a database (Visual Basic database developed in-house). Then
ORS forwards the applications to the IRB Chair. The IRB Chair reviews the applications, suggestions revisions
if needed, determines the type of review and signs the application. The application is returned to ORS with
approvals for exempt or expedited actions, or with a request to copy and distribute for those applications
requiring full IRB review. ORS completes the necessary database entries and 1) sends the approved application
to the PI or 2) distributes the application for review at the next full IRB meeting.

The IRB meets monthly for full reviews, to review the report of applications that have been approved as exempt
or expedited, and to review renewal applications. The IRB also uses the meeting time to discuss emerging
issues, policies and trends in human subjects protections.

ORS sends renewal forms to all PIs with approved protocols three months prior to expiration. Reminders are
sent two months prior to expiration. If no renewal application is received, a final notice is sent one month prior
to expiration. Any protocols that are not renewed are terminated. Renewal applications are logged in and
routed in much the same manner as first time applications. See Beverly Maddox-Britt’s handout for the list of
database fields.

Russ Lea asked if they would be willing to share their database with other campuses that are looking for a tool
to help manage the IRB process. Dr. Maddox-Britt said that UNCG would share their database. Bob Lowman
commented that the national standard for IRB support is 1 FTE for every 300 actions.

XIV. NC Society of Research Administrators Recap 2003 (Linda Jackson)
NC Society of Research Administrators (NCSRA) has the opportunity to work more closely with the North
Carolina Community college System and K-12 community. The regional SRA meeting is a cost effective way
to get information to departmental administrators. Linda Jackson thanked Russ Lea for his continued support of

XV. Spring Host Site
UNC-Wilmington has agreed to host the 2004 spring SPARC meeting. Participants said that this time of year
(mid-March) works well for the spring meeting. Dr. Lea prefers the spring meeting to be controlled by the
campus hosting the event. The program can be designed with great flexibility, e.g. formal presentations,
discussions, focused workshops, or an in-depth look at current important topics. The SPARC membership is
responsible for developing the agenda for the spring SPARC meeting. UNC-Wilmington has agreed to host the
2004 spring SPARC meeting.

XVI. Closing (Bob Johnson) Dr. Johnson again thanked Jo Harris and all participants for coming to Boone.
Dr. Bob Lowman extended thanks to ASU for hosting an excellent meeting.


To top