Uniform Guidance(UG!)

University of New Hampshire

Uniform Guidance TeamJan Nisbet, Project Sponsor, Senior Vice Provost for Research

David Browning, Project Manager, Financial Research Administration, SPA

Jo Beth Dudley, Director of Finance and Administration, EOS

Vicki Escalera, Director of Internal Audit, USNH

Louise Griffin, Director of Administration, SVPR

Nancy Hamer, Director of Administration and Financial Services, AA

Karen Jensen, Manager, Research Administration, SPA

Carol Mitchell, Controller, USNH

Francine Ndayisaba, Accounting Manager, USNH

Lisa Pollard, Purchasing Manager, USNH

Kate Roberts, Director of Financial Services, CEPS

Kerry Scala, Finance Director, VPFA Office

Denise Smith, Director of Purchasing, USNH

Victor Sosa, Director, Sponsored Programs Administration

Scott Towle, Manager Cost Analysis, VPFA Office

What is Uniform Guidance

2 CFR 200

A-87

A-89

A-110

A-21A-133

A-102

A-50

A-122Uniform Guidance (UG) is a combined, simplified, version of 8 circulars.

Replaces Existing Circulars:

All included in 2 CFR 200

Applies to:

StatesNon-ProfitsTribal Nations

Effective Date: Guidance for Federal and Non-Federal Entities that applies to:

GrantsCo-op AgreementsContracts*

*Federal contracts follow the FAR, plus UG for cost principles.

December 2014

26

Institutions of Higher Ed (IHE)

Uniform Guidance Themes Making the most efficient use of federal funds

More flexibility in the direct cost category, as long as purchases meet the same direct cost standard (allowable, allocable and reasonable) and follow Internal Controls

Internal Controls references throughout the document; require clear roles and responsibilities; and monitoring to ensure compliance

Closeouts:

Not new BUT more pressure from agencies for 90 day close outs.

Subawards will need to close in 45 – 60 days

Only NSF has issued implementation guidelines, other agencies yet to weigh in

The Good, The Bad and the ???

What the guidance is and what (we think) it means

Much depends on the agency implementations, which with the exception of NSF, remain unknown.

Pre-Award – Good!!!

Standard Information Funding Opportunities need to include standard info – not a

change but good to know

Prescribed Elements Prescribed format, review criteria, cost share requirements,

due dates, deviations in standard terms and conditions, additional reports

60 Days Lead Time Generally, 60 days lead time for funding announcements,

unless shorter notice is specifically approved by agency head – minimum of 30 days lead time.

Pre-Award – Good!

Pre-Approved Terms & Conditions Agencies must use pre-approved terms and conditions, or

describe deviations at proposal stage

Approval of Exceptions Any exception to terms and conditions (e.g., limits on F&A)

must be approved by the agency head and posted on the OMB website

Tracking of Exceptions OMB will be tracking exceptions to policies, evaluating the

effectiveness of the UG through metrics

Subrecipient Monitoring – Do you want to hear the good news first?

F&A Improvement F&A rate agreement must be

honored if one exists

Subrecipient (e.g., foreign, small businesses, etc.) without a negotiated rate can get an automatic 10% MTDC F&A rate.

Increased burden for vendor vs. subrecipient classification

Prime recipient makes the determination between Subrecipient vs. Professional Services/Vendor and we need to document how we make the decision each time

Fixed Price Sub Awards Agency must grant prior approval for

issuing fixed price subawards New maximum limit for fixed price

subawards $150K Potentially more risk assessment

burden for OSP as audit threshold increases to $750K, time will tell

Subrecipient Monitoring ‐ +/‐

Fully documented risk assessment for each sub prior to issuance.

New obligation to be able to prove that UNH (the PI!) received and reviewed the subrecipient’s performance and financial reports

Cost Share – All Good!

Voluntary committed cost sharing is NOT expected, could be basis for exclusion (NSF)

Cost sharing requirements must be included in the funding announcement

Cost sharing may not be used as a factor in reviewing proposals or as merit criteria

Changes in F&A Cost Rulings - Good

Federal agencies are expected to honor negotiated F&A Rates• Class or single award exceptions only when

required by Federal statue or regulation, or approved by an agency head or delegate

• Exceptions must be reported to OMB• Policies, procedures and general decision

making criteria for making exceptions must be published

Participant Support Costs

Must be excluded from F&A (similar to NSF Model)

Award Notices – Good!All federal awards must include clear terms and conditions (for the entire award period), including:

• Reporting requirements• Format• Due Date• Any deviations from agency policy

Provide a basis for objecting when agency layers on additional requirements (e.g., prior approvals, reporting) during the life of an award

Award Terms – More Good!

Recognition that technology allows a PI to be away from campus and still be engaged in the project

“Disengagement” from the project for more than three months, rather than “absence” from the project.

WORKING OFF-SITE

Document Retention - Good!200.335 – Electronic Record states that there is no need to create a paper record for a record that was originally electronic and cannot be altered

May convert paper to electronic, provided the records are:1. Subject to periodic quality control

reviews2. Provide reasonable safeguards against

alteration, and3. Remain Readable

Still a conflict between UG and FAR which states that paper records must be kept for a year after paper records are converted to an electronic form.

.pdf

Direct Costs – Good!Publication Costs (Page Charges)

Page charges are still allowable costs after award end date but before closeout (in essence, adoption of the NSF model); costs must be consistently charged as a direct cost.

Admin and Clerical Salaries

Eliminated “major project” reference

May be direct charged when services provided are:

Integral to the award

Specifically identified with the activity

Included in the budget or have prior written approval of the Federal Agency

Computing Devices

Considered supply costs (if it’s under $5K); can be charged as a direct cost when devices are “essential and allocable to a project”, but not “solely dedicated” to the performance of the award; need standards for documentation

Other Cost Items

Conference Costs

Requires conference hosts to exercise discretion and judgment to ensure that conference costs are appropriate, necessary and managed in a way that minimizes cost to the federal award (remember the notion of waste and abuse)

‘As needed, the costs of identifying, but not providing, locally available dependent-care resources are allowable’

Recruitment Costs

Clarification is made that now allows short term travel visas (but not longer term immigration visas)

Travel Costs

Temporary dependent care costs above and beyond regular dependent care that directly results from travel to conferences, is allowable provided:

Cost is direct result of individual’s travel for the federal award,

Cost is consistent with non-federal entity’s travel policy for all travel (not just sponsored), and

Cost is only temporary during the travel periodUniversity travel policies will be evaluated for

current and future practices, as the Uniform Guidance requires consistent treatment between federally funded programs and non-federal programs.

Time & Effort Reporting

Strengthening of Internal Controls

Examples that used to be provided have now been removed.

These prior examples had been interpreted by auditors to be the prescription

The term ‘Effort Reports’ is no longer explicitly mentioned

Note: While the prescriptive language has changed, and examples removed, there is still a strong focus on accountability and internal controls regarding compensation on federal awards. UNH will review the guidance carefully and evaluate current and future processes for effort reporting.

Purchasing – Some challenges

All procurement between the micro-purchase level ($3K) and the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($150K) must be competitive – how will we implement?

We do have some time – non federal entities will be given up to one full fiscal year after the effective date of the Uniform Guidance – for UNH – July 1, 2016.

Also stresses Small and Minority Owned Business Issues

Internal Controls – More Scrutiny

Requires us to have strong, internal controls.

Council on Financial Assistance Reform (COFAR) offers the following source documents to be used as best practice, but are not prescriptively required

“Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” (Green Book) issued by the Comptroller General.

“Internal Control Framework” issued by the Committee on Sponsoring Organizations (COSO)

Could lead to: Stronger audit scrutiny

and emphasis on documentation!

Expect efforts to limit cost transfers and late salary transfers.

Spending at the End of Award – More Scrutiny

No more than $5K in materials remaining at the end of the grant

Implies closer scrutiny on overall spending in the last few months of the award – may need closer financial monitoring

Performance Reporting

Continued pressure from agencies to relate research progress to financial information and other “data” (e.g., number of students, publications, patents)

Guidance provides for research sponsors to use standard Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) format – depends on agency implementation (NSF is on board!)

Financial Reporting – Didn’t see this coming

New certification for financial reports – statutory penalties for false certifications

I certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that the report is true, complete, and accurate and the expenditures, disbursements and cash receipts are for the purposes and objectives set forth in the terms and conditions of the Federal award. I am aware that any false, fictitious, or fraudulent information, or the omission of any material fact, may subject me to criminal, civil or administrative penalties for fraud, false statements, false claims or otherwise.

Closeouts – More Pressure on 90 Days

No change in federal requirements, but agencies are becoming more stringent

All reports are due “no later than 90 calendar days after the end date of the period of performance”

Why? Pressure on agencies – memo from OMB July

2012 New sub-accounting – NSF, NIH, others to

come No cash draws on awards after 90 days,

except in exceptional cases, as approved by the agency

Applies to all reports – PIs get ready Focus on more timely financial review

Top Issues To Be Aware Of

1.Many good things in the UG2.Still waiting for agencies to weigh in3.Documenting and monitoring internal controls –

where we have gaps4.Price competition is key5.Closeouts – in 90 days, for real!

Next Steps

• Working group is continuing to determine full implications and impact of UG

• Web page has been developed and updates will be posted• http://www.unh.edu/research/2-cfr-200-uniform-guidance

• Training for the UNH community• Timing is an issue – dependent on agency implementations

• Communicating• Ideas?