Post COBRE and INBRE Post COBRE and INBRE Funding: Best Practices to Funding: Best Practices to Sustain Critical ResourcesSustain Critical Resources
4th Northeast Regional MeetingAugust 10-12, 2011Salve Regina UniversityNewport, Rhode Island
2
Tim HunterUniversity of VermontCore Director VGN Microarray FacilityCore Director, VCC DNA Analysis FacilityCore Director, Advanced Genome Technologies Core (AGTC)Asst Director, Translational Technologies Unit, CCTS
What We Have Learned: Common Issues Some NCRR-funded cores are isolated:
No easy access to medical schools (ID) Sometimes difficult to hire specialized staff Some cores want to do outreach but don’t know how Information does not get to them, need a central place
Most were not aware of the opportunities for networking in the “Core Community”
Very few attendees are aware of federal regulations regarding core fees structure – where is the information?
Most had never developed chargebacks or a business plan to sustain critical core activities beyond NCRR funding.
No formal standards on how core charge back should be implemented.
Need for a workshop on core management (Best Practices)?
Why Implement Best Practices Transparency
Increase Visibility of Core
Establish and maintain High Quality ServicesProfessional DevelopmentBenchmarking (www.abrf.org)
Promotes User confidence, Education, and AwarenessOpen Houses, Workshops, and TutorialsUser Oversight
SustainabilitySustaining technologies/services crucial to Research Institute
Best Practices: Short List
Developing a Business Plan
Developing a full cost recovery Budget Evaluate Impact of Core Facility on
Research Competiveness
Marketing/Customer Relations (Steve,
Jim, Jackie)
Best Practices: Longer List
3-5 Year Business PlanDeveloping full cost recovery Budget , regardless of subsidiesMake sure technologies/services are congruent with the organization’s mission and vision. Financial benchmarking: internal and externalAccess/ Utilization (user friendly)Technical benchmarking: internal and externalEducational outreach: internal and externalImpact and Outcomes (tracking)Local and Global Oversight:Communication and promotion
Developing a Business Plan Clear Mission
Organizational Structure Inventory of resources
Maintenance plans Operational Plan
Staffing, delivery of services (QC,QA, user relations), LIMS Marketing Plan Financial Planning Technology Assessment 3-5 Year outlook of future needs
Technology Assessment, Financials
Web Resources: Business Planning OMB Circular A-21 Basics:http://www.aucd.org/docs/urc/A21basics.pdf
OMB Circular A-21 Cost Principles for Educational Institutions http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/circulars/a021/a21_2004.pdf
Business Plan for a Startup Business: Including narratives and several financial worksheets( from SCORE):
http://www.careerramblings.com/pdf/cr_business_plan.pdf (Request for comments on) FAQs to Explain Costing Issues for Core
Facilities:http://cancer.osu.edu/research/cancerresearch/sharedresources/Documents/NIH
%20-%20Core%20Facilities%20FAQs.pdf SCORE: Free Small Business Advice, How-to-Resources, tools:http://www.score.org/
All Posted on NICL website
Developing a full cost recovery Budget
“The Crash Course”
Developing a full cost recovery Budget Project Utilization
Define service/billable units % Effort of each staff dedicated to delivery Determine true cost of service (Direct)
Service contract, consumables, reagents Indirect Cost
Administration, consulting, space costs, communications Instrument Depreciation Fully loaded chargeback
Applying Dept, center, college subsidies
Must be Circular A-21 Compliant
Direct vs. Indirect (F + A)
Direct Costs – can be identified specifically with delivery of a particular service/technology. i.e., labor, operating supplies and materials, service contracts, depreciation on non-federally purchased equipment.
Indirect Costs – Costs that are incurred for common or joint objectives and cannot be readily identified to a specific service/technology. i.e., space, administration, travel, communications (phone, copier), deficit recovery
Developing a full cost recovery Budget Service
Utilization
Define Service
Annual Survey Email solicitation History
i.e., Fragment Analysis Billable Unit: Injection Std and Titration
provided
Developing a full cost recovery Budget Determine % direct efforts for each staff
Developing a full cost recovery Budget
Service cost analysis (S)
Direct (S+L) cost for delivery of defined service
Developing a full cost recovery Budget
Direct
Core Operating Principles: Best Practices in determining chargebacks The costs of providing service are allowable,
allocable, consistently applied and reasonable.
The rates are established to recover these are documented and systematically evaluated against actual cost and revised on a regular basis to reflect actual costs (A-21 J.47)
These rates are charged to all users on a consistent basis, regardless of funding source(s) and employing a principle of “one service, one rate”.
Evaluating Impact of Core Facility on Research Competitiveness: Essential Metrics Kinds of services provided
Staffing Grant proposals and (by PI, dates of submission
or funding, title, and agency) Funded grants that used data from the facility. List of publications that used data from the
facility. Numbers of completed projects for internal
faculty and students sortedby college or school (the units of a project will vary by facility)
Numbers of clients outside Institute, if any
Essential Metrics Budget Information Financial benchmarking: internal and external Access/ Utilization Technical benchmarking: internal and external Educational outreach: internal and external Impact and Outcomes Local and Global Oversight: Communication and promotion Professional Development (Expertise)
Funding Landscape Post COBRE
Movement of IDeA States Programs to NIGMS
19
?????? Lots of Lingering Questions ??????
NIH/NCRR Meetings on Efficient Core ManagementThe Efficient Management and Utilization of Core Facilities
July 14 – 15, 2009
managing core facilities issues of cost efficiency,
management and access
finding and accessing core
facilities government policies
governing managing and reporting
training core directors
quality improvement
Moving Forward in the Efficient Management and Use of Core Facilities
November 15 – 16, 2010 updates on maximizing the use and efficiency of existing NIH-funded research core facilities
developing effective training programs for core facility directors
exploring software options for enhancing administrative management of core facilities
creating a national registry of core resources
standardizing compliance with OMB Circular A21
NISBRE 2012:What workshops or presentations would be of greatest value to the NICL community?