# Presentation: 301133

## NIH Electronic Research Administration:

-  Commons Working Group

## Today

**Define the eRA objective**
**Frame events that go us here**
**Discuss how you can contribute**
**Frame options and issues**
**Seek input for future directions**
**Address your issues and concerns**
**  **

##  eRA Objective:	

**Convert the NIH application, initial peer review, secondary council review, award and post award administrative process from a paper to an electronic medium.**
**Integrate eRA NIH with the Federal Commons**

## What’s Involved

**~ 200 million pieces of paper**
**~ 46,000 new or competing applications**
**Operate 3,166 study section meetings **
**Support the 80 Council meetings **
**~ 60,000  Grant Awards **
**Historical records 1973 to present **
**Reports and trend analysis **

## eRA = Three Systems 

**IMPAC II – 1996**
**   ****IMPAC I (legacy) - 1964**_**[ ](file:///../../../TEMP/Click%20To%20Preview)**_
**Commons - 1996**
**Federal Commons - 1999**

## eRA Objective:Full Electronic Grants Administration 

**eRA Objective:****Full Electronic Grants Administration **

## How to Manage the Beast ?

**How to Manage the Beast ?**

## What Changed in FY 2000:

**Evaluate the status of eRA**

## Stress in any development

**Cost**

**Technical**

**Schedule**

**Stress in any development**

## Impact of under funding

**Technical**

**Schedule**

**Impact of under funding**

## eRA Objective:Full Electronic Grants Administration 

**eRA Objective:****Full Electronic Grants Administration **

## eRA Objective Not Achieved - Yet

**eRA Objective Not Achieved - Yet**

## Peer Review of the Commons

**Not financed sufficiently to meet objectives**
**Development Work Stopped**
**Competitive Grant Application Process (CGAP)**
**Complex Non-Competing Award Process (CNAP)**
**Fellowships **
**Redesign E-SNAP with new business practices:**
**Changes in policy and in design**
**Focus efforts on:**
**Integration with IMPAC II**
**E-SNAP, X-Train, 194 data set transmission**
**Communications-outreach**

## Slide 14

## Key Facts for FY 2000:

**$ 13.826 million was made available for IMPAC I, IMPAC II, and the Commons**
**Only ~$ 0.7 million was available for application development**
**$ 13.126 million was for maintenance and operations.**
**This summer almost all funds that had been available for application development were redirected to keep I-Edison and CRISP on the WEB operating.**

## What Changed in FY 2000:

**Evaluate the status of eRA**
**New structure established for the project:**

##  Project Management Team 

**TPC Advocate**
**Wally Schaffer**

** ****Project Management Team **

**Project Manager**
**John McGowan**

**CMO Advocate**
**Claire Benfer**

**GMAC Advocate**
**Marcia Hahn**

**ECB Advocate**
**Thor Fjellstedt**

**RPC Advocate**
**Eileen Bradley**

**CIT liaison & IC Tech Advocate**
**Donna Frahm **

**PI Advocate**

**POPOF/Program Advocate**
**Christopher Beisel**

**Research Institution Advocate**
**George Stone**

**Reports Advocate**
**Carol Martin**

**Daily Operations Manager**
**Jim Cain**

**IT Design/Arch. Advocate**
**Donna Frahm**

**Data Integrity**
**Belinda Seto**

**Receipt and Referral**
**Brent Stanfield**

**FDC/ROW Liaison**
**Jay Silverman**

**OER Liaisons**

## What Do We Hope To Have?

**Clear Individual:**
**Responsible for priority setting with their groups**
**Planning**
**Implementation**
**Monitoring Progress**
**Makes decisions and recommendations for the design based on group input**
**Group and Process to:**
**Establish budgets and needs**
**Project future directions**
**Allow time for business/policy redesign and the communication needed at the design stage to integrate with other systems (IC, NBS, Institutions, Fed Commons) and their processes.**
**Design and implement projects with business plans using the funds made available with target milestones.**

## What Changed in FY 2000:

**Evaluate the status of eRA**
**New structure established for the project:**
**Functional Groups – Group Advocate**
**Project Team – Project Manager**
**Steering Committee – Chair - IC Director**
**Board of Governors – Chair **
**CIO - NIH Director**
**Established Priorities for FY 2001**

## Straw-man for Developing Priorities

**Straw-man for Developing Priorities**

## Sample Criteria 

## Advocates Took the Job Seriously 

**Cornell**
**Dartmouth**
**Emory**
**Florida**
**Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center**
**Michigan**
**MIT**
**North Carolina State**
**Northwestern**
**Penn State**
**St. Jude**
**Wisconsin**

## Priorities Identified by Each Group

## Priorities from the Project Team

## Development of Business Plans

**Development of Business Plans**

## Next Version of the Commons

**Priority #     Title                                                              Total           Commons **
**                                                                                              ****Cost             Cost**

**Next Version of the Commons**

**Total Cost For FY 01 ---- 6,191,860.00**

## Results

**Match expectations with reality**
**Involvement of all communities in the process**
**A clear set of needs and objectives that could be communicated openly**
**Credible business plans with budgets**
**Improved funding for the project**

## Next Steps  

**Continue to map expectations with reality**
**Implement the FY 2001 plans**
**Establish priorities & plans for the FY 2002 **

## Phase In Growth Process

**Phase In Growth Process**

- $5M

- $10M

- $15M

- $20M

- Dec ‘00

- June ‘01

- Feb ‘01

- Oct ‘01

- Apr ‘01

- Annual Budget

- Aug ‘01

- Dec ‘01

- 31 FTEs

- Approx. 100 FTEs

- FTEs

**31**

**Contract Staff**

**~ 100**

**Full time recruiter – goal 4 individuals –month**
**Facilities on site to accommodate growth**
**Re-organized to meet the project needs**
**Already 6 new people added**

- Annual Budget

## Next Steps  Map expectations with reality

**A year to ramp up resources to the project**
**New people – advisory, contract, staff**
** ****general knowledge of process**
** ****orient them to the project**
**Integrate into management structure**
**Increased oversight and management support to facilitate and monitor the project**
**New architecture and design being established**

## Resources Being Implemented

**New Office of Planning and Evaluation for eRA within the Division**
**Newsletters-Website-Outreach**
**4-7 Contract Staff who will:**
**Facilitate your functional group meetings**
**Help you build consensus and bring issues to closure for priorities or design**
**Document actions **
**Monitor progress versus established goals**
**Develop reports and documentation**

## Web FormsCurrent 2 Tier Structure

**Web Forms****Current 2 Tier Structure**

**Transaction**
**Manager**

**Relational  Database**

**Forms execute here!**
**PL/SQL**

## ObjectsNew 3 Tier Structure

**Objects****New 3 Tier Structure**

**Transaction manager**
**Presentation Manager**
**Session Manager**
**Server Administration**
**Messaging Server**
**Java Server Engine**
**Object oriented business objects**

**Application Tier**

**Relational Database**

**Middle Tier**

## Next Steps Implement FY 2001 Plans Current Commons Interface:

**Maintain production systems**
** ****I-edison -    ~290 organizations **
**Life-cycle redesign **
**CRISP -  ~30,000 queries a week**
**Improve data quality**
**Keep other existing interfaces **
**No enhancements or modifications**
**Focus on refining the requirements and redesign with new technology**
**Get feedback from the Commons Working Group**

## Straw man for Discussion

**Registration**
**Limit to current institutions**
**Accounts Administration**
**Status – ****Application or Award**
**Summary Statement retrieval in the status to be completed**
**Profiles**
**Institutional**
**Individual –professional profile**
**X-Train**
**E-Snap**
**Obtain feedback from 2 schools with heavy use of the impact of discontinuing until a more robust and integrated module provided in version 2 of the Commons.**

## Rebuild TechnologyStart with Experienced or New

**Rebuild Technology****Start with Experienced or New**

**Registration**
**Accounts Administration**
**Status – ****Application or Award**
**Profiles**
**Institutional**
**Individual**
**X-Train**
**E-Snap**

**Competing Application**
**R01**
**Fellowships**
**Career**
**Complex Mechanisms**** **
**Federal Commons**

## Next Steps Priorities & Plans for the FY 2002 

**Capitalize on previous investment**
**Competing grant applications**
**Business process associated with grant applications**
**Education materials and web tutorials**
**Interface technology options**
**Integrate functionality with the Federal Commons**
**Other-(Prototypes)**

## What Changed in FY 2000:

**Evaluate the status of eRA**
**New structure established for the project:**
**Functional Groups – Group Advocate**
**Project Team – Project Manager**
**Steering Committee – Chair - IC Director**
**Board of Governors – Chair **
**CIO - NIH Director**
**Established Priorities for FY 2001**
**Piloted a new planning and priority setting process **
**New outreach effort initiated**

## Coming October First

## Coming October First

## Role of the Working Group

**Prioritization of user requirements:**
**What changes should be made in functionality of existing Commons interfaces?**
**What should priorities be for the next phase of Commons development? **
**Outreach:**
**What role should the Working Group play in coordinating deployment of Commons interfaces?**
**How should the Working Group coordinate with other professional organizations: FDP/NCURA/SRA/COGR?**
**How should the Working Group interface with third party vendors?**
**Responding to action items:**
**Should the Working Group establish an infrastructure to address/respond to specific issues?**

## It’s a work in progress!!

***It’s a work in progress!!***

**Please provide feedback**