Source: https://www.pepperdine.edu/academics/rsp/policies/
Timestamp: 2020-06-05 10:42:27
Document Index: 9676654

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 200', '§200', '§200', '§200', '§200', '§ 200', '§ 200', '§200', 'art 200', '§200']

Policies, Guidelines, and Recommendations | Pepperdine University
Policies, Guidelines, and Recommendations
RSP Contact Information
The Office of Research and Sponsored Programs (RSP) provides Pepperdine University principal investigators with guidance and information concerning research policies and procedures to support their pursuit and management of external funds for sponsored projects.
A sponsored project is an externally funded, restricted project or activity originated and conducted by faculty, and in some cases staff, with a defined scope of work that provides a basis for accountability and sponsor expectations. In most, if not all cases, a sponsored project is awarded by the sponsor through a Notice of Award document which specifies the terms and conditions of the award.
Eligibility to Submit Proposal for External Support
In order to ensure that research is conducted by those who have the requisite training and education, as well as an appropriate relationship with the University, the University generally will only support proposals for projects that are already in progress when the PI holds an appointment by the University as an assistant professor, associate professor, professor, and/or distinguished professor, or is a full-time staff member of the University. Other members of the University community must obtain an exemption to University policy in order to serve as a PI. Exemptions require the special approval of the Provost, Vice Provost, and the Dean of the relevant school.
To facilitate the exemption review and approval process, the proposed PI must submit a photocopy of the AUTHORIZATION FOR EXTERNAL FUNDING FORM, the abstract, his/her curriculum vitae (CV), and a completed PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR ELIGIBILITY FORM, signed by the proposed PI's department chairperson.
RSP will not submit a grant application or, as in some instances, request transfer of an award from another institution to the University, until an exemption request is approved by those mentioned above.
For further information regarding eligibility, please contact RSP.
Routing - Authorized Signatures/Approvals
The PI must allow adequate time prior to submission for RSP's review and preparation of application materials. Accordingly, RSP must receive all finalized materials at least one (1) calendar week prior to the sponsor's deadline. For example, if a proposal is due on a Wednesday, RSP must receive the finalized application package by the previous Wednesday. Upon receipt of the final application package, RSP will conduct necessary compliance checks and route the proposal for approval and subsequent submission. Materials received after the internal administrative deadline will not be submitted for consideration.
Before a proposal may be submitted for any sponsored project, the Principal Investigator (PI), working in conjunction with RSP, must obtain authorization through RSP's routing system. Authorizations for proposals submitted through RSP are required from the PI, and generally include the Department Chairperson (if applicable), the Dean or Director of the School, the Major Area Budget Manager, the Assistant Provost for Research, the Vice Provost, and the Provost.
Before an award may be accepted for any sponsored project, the Principal Investigator (PI), working in conjunction with RSP, must complete, sign and obtain all other required authorizing signatures on the AUTHORIZATION FOR EXTERNAL FUNDING form. Authorizations for awards submitted through RSP are required from the PI, and generally include the Department Chairperson (if applicable), the Dean or Director of the School, the Major Area Budget Manager, the Assistant Provost for Research, the Vice Provost, and the Provost.
Policies on Conflict of Interest in Research
In accordance with Federal regulations, Pepperdine University has a responsibility to manage, reduce, or eliminate any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may be presented by a financial interest of an investigator. Thus, investigators must disclose any significant financial interest that may reasonably appear to be affected by sponsored projects. Investigators must fully disclose any significant financial interest before the proposal is submitted. Pepperdine also requires disclosure of any family relationship between investigators and persons working with them on sponsored projects.
As of August 2012, new Public Health Service (PHS) regulations require that all PHS-funded investigators (including those funded through the NIH and CDC) file a disclosure—even if it Is a negative report—with each grant proposal, and annually for the life of the grant. The process is as follows:
1. If you are funded by or applying to a PHS sponsor, please see the Policy on PHS/NIH Conflict of Interest in Research; or
If you are funded by or applying to any other sponsor than PHS, please see the Policy on Conflict of Interest in Research; and
2. Complete the Financial Interest Disclosure Form; and
3. Return the form to the RSP (TAC Room 336).
All conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest must be resolved before any awarded funds can be spent. Pepperdine University's Institutional Official (see definition within policies) may require a written plan for resolving conflicts.
If a new significant financial interest arises at any time during the period after the submission of the proposal through the period of the award, that interest must be disclosed.
"Investigator" means the principal investigator/project director, co-principal investigators, and any other person at the University who is responsible for the design, conduct, or reporting of research, educational, or service activities funded, or proposed for funding, by an external sponsor. In this context, the term investigator includes the investigator's spouse or domestic partner and dependent children.
Equity interests (e.g., stocks, stock options or other ownership interests); and
Salary, royalties, or other remuneration from Pepperdine University;
An equity interest that when aggregated for the Investigator and the Investigator's spouse or domestic partner and dependent children, meets both of the following tests:
does not exceed $5,000 in value as determined through reference to public prices or other reasonable measures of fair market value; and
does not represent more than a five percent ownership interest in any single entity;
Salary, royalties or other payments that when aggregated for the Investigator and the Investigator's spouse or domestic partner and dependent children over the next twelve months, are not expected to exceed $5,000;
Income from seminars, lectures, or teaching engagements sponsored by public or nonprofit entities; and
This section directly addresses the eligibility of faculty with nine-month appointments to receive fourth quarter salary, often known as summer salary or summer ninths.
Several years ago, federal auditors discovered that many PIs who received a total of three (3) summer months of salary from federal sources did not devote 100% effort during those three (3) months to the grant-funded projects. In other words, salary expenditures were being charged to grants when individuals did not work, or salary was being charged in excess of the time spent on the project. Consequently, a number of large fines were threatened or levied against leading research institutions.
The audit also revealed that PIs had charged non-related activities to sponsored projects. These activities included, but were not limited to: proposal writing, committee or administrative work, teaching, university service, and vacations. It is important to remember that only activities directly related to the research projects, such as conducting research, writing progress reports, attending research-related conferences, and or/holding research meetings can be charged to a sponsored project. Also of concern, auditors found salary inappropriately charged in the summer when work was actually performed during the academic year. In response to these findings, a number of leading research institutions have now limited faculty to receiving two or two-and-a-half (2-2.5) summer ninths from federal sources. As of January 1, 2009, the National Science Foundation (NSF) unveiled a significant revision to its salary reimbursement policy, limiting compensation of project personnel to two (2) months of their regular salary paid from NSF grants during a calendar year.
University faculty compensated for nine-month academic appointments may charge up to two-and-a-half (2.5) months of summer salary on sponsored projects, subject to allowability per the relevant agency. University faculty compensated for eleven-month academic appointments may charge up to one (1) month or 1/11 of the employee's base salary as summer salary on sponsored projects, subject to allowability per the relevant agency. For further information, please contact the Dean and Major Area Budget Manager of your school.
PIs are generally expected to be at the University for the period for which support is sought unless their research requires specific off-campus responsibilities.
If a faculty member already has administrative or other non-research related responsibilities during the summer period, they will be precluded from devoting 100% effort to sponsored projects, and thus from requesting up to two-and-a-half (2.5) months of salary from those projects. Instead, they may capture a percentage of time that accurately reflects the work they will perform on the project.
An exception to exceed the 2.5 months of summer salary on sponsored projects will require a completed REQUEST TO CHARGE OVER 2.5 MONTHS SUMMER SALARY TO SPONSORED PROJECTS FORM from the PI, which indicates the full extent of the effort during the summer period. The request will then require the approval of the faculty member's Division/Department Chairperson, Dean, and the Vice Provost. In rare circumstances, University faculty compensated for eleven-month academic appointments may be eligible for up to one month of summer salary subject to University approval and relevant agency allowability. The request would require the approval of the faculty member's Division/Department Chairperson, Dean, and the Vice Provost for Research and Strategic Initiatives.
For a copy of the REQUEST TO CHARGE OVER 2.5 MONTHS SUMMER SALARY TO SPONSORED PROJECTS FORM, please contact RSP's Compliance Monitoring Officer.
Non-sponsored funds, such as internal support from the University, may also be used to cover salary for any portion of the summer salary, including the remaining 0.5 month not allowed on sponsored projects.
During the performance of the project, the PI may realize that modifications to the budget are necessary. Many sponsors are flexible with respect to how project funds are expended, and generally allow budget changes that are necessary to carry out the project. PIs must know the specific requirements for their awards and, if necessary, request prior approval for budget modifications. Rebudgeting to include vertebrate animal care costs or human subject costs is not permitted without prior IACUC or IRB approval. The RSP Compliance Monitoring Officer is available via telephone at (310) 506-6996 to provide further information to PIs regarding any matters related to budget modifications.
RSP, with support from the Controller's Office, General Counsel's Office, and University Auditing, has implemented a Cost Transfer Policy, effective immediately. A cost transfer is a movement of costs associated with a transaction between two chartstrings (CFS), of which at least one must be a federally sponsored project. A Cost Transfer Justification Form will be used each and every time that charges need to be corrected BETWEEN federally sponsored projects. Charges will need to be corrected via a transfer FROM a federally sponsored project to another CFS, or changes need to be corrected via a transfer TO a federally sponsored project from another CFS.
Cost Sharing Policy Cost sharing refers to the expenditure of University or third-party resources beyond the amount funded by the sponsor to support the scope of work defined by a sponsored (federal or non-federal) award. Pepperdine strongly discourages cost sharing unless such a commitment is required by the sponsor because such commitments burden Pepperdine with financial and administrative responsibilities, while limiting the academic and programmatic flexibility that University resources are intended to provide. Cost sharing requires the maintenance of detailed records that are subject to audit and cost sharing has the potential to affect negotiated indirect cost recovery rates negatively. If a commitment of University resources is made in the project proposal it is considered committed cost sharing. All cost sharing commitments will be administered in accordance with this policy.
1) Mandatory: Refers to those costs which are either required by the terms of the award or by federal statute that the University must contribute toward the project in order for an award to be made.
2) Voluntary Committed: Any cost associated with a project, which has been identified in the proposal, but for which funding has not been requested from the sponsor. Some common examples include a percentage of effort for faculty included in a proposal budget or stated in the text of the proposal for which compensation is not requested or the purchase of equipment for the project, identified in the proposal, for which funds have not been requested.
3) Voluntary Uncommitted: Any cost associated with a project and not funded by the sponsor that has not been identified in the proposal or in any other communication to the sponsor as a commitment of the University. An example would be effort of faculty that is over and above that which is committed in a sponsored agreement. Academic year effort on a project for which only summer salary was proposed also would be considered uncommitted cost sharing if such effort was not listed either in the budget or in the body of the proposal.
4) In-kind/Matching: Refers to the requirement of some sponsored projects that grant funds be matched in some proportion with non-sponsored project funds, or that the grantee participate to some extent in the cost of the project. Matching requirements may be in the form of an actual cash expenditure of funds or may be an "in-kind" match, which is the value of non-cash contributions to the project.
With both mandatory and voluntary cost sharing, when an award is received in which the cost sharing was proposed, the cost sharing becomes a binding commitment that the University must provide as part of the performance of the sponsored project. Failure to properly record cost sharing may result in audit findings that may result in audit disallowances that have to be refunded to the appropriate sponsor and/or reduce Pepperdine's indirect cost rate (F&A) during future negotiations.
FEDERAL GUIDELINES ON COST SHARING
The tracking, reporting, and certification of direct cost sharing and matching are subject to audit to the same extent as other direct project costs.
Under 2 CFR § 200.306, the requirements for cost sharing on federal awards include that the costs:
_are verifiable from the non-Federal entity's records;
_are not included as contributions for any other federally-assisted project or program;
_are necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient accomplishment of project objectives;
_are allowable under Subpart E - Cost Principles of this part;
_are not paid by the federal government under another award, except where the Federal statute authorizing a program specifically provides the Federal funds be made available for such program can be applied to matching or cost sharing requirements of other Federal programs;
_are provided for in the approved budget when required by the Federal awarding agency; and
_conform to other provisions of the part, as applicable.
Please note that compliance with federal regulations and cost accounting standards requires that all cost-shared expenses be treated in a consistent and uniform manner in proposal preparation and in the financial accounting and reporting of these expenses to sponsors.
VOLUNTARY COMMITTED COST SHARING STRONGLY DISCOURAGED
University policy is to provide only the minimum amount of cost sharing necessary to meet sponsors' requirements and to strongly discourage voluntary committed cost sharing. Voluntary cost sharing is strongly discouraged as:
_Many federal agencies also discourage voluntary cost sharing as well. For example, NSF expressly prohibits inclusion of cost sharing, except when required by an NSF solicitation. For further information regarding NSF's policy, please see: www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/csfaqs_jan11.pdf
_Voluntary cost sharing increases the workload of departments and divisions and the University's resources because tracking the cost share requires setting up additional accounts. It also adversely affects the University's indirect cost recovery rate.
COMMON EXAMPLES OF COST SHARING
Examples of cost sharing include any University contributions in terms of personnel effort, associated employee benefit costs, other direct expenses, and the indirect cost rate (F&A) calculated on these expenses at the approved University indirect rate. If permitted by the sponsor, the University may also show as cost sharing the difference between indirect costs at the sponsor-limited rate and indirect costs at the University's negotiated rate. The University department or division to which such cost sharing will be charged must be specified prior to approval of the sponsored project budget.
Sponsored Project Extensions
The PI must plan and manage project work in an efficient manner such that the project will be finished within the timeframe and funds authorized. Despite a PI's best efforts, he/she must sometimes seek additional time to complete the project, with or without additional funds.
A no-cost extension is a request to extend the termination date of a project without any additional funds.
ALLOWABILITY OF NO-COST EXTENSION REQUESTS
Whether a no-cost extension will be permitted depends upon the sponsor. Some federal sponsors allow the institution to internally approve the extension, while other sponsors require that a formal request for additional time be submitted for their approval.
NO-COST EXTENSION EFFORT LEVEL
PIs must continue to devote the same level of effort as in the period preceding the extension, unless prior approval for the reduction has been received.
Relatedly, the carrying forward of funds that are unspent at the end of a multi-year project is dealt with differently by different sponsors.
NO-COST EXTENSION CONTACTS
For any questions, information, or assistance regarding the topics above, RSP should be consulted for the specific requirements of the award and the sponsor.
Reduction of Effort and/or Change of Principal Investigator
When a PI will be absent from a project for three (3) or more consecutive months or reduce effort by 25% or more, the PI must seek prior approval from the University and the sponsor. In the event of such and absence or effort reduction, the sponsor may require a change in the PI. PIs may also need to be added or removed from a project under other scenarios. Please contact RSP's Compliance Monitoring Officer via telephone at (310) 506-6996 for further information.
Sponsors' record retention requirements (usually three [3] years for federal sponsors) usually commence on the date that the last financial report is submitted to the sponsor. However, for certain sponsors (NSF for example), the record retention obligations continue until three years from the date that the PI submits the technical report. Notwithstanding sponsor record retention requirements, which vary from sponsor to sponsor, PIs must also review and conform to the University Record Management Policy and University Records Retention Schedule. For questions regarding record retention requirements, please contact the RSP Compliance Monitoring Officer, available via telephone at (310) 506-6996.
If a sponsor seeks an audit of an award, the sponsor or its designated representative must perform the audit or otherwise arrange for the audit to be conducted at its own expense. When an audit is sought, the PI must notify RSP immediately if the audit is not sought through RSP. The PI's notice to RSP should include information regarding when and how (i.e. through whom) the sponsor plans to conduct the audit. The PI must also provide to RSP reasonable assistance throughout the audit process. If costs charged to the audited sponsored project are disallowed in the course of the audit, those costs will be borne by the PI's department and/or school. RSP will coordinate with the department to prepare and submit a revised final invoice and/or Financial Status Report if required as the result of the audit.
Separate from any audit initiated by the sponsor, a certified public accounting firm performs an annual financial audit of the University's accounting records. The annual audit includes a review of sponsored project accounts funded by federal agencies or institutions, and a determination of the University's compliance with federal regulations. This audit is conducted in accordance with OMB Circular A-133: Audits of States, Local Governments, and Nonprofit Organizations and satisfies most federal audit requirements. RSP works closely with General Accounting, which serves as the University representative to coordinate this audit, to respond to all inquiries regarding University sponsored project accounts posed by the accounting firm during the course of the audit. However, the PI's department may be asked to assist with the audit as deemed necessary and appropriate.
Finally, in addition to the above-described audits, University Auditing Services may conduct internal audits or consults. When such audits or consults are conducted, departments may be called upon to participate in some manner. Internal audits or consults serve numerous purposes. More detailed information regarding these types of audits or consults is discussed at Section 15, entitled Auditing Services, of the University's Financial Policies.
Closeouts and Final Reporting Process
Preparation for the closeout of an award should begin immediately upon receiving the award. The PI must personally review the NOTICE OF AWARD MEMORANDUM, the accompanying agreement, and the budget to ensure accuracy and future compliance.
At a time before the termination date of the award, attention should be given to a complete review of the account in preparation for closeout. The review should involve the collaboration of the PI and his/her Major Area Budget Manager.
After completion of the award period, the PI will work with RSP and their budget manager to complete all closeout requirements on behalf of the sponsor and Pepperdine University.
Subrecipient/Subaward Policy
In accordance with UG Policy 2 CFR §200.331 - Requirements for pass-through entities (PTEs, [defined by §200.74]), PTEs are responsible for ensuring that subawards (as defined by §200.92) are clearly identified and financially monitored. In an effort to ensure best practices in the stewardship of federal funds, Pepperdine University will conduct reviews of subrecipients (as defined by §200.93) at both the pre- and post-award stages. Throughout the duration of the subaward, the PTE will be responsible for monitoring financial and programmatic activities not less than once per year, following the guidance and steps outlined below.
When serving as a PTE, Pepperdine University will issue a subrecipient commitment form that adheres to the guidance as described in § 200.331. Pepperdine University will also adhere to guidance stipulations outlined in § 200.324 . After the proposed subrecipient has submitted the subrecipient commitment form, all responses will be evaluated to determine risk before issuing a subaward agreement. In the event that risk cannot be mitigated (e.g., adverse audit findings, debarment, suspension, etc.), Pepperdine University reserves the right to refuse, modify, or, in the case of an existing agreement, terminate the agreement per the processes outlined in the subaward agreement. Pepperdine will conduct risk assessment throughout the life of the award to ensure that federal funds are used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the Federal award. Determinations will be made as to whether adjustments to the subaward agreement are necessary.
UG Policy 2 CFR §200.330, Subrecipient and contractor determinations requires that PTEs make classifications about those to whom Federal funds are administered by identifying them as a subrecipient or contractor. Case-by-case determinations are evaluated on the following criteria:
(A) Subrecipient(s):
Determines who is eligible to receive what Federal assistance;
Has its performance measured in relation to whether objectives of a Federal program were met;
In accordance with its agreement, uses the Federal funds to carry out a program for a public purpose specified in authorizing statute, as opposed to providing goods or services for the benefit of the pass-through entity.
Whereas, (A) Contactor(s):
Is not subject to compliance requirements of the Federal program as a result of the agreement, through similar requirements may apply for other reasons.
The University will administer a checklist for the PI to evaluate the project against these criteria. The Office of Research and Sponsored Programs will make the final determination upon receipt and evaluation of the subrecipient v. contractor checklist and may pursue clarification with the PI as needed.
In order to ensure that all necessary steps are completed, please reference the following checklist of what must occur when engaging in a subaward relationship:
· Confirm proposed collaboration necessitates a subrecipient relationship as opposed to a vendor or contractor agreement.
o Factors:
§ Whether the outside organization is conducting a defined portion of the programmatic aspects of a sponsored project first awarded to the University;
§ Whether the proposed services are uniquely designed in response to each project;
§ Whether the subrecipient would retain rights to intellectual property;
§ Whether the subrecipient participates in development and execution of the statement of work; and
§ Whether the subrecipient's results would be published.
· Potential subrecipient should then submit a proposal to the PI.
o It should include the following:
§ Budget;
§ Budget justification;
§ Scope of work;
§ Letter of commitment signed by an authorized representative of their institution; and
§ Any other documents required by the University or sponsor.
· This includes documentation demonstrating compliance with regulations such as those governing research with human or animal subjects and conflict of interest disclosures.
· The PI incorporates the above proposal information into their own proposal and submits the entire package to RSP.
· Proposal is then routed for Pepperdine University institutional review and once approved, submitted to the sponsor.
SUBAWARD APPROVAL STAGE
· Should the prime award be made, the PI determines when the subaward will be issued.
· RSP will then assess the subrecipient organizations' financial status and internal controls and will establish corresponding terms and conditions in the subrecipient agreement consistent with the level of perceived risk.
o This includes checking the online federal debarment list.
· If applicable, RSP will also collect Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) data from the potential subrecipient.
· RSP then prepares and negotiates the subaward agreement.
o Subrecipients are made aware of the regulations imposed upon them by written documentation.
o RSP will ensure that the subaward issued contains the required suspension and debarment certifications for subawards and will conduct periodic review for status changes.
· Upon receiving signature from the collaborating institution, RSP will route for institutional approval.
SUBAWARD MODIFICATIONS
· If a modification to a subaward is needed, sometimes due to changes affecting the prime award or due to the needs of the project during the subaward period of performance, RSP will assist the PI to determine whether approval is needed from the sponsor and to issue any required amendments.
o Modifications can include changes in:
§ Budgetary amounts;
§ Project dates; or
§ Terms of the agreement.
· All subawards must be monitored to ensure that the subrecipient complies with the terms of the prime agreement.
· Federal regulations for subrecipient monitoring are found in Part 200- Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, under Subrecipient Monitoring and Management, §200.330 – 332.
· PIs have the primary responsibility for monitoring subrecipients to ensure compliance with federal, state, or local regulations and with the terms of the prime award agreement and subaward agreement.
o This includes:
§ Periodic review (at least quarterly) of all expenditures;
§ Confirmation that all subaward costs are reasonable and allowable;
§ Endorsement that invoices have:
· been submitted timely;
· been dated;
· included pertinent information describing the services reflected by billings and periods of performance; and
· been signed by an authorized subrecipient contact person confirming that the charges billed are allowable.
· Before invoices can be processed, the PI's approval and signature are also required.
o The PI's signature on the invoice attests that the work being performed has been reviewed and is in accordance with the scope of work and that the invoice adheres to the budget.
· PIs are also responsible for receipt and review of performance reports or other deliverables and review of expenses in light of the budget.
· If necessary, PIs will also perform on-site review as required by the specific award in order to monitor subawardee compliance, and to follow-up on audit and other reports.
Capital Equipment Administration Policy
The following are property management standards for capital equipment assets (an article of nonexpendable, tangible personal property having a useful life of more than one year with an acquisition cost or fair market value of $5,000 or more) acquired with federally-sponsored funds:
A. Careful screening should take place before purchasing property and equipment to ensure it is needed. Careful screening may include the following elements and procedures:
Consider whether existing equipment already owned can meet identified needs; and
Consider the purchase based on the cost of the proposed equipment and/or the size of the grant recipient.
B. Capital equipment asset records in Pepperdine University's Office of Research and Sponsored Programs will include the following:
Description of the property/equipment (including make and model);
Manufacturer's serial number or other identification number;
Vendor/source of the property;
Whether the title settles with the recipient or the Federal Government;
Cost of the item;
Percentage of Federal participation in the cost of the item;
Location of the property/equipment;
Maintenance procedures implemented to keep the equipment in good condition;
Condition of the property/equipment as of the date the information is reported; and
If applicable, the disposition data and sale price.
Note: If a grantee is authorized or required to sell the property/equipment, proper sales procedures must be established to ensure the highest possible return.
C. Equipment owned by the Federal Government is identified to indicate Federal ownership in the award document.
D. In most situations, when discretionary grant funds are used to acquire equipment and nonexpendable personal property, title vests with the organization, subject to obligations and conditions provided by the federal funding agency.
Award recipients and subrecipients should use the equipment in the program or project for which it was acquired as long as needed, whether or not the program or project continued to be funded by Federal funds.
When no longer needed for the original project or program, the grantee must use the property in connection with its other federally sponsored activities in the following order of priority:
i. Other projects of the awarding agency needing the property
ii. Projects of other Federal agencies needing the property
E. Per Federal requirements, a physical inventory of the property/equipment must be taken and the results reconciled with the property/equipment records at least once every two years.
This includes a verification of the existence, current utilization, and continued need for reach item.
Any difference between physical inspection and accounting records will be pursued to determine the cause of the difference.
Pepperdine University must promptly and properly investigate and fully document any loss, damage, or theft of nonexpendable property.
TAC 336
310.506.4819