A “person month” is the metric for expressing the effort (amount of time) principal investigators (PIs), faculty and other senior personnel devote to a specific project. The effort is based on the type of appointment of the individual with the organization; e.g., calendar year (CY), academic year (AY), and/or summer term (SM); and the organization’s definition of such. For instance, some institutions define the academic year as a 9-month appointment while others define it as a 10-month appointment.
Conversion of percentage of effort to person months is straight-forward
To withdraw an application after it has been validated by eRA Commons and moved on to the Center for Scientific Review, there are two ways you can request the withdrawal.
A new eRA Commons feature allows the withdrawal electronically through the Prior Approval tab in eRA Commons. This action can be initiated by a principal investigator (PI) or Signing Official (SO), but can only be submitted by the SO. The request can be internally routed in Commons between the SO and PI for review before submission. (Read the
New enhancements have been added to the detailed Status Information screen in the March 30 software release. The detailed Status Information screen, accessible by Signing Officials (SOs) and Principal Investigators (PIs), is the information screen for every successfully submitted grant application and every grant award. In the Other Relevant Documents section, you have quick access to important forms, documents, and reports. Administrative Supplements and Relinquishing Statements that have been submitted can also be accessed by clicking on the appropriate link. These links open
In exciting news, starting on April 1st, the process to request an exception to the University Area 5 Day Submission Policy will be changed. Instead of email, all requests will be submitted through a simple online form. No further action is required after submitting the form.
The form is available directly from the OSP website or by
The role of preprints — complete and public draft manuscripts which have not gone through the formal peer review, editing, or journal publishing process – continues to be a hot topic in the biological and medical sciences. In January, three major biomedical research funders – HHMI, the MRC, and the Wellcome Trust
The GMAS help desk often gets questions regarding signing the electronic Participation Agreement and receiving a security error. Here are two reasons why you would receive this error message instead of landing successfully on the Participation Agreement, where you can read the terms and sign.
1. An incorrect link was provided to the individual who needs to sign: This often happens when an individual is provided with a link from the GMAS request or person profile where the Participation Agreement is showing as needed
In a previous blog, we described the outcomes of grant applications according to the initial peer review score. Some of you have wondered about the peer review scores of amended (“A1”) applications. More specifically, some of you have asked about amended applications getting worse scores than first applications; some of you have experienced amended applications not even being discussed after the first application received a