Grants Blog

Archive for the ‘General’ Category

This week Congress will vote on a continuing resolution to fund the federal government for the remainder of the current fiscal year. I’ve been looking at the proposal and noticed a few things that might be of interest to grants professionals.

First, while the theme of transparency and accountability grow, Congress is planning to slash funding for electronic government initiatives by about 75 percent. This would impact sites such as USAspending.gov where the public has access to information about federal aid recipients. With only $8 million to spend on e-gov, federal officials would have to make some tough choices about which transparency sites to maintain and which ones to shut down or scale back.

The second interesting tidbit is that the funding proposal would implement an across-the-board cut for all non-defense programs, but agencies would still have discretion over the funding levels for many of their individual programs.

Finally, one of the federal government’s innovation efforts is being de-funded. The Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation would be zeroed out, with only enough funding to cover the projects OMB already committed to. This initiative, originally funded $34 million, was intended to support innovative programs that promoted efficiency and cooperation among federal agencies and states, local governments , and nonprofit organizations.

So, those are my first thoughts on this massive spending package for FY 11. Anyone else have comments they would like to share?

Just about an hour ago, OMB issued guidance to agencies about how to prepare for a federal government shutdown. I haven’t had a chance to read through the whole thing yet, but I thought it important to let everyone know as soon as possible.

The memo is available here.

I’ll pass along any other information I come across as soon as possible.

If you purchase goods or services using federal grant funds, you might be interested in this: the simplified acquisition threshold for procurements under grants has not changed, even though the FAR level was recently increased to $150,000.

The threshold for grants – which is detailed in OMB’s grants management circulars – is based on the FAR’s underlying statute, not the FAR itself. According to OMB’s Office of Federal Financial Management, an interagency workgroup is looking into whether OMB should change the grants threshold to $150,000 for consistency with the FAR. However, they want to consider what impact this would have on the various grants communities before they make any change.

So for now, the simplified acquisition threshold for grants remains at $100,000.

Information about Management Concepts’ annual Federal Grants Update seminar is now available. This one-day course is a great way to keep track of the latest developments in grants management and to learn about pending changes that may impact your day-to-day grants work.

This year we’ll be discussing GPRA, subaward reporting, transparency and accountability, audit guidance, presidential and congressional priorities, and more.

Classes start the first week in April and run throughout the summer in cities around the country. We can also bring the course to your location. Click here to see dates, locations, topics, and registration options.

In another new memo promoting open government, OMB offers details of how the fast-approaching Transparency Act subaward reporting process will work and the related responsibilities of federal agencies, prime grantees, and subgrantees.  

For example, in any new awards issued as of October 1 2010, federal agencies must include a new award term that delineates the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) subaward reporting requirements.

Prime grantees will be required to register in two systems to meet the act’s subaward reporting requirements: the Central Contractor Registration, and the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). (FSRS was set up as the portal for Transparency Act subcontract reporting and is now being used to also report subgrants.)

The memo also clarifies that subawardees are not required to do the actual reporting; that is the prime recipient’s responsibility. However, the subawardee is required to provide the prime with all of the information needed.

Further, entities that are already reporting this information for Recovery Act grants through FederalReporting.gov will not be required to duplicate that reporting in FSRS.

These are just a few examples of the information included in the memo. You can view and download the entire 51-page guidance here.

President Obama’s themes of tying performance to funding, and tightening the discretionary budget belt will carry forward into fiscal year 2012 and beyond. In June 2010, OMB issued budget guidance to federal agencies that are now working to develop their FY 12 budget requests for submission to OMB. The guidance, which came in the form of two memos, directs agencies to “identify the programs and subprograms that have the lowest impact on your agency’s mission and constitute at least five percent of your agency’s [FY 10] discretionary budget.” 

In Memo M-10-19, OMB noted that agencies should not simply reduce spending across the board. Instead, agencies should aim to restructure their operations strategically. This should include eliminating low-priority programs and activities, re-engineering staffing plans, improving procurement and grants management processes, and strengthening IT and financial management.

 A follow-up memo, M-10-20, gave more insight into how these reductions are to be achieved. Agencies are to evaluate programs based on their impact on the agency’s mission and relevant administration initiatives. Agencies should consider whether the program has an unclear or duplicative purpose, uncertain federal role, a completed mission, or lack of demonstrated effectiveness, according to the June guidance. The intent is to identify those programs with the lowest impact. OMB emphasized that agencies were not to meet the five-percent low-priority program target with across-the-board reductions or incremental savings in administrative costs.

You can view both of the memos on OMB’s website. Also, remember that these and other recent developments in grants administration will be covered in our Federal Grants Update 2010 seminar which is currently running in locations around the country.

The federal government’s Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is circulating a proposed job classification series that would specify and standardize the use of the job title “Grants Management Specialist.”

Federal law requires OPM to establish official position titles to include a basic title (e.g., Grants Management Specialist) and optional titles such as “lead” or “supervisor”. Agencies must use the official position titles for human resources management, budget, and fiscal purposes.

According to the draft, the so-called Grants Management Series 1109 would include positions which “manage, supervise, lead, or perform administrative business and analytical work involving: (1) the management, award, and obligation of funds for federal assistance such as grants, cooperative agreements, and other related assistance and services using financial, administrative, business, and negotiation procedures; (2) the competitive or non-competitive evaluation of grants proposals; and (3) the administration or termination, and closeout of grants.”

The draft then goes on to list nearly 20 typical job duties of a grants management specialist.

You can read the full draft job classification here.

Comments may be submitted until June 25 to fedclass@opm.gov.

We need your help to plan our schedule for next year. What classes would you like to see offered in various locations? Are there cities where you think we should offer training? What new courses or products could we offer to meet your training and professional development needs?

Your answers to these and other questions will help us improve our grants management training curricula. Please take a few minutes to complete our online survey by clicking here. Your feedback is greatly appreciated and is for informational purposes only.

Thanks.

If you would like to voice your opinion on this question, now is your opportunity. The Office of Management and Budget is seeking input about what constitutes “inherently governmental” functions as it works to develop new guidance for determining whether federal agencies should contract out certain tasks or whether the work should be performed by government employees.

Some activities seem obviously governmental, such as hiring federal workers or establishing federal policy, but other areas are less clear.

And while much of the attention is directed toward the role of contractors and procurement actions by federal agencies, there is also a question about grants management responsibilities.

Specifically, OMB’s Office of Federal Procurement Policy wants to know whether the new guidance should say anything new about the use of contractors to manage federal grantees.

Comments are due June 1. The Federal Register notice is available by clicking here