Ron Schultz (Johns Hopkins), Jennifer Quinn (Brown),
Kyle Burkhardt (Princeton), and Claire King (Drexel),
Renee Dolan (Michigan State, KC)





Poll the audience
Award Hierarchy basics
Types of hierarchies
Example: NIH 3 year award, $1 million a year
awarded for 3 years
Pros / Cons of the Award Hierarchy

Does your school…
 Use any of the Coeus modules currently?

Are you…
 Thinking of using Coeus award module soon?
 Currently using the Coeus award module?
Award Hierarchy creates relationships between
one or more award ‘variables’:
Awards-Accounts-Account Types-Units-Time.


Award Hierarchy is comprised of ‘Tiers’, levels:
 Fewer Tiers = Easier maintenance/use, fewer
embedded variables.
 More Tiers = More skill to maintain/use, more
variables displayed.

Different Account numbers are assigned to
parent and each child.

The child account will have the same six-digit award
number as the Parent award
 3-digit extension end of award number is different for
each child award created
 If the parent is 001575-001, the first child award
created is 001575-002, etc.

The Award Hierarchy creates relationships:
 Two-tiers (Parent-child):
▪ relate Award with allocation accounts
▪ Brown University
 Three or more-tiers (Parent-child-grandchild….):
▪ relate Time with Award, and with allocation
accounts.
▪ Drexel &
▪ Kuali Coeus
 Variable-tiers (Parent, child, grandchild, and/or greatgrandchild)
▪ Could be one level or multi-level
▪ Could have multiple child/grandchild/great-grandchild accts
▪ Variety of reasons for child accts.
▪ Each PI or each dept, different OH rates, subcontracts,
type of costs, supplemental funding, cost sharing, etc…
▪ Princeton
The Parent award reflects the Notice of Grant Award and is linked
to the Main Account No. - The Principal Investigator and their
Lead Department on the award notice is ultimately responsible for
the administration and requirements of that award.
All Award dollars are entered into the Parent and then flow down to
children accounts. We track all anticipated dollars only at the
Parent level.
Child awards are sub accounts associated with the
Parent award that are funded by the Parent NGA and
have a separate Brown account number. Child
Awards are created for various purposes:
a) track specific spending
b) equipment purchases
c) cross-departmental award administration
d) differing Indirect Cost Rates from the Parent
• Year 1 - $1,000,000 Obligated to the Parent /
$3,000,000 Anticipated to come in.
• Year 1 - $100,000 Distributed to Child account. A
new account is needed for the distribution of funds to
another Investigator / Department.
*Notice the Distributable amounts on the Parent
A NEW SEQUENCE is added to the Award record whenever we add
new money!!
• Year 2 - $1,000,000 Obligated to the Parent.
• Year 2 - $100,000 Distributed to Child account.
• Year 3 - $1,000,000 Obligated to Parent account /
$100,000 Distributed to Child Account.
• The History screen on the Money & End Dates tab is a
snapshot of the funding cycle of the Award / Accounts.



Tier One – Project Rollup
 Master Agreements - Contracts
 Totaled Obligated and Anticipated Funding
 No Account Number
Tier Two – Obligated Funding
 Notice of Grant Awards
 Main Account Fund Number
 Reporting Level
Tier Three – Sub Accounts
 Subcontracts
 Intercompany Funds for Clinical Faculty Salaries
•View from
an Award
search
•View from
Hierarchy
Actions panel
in an Award
Obligated dates are updated

KC took transactional approach
 No longer have to move funds through each tier

Different views available
 Current vs. Pending
 Totals only, Dates only, Distributed/Distributable
Princeton example:
Parent/child/grandchild/
Parent/child/grandchild: great-grandchild:
Parent only:
Parent/child:

Princeton simple example:

Brown:
 Pros:
▪ All accounts under the same award notice are connected in Coeus.
▪ Simple structure quickly identifies main award vs. subaccounts.
▪ Easily roll-up dollars for reporting purposes to main award.
 Cons:
▪ Cross-departmental parent / child accounts are sometimes
managed by two different individuals.
▪ Department of Lead will not have access to expenditure info of
child
▪ Risk of double counting award dollars if reporting structure is not
built correctly.

Drexel:
 Pros:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
At a glance project funding history
Award Notice shows child distributions
Shows supplements
Allows for different Overhead Rates
Allows for different PI’s and different Proposal Titles within a
award/contract
 Cons:
▪ When obligating new funding, remembering to add each parent level
▪ New Award reporting runs off of Tier Two not Tier One
▪ Does not show cost share funding

Princeton:
 Pros:
▪ Only use variable tiers as needed…
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Each PI, dept, or project
Different OH rates
Subcontracts
Type of costs
Supplemental funding
Cost sharing
▪ Create only as many as needed
 Cons:
▪ If the parent lead unit differs from lead unit for child accts
▪ Lead unit has ultimate project responsibility
▪ Depending on your financial systems, lead unit might not see children’s expenditures (i.e.
labor accounting)
▪ This causes problems when different units overspend!
▪ Difficulties in making the same change to all accts