Post COBRE and INBRE Funding: Best
Practices to Sustain Critical Resources
4th Northeast Regional Meeting
August 10-12, 2011
Salve Regina University
Newport, Rhode Island
Tim Hunter
University of Vermont
Core Director VGN Microarray Facility
Core Director, VCC DNA Analysis Facility
Core Director, Advanced Genome Technologies Core (AGTC)
Asst Director, Translational Technologies Unit, CCTS
2
What We Have Learned: Common Issues

Some NCRR-funded cores are isolated:









No easy access to medical schools (ID)
Sometimes difficult to hire specialized staff
Some cores want to do outreach but don’t know how
Information does not get to them, need a central place
Most were not aware of the opportunities for networking in the “Core
Community”
Very few attendees are aware of federal regulations regarding core fees
structure – where is the information?
Most had never developed chargebacks or a business plan to sustain
critical core activities beyond NCRR funding.
No formal standards on how core charge back should be implemented.
Need for a workshop on core management (Best Practices)?
Why Implement Best Practices

Transparency

Increase Visibility of Core

Establish and maintain High Quality Services



Promotes User confidence, Education, and Awareness



Professional Development
Benchmarking (www.abrf.org)
Open Houses, Workshops, and Tutorials
User Oversight
Sustainability

Sustaining technologies/services crucial to Research Institute
Best Practices: Short List

Developing a Business Plan

Developing a full cost recovery Budget

Evaluate Impact of Core Facility on Research
Competiveness

Marketing/Customer Relations (Steve, Jim,
Jackie)
Best Practices: Longer List










3-5 Year Business Plan
Developing full cost recovery Budget , regardless of subsidies
Make sure technologies/services are congruent with the
organization’s mission and vision.
Financial benchmarking: internal and external
Access/ Utilization (user friendly)
Technical benchmarking: internal and external
Educational outreach: internal and external
Impact and Outcomes (tracking)
Local and Global Oversight:
Communication and promotion
Developing a Business Plan




Clear Mission
Organizational Structure
Inventory of resources
 Maintenance plans
Operational Plan





Staffing, delivery of services (QC,QA, user relations), LIMS
Marketing Plan
Financial Planning
Technology Assessment
3-5 Year outlook of future needs
 Technology Assessment, Financials
Web Resources: Business Planning
OMB Circular A-21 Basics:
http://www.aucd.org/docs/urc/A21basics.pdf

OMB Circular A-21 Cost Principles for Educational Institutions
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/circulars/a021/a21_2004.pdf

Business Plan for a Startup Business: Including narratives and several financial
worksheets( from SCORE):
http://www.careerramblings.com/pdf/cr_business_plan.pdf

(Request for comments on) FAQs to Explain Costing Issues for Core Facilities:
http://cancer.osu.edu/research/cancerresearch/sharedresources/Documents/NIH%20%20Core%20Facilities%20FAQs.pdf

SCORE: Free Small Business Advice, How-to-Resources, tools:
http://www.score.org/

All Posted on NICL website
Developing a full cost
recovery Budget
“The Crash Course”
Developing a full cost recovery Budget




Project Utilization
Define service/billable units
% Effort of each staff dedicated to delivery
Determine true cost of service (Direct)


Indirect Cost



Service contract, consumables, reagents
Administration, consulting, space costs, communications
Instrument Depreciation
Fully loaded chargeback

Applying Dept, center, college subsidies
Must be Circular A-21 Compliant
Direct vs. Indirect (F + A)

Direct Costs – can be identified specifically with
delivery of a particular service/technology. i.e., labor,
operating supplies and materials, service contracts,
depreciation on non-federally purchased equipment.

Indirect Costs – Costs that are incurred for common or
joint objectives and cannot be readily identified to a
specific service/technology. i.e., space, administration,
travel, communications (phone, copier), deficit
recovery
Developing a full cost recovery Budget

Service Utilization

Annual Survey
Email solicitation
History

i.e., Fragment Analysis



Define Service


Billable Unit: Injection
Std and Titration provided
Developing a full cost recovery Budget
Determine % direct efforts for each staff
Developing a full cost recovery Budget

Service cost
analysis (S)

Direct (S+L)
cost for
delivery of
defined
service
Developing a full cost recovery Budget
Direct
Core Operating Principles: Best
Practices in determining chargebacks

The costs of providing service are allowable, allocable,
consistently applied and reasonable.

The rates are established to recover these are documented and
systematically evaluated against actual cost and revised on a
regular basis to reflect actual costs (A-21 J.47)

These rates are charged to all users on a consistent basis,
regardless of funding source(s) and employing a principle of
“one service, one rate”.
Evaluating Impact of Core Facility on
Research Competitiveness: Essential Metrics







Kinds of services provided
Staffing
Grant proposals and (by PI, dates of submission or
funding, title, and agency)
Funded grants that used data from the facility.
List of publications that used data from the facility.
Numbers of completed projects for internal faculty
and students sorted
by college or school (the units of a project will
vary by facility)
Numbers of clients outside Institute, if any
Essential Metrics









Budget Information
Financial benchmarking: internal and external
Access/ Utilization
Technical benchmarking: internal and
external
Educational outreach: internal and external
Impact and Outcomes
Local and Global Oversight:
Communication and promotion
Professional Development (Expertise)
?????? Lots of Lingering Questions ??????
Funding Landscape Post
COBRE
Movement of IDeA States
Programs to NIGMS
19
NIH/NCRR Meetings on Efficient Core Management
The Efficient Management and
Utilization of Core Facilities
July 14 – 15, 2009

managing core facilities

issues of cost efficiency, management
and access

finding and accessing core facilities

government policies governing
managing and reporting

training core directors

quality improvement
Moving Forward in the Efficient
Management and Use of Core Facilities
November 15 – 16, 2010





updates on maximizing the use and
efficiency of existing NIH-funded
research core facilities
developing effective training
programs for core facility directors
exploring software options for
enhancing administrative management
of core facilities
creating a national registry of core
resources
standardizing compliance with OMB
Circular A21
NISBRE 2012:

What workshops or presentations would be of greatest value to the NICL
community?