[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 9, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26859-26868]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11540]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Agency Information Collection Under Review by the Office of
Management and Budget
AGENCY: Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the
President.
ACTION: Notice of submission for OMB review; comment request.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has submitted the
information collection listed as Appendix C at the end of this notice
to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), OMB, for
review under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104-13). This new form will be required by OMB Circular A-21, ``Cost
Principles for Educational Institutions,'' for the submission of
facilities and administrative rate proposals by educational
institutions. On September 10, 1997, (62 FR 47721) OMB proposed the use
of a standard format for submitting of facilities and administrative
rate proposals by educational institutions. OMB received 35 comments
from Federal agencies, universities and professional organizations, all
of whom favored the development of such a form. Based upon this
information, OMB issued a Federal Register notice on August 12, 1999,
(64 FR 44062) which proposed to revise Circular A-21 to incorporate a
new form. OMB received 40 comments from Federal agencies, universities
and professional organizations. Most commenters agreed with the concept
of a standard format that would streamline the rate proposal submission
process. In addition, many commenters had questions and requested
clarifications regarding data to be included in the form or the format
of the form. Changes were made to the form as appropriate. The comments
and OMB responses are summarized in the Comments and Responses section.
Once this new form receives clearance under the Paperwork Reduction
Act, OMB will issue a final revision to incorporate the form in
Circular A-21.
DATES: Submit comments on or before June 8, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Address comments to Ed Springer, Desk Officer, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), OMB, 725 17th Street NW,
Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. E-mail
comments may be submitted to [email protected]. Please
include the full body of the comments in the text of the message and
not as an
[[Page 26860]]
attachment. Please include the name, title, organization, postal
address, and E-mail address in the text of the message. (Comments
should also be addressed to the Office of Federal Financial Management
at the address listed below.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gilbert Tran, Office of Federal
Financial Management, Office of Management and Budget, (202) 395-3993
(e-mail Hai [email protected]).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Control No.: 0348-XXXX.
Title: Standard Form for Facilities and Administrative Rate
Proposal.
Form No: N/A.
Frequency: On occasion.
Type of Review: New collection.
Respondents: Large universities.
Number of Responses: 282.
Estimated Time Per Response: 4 hours.
Needs and Uses: This provides a standardized format for the
submission of facilities and administrative (F&A) rate proposals that
would assist educational institutions in completing their F&A rate
proposals more efficiently, and help the cognizant agency review each
proposal on a more consistent basis. It will also facilitate the
Federal government's effort to collect better information regarding
educational institutions' F&A costs that could be useful in explaining
variations in F&A rates among institutions. Copies of the above
information collection proposal can be obtained by calling or writing
Gilbert Tran at the address listed above.
Comments and Responses
General
Comment: Some commenters suggested that the estimated time of four
hours needed to complete the standard format is gravely underestimated.
They commented that the process of collecting data for the preparation
of an institution's rate proposal and completing the standard format
can take several months.
Response: OMB agrees that the process of collecting data and
preparing the facilities and administrative rate proposal in accordance
with Circular A-21 can take several months to complete depending on the
size of the universities and the complexity of its proposals. The
estimated four hours is only for the filling of prepared data in the
standard format. Only three commenters indicated that the completion of
the standard format will greatly increase grantees' workload. In
addition, in consideration of the comments that cited some data
requests as overly cumbersome and difficult to collect, OMB has
reexamined all proposed data requests, discussed them with the Federal
agencies and, consequently, deleted much of the requested data in the
final version.
To further streamline and simplify the proposal submission process,
OMB will work with the Federal agencies to encourage the submission of
the standard format electronically.
Comment: Most commenters applauded the concept of a standard format
that would streamline the rate proposal submission process. However,
they requested that the implementation date be delayed to allow them to
adjust to the new format requirements.
Response: OMB agrees. The implementation date is changed to apply
to facilities and administrative proposals submitted on or after July
1, 2001 (instead of July 1, 2000). Earlier implementation of the
revision is permitted and encouraged.
Comment: The revision should explicitly state that universities and
cognizant agencies could agree to eliminate certain elements from the
standard format, when applicable, particularly when a university uses
the standard 24 percent to claim administrative costs, as allowed in
section G.9 of Circular A-21, ``Alternative method for administrative
costs.''
Response: OMB agreed. The final revision allows the cognizant
agencies to grant exceptions, on an institution-by-institution basis,
from all or portions of Part II of the standard format. For example,
when a university uses the standard 24 percent to claim administrative
costs as allowed in section G.9 of Circular A-21, the cognizant agency
may waive all the requirements for detailed data in the administrative
cost pools (i.e., general administration, departmental administration
and sponsored project administration). However, for consistency in data
collection and reporting, information in Part I should not be waived
(unless the information is not applicable to a particular institution).
Comment: Several commenters raised a concern about having to submit
two standard format proposals in one fiscal year when they negotiate
rates on a ``fixed with carry-forward'' basis. They do not see the need
to submit a standard format proposal when the proposal is used only to
determine the carry-forward amount.
Response: When an institution is required to submit a historical/
incurred cost proposal solely to determine a carry-forward amount, the
cognizant agency may waive all or part of the requirements to submit
the standard format proposal as required in G.12 of Circular A-21.
Part I, Schedule A
Comment: Some commenters requested clarification of the information
related to students, faculty and staff population in Part I, Schedule
A, item d of the standard format. Does the population count include all
affiliate organizations associated with the institution?
Response: The students, faculty and staff population information
requested in Part I, Schedule A of the standard format should be based
on full-time equivalents (FTE) for the institution only.
Comment: Several commenters suggested that the breakout of salaries
and wages (and fringe benefits) by professional/professorial and other
labor (as required in Part I, Schedule A, item h; and, Part II, ``Rate
Proposal Summary by Major Function,'' of the standard format) is not
always maintained at the aggregate level by universities and may
require significant effort to compute.
Response: OMB agreed that the requested data may not be readily
available on the aggregate level at many universities. Therefore, this
requested data is removed from the standard format in Part I (Schedule
A, item h) and Part II, ``Rate Proposal Summary by Major Function,''
item 3.(d) of the standard format. In addition, this information is
usually available on a department-by-department basis with the
departmental administration calculation schedules.
Comment: The breakout by salaries classification (i.e.,
professorial/professional and other labor) by major functions, as
required in item h of Part I of the standard format, is difficult to
accumulate and would require significant time and effort.
Response: This breakout requirement is removed. Item h now only
requires the modified total direct costs for each major function by
salaries and wages/fringes, and non-labor costs.
Comment: In item i of Part I, Schedule A of the standard format,
the schedule seems to require information only on the allocation
percentage of overhead pools to direct functions. Should cross-
allocation percentage to other overhead pools be included? If cross
allocations are excluded, the ``total'' column should be eliminated
because the total percentage will not be 100 percent. Alternatively,
another column (titled ``Other'') should be added to account for all
cross allocations.
Response: For simplicity, cross allocation of an overhead pool to
[[Page 26861]]
another overhead pool (e.g., allocation of interest expenses to
buildings or equipment) is excluded from this schedule. The schedule
will show only the allocation of F&A cost pools to major direct
functions for which amounts should be readily available from the step-
down allocation schedule. This ``total'' column is, therefore,
eliminated. The ``Other'' column is used to display overhead allocation
to other major institutional functions for which F&A rates are computed
(e.g., primate centers and applied physics laboratories).
Comment: In item i of Part I, Schedule A of the standard format,
what should be included in the ``other'' column?
Response: The ``other'' column in item i of Part I of the standard
format should reflect the percentage of the cost pool allocated to
major functions (other than Instruction, Organized Research and OSA)
for which rates are developed for billing purposes such as primate
centers or applied physics laboratories.
Part I, Schedule B
Comment: What is the definition of the term ``base year'' used in
Part I, Schedule B of the standard format? Does it refer to: (a) only
historical (or incurred) cost financial information or (b) both
historical and projected cost information related to an F&A rate
proposal submission?
Response: The term ``base year'' refers to only historical (or
incurred) cost data which is based on an institution's financial
statements. To clarify this matter, the ``base (or data) year'' phrase
at the beginning of Part I, Schedule B of the standard format has been
changed to ``Historical Base Year.''
Comment: What should be included in ``Land Improvements'' line in
Part I, Schedule B of the standard format?
Response: Under this title, the universities should report the
distribution of ``land improvements'' costs to the universities' major
functions and the computed percentage point for the overall F&A rates.
``Land improvements'' costs are defined in Circular A-21, section
F.2.(b).4, as ``depreciation or use allowances on certain capital
improvements to land, such as paved parking areas, fences, sidewalks,
and the like, not included in the cost of buildings.''
Comment: Schedule B of Part I of the standard format should include
a line for the utility cost adjustment of 1.3 percentage points, as
allowed in section F.4.c of Circular A-21 for certain universities.
Response: OMB agreed. A line is added in schedule B of Part I of
the standard format, under the ``Operation & Maintenance'' item to
allow the applicable universities to report the utility cost adjustment
in order to reflect all the rate components proposed in the F&A
proposal.
Comment: What should be included in the ``Other'' line under the
``Modified Total Direct Cost and F&A Rates'' of Part I, Schedule B of
the standard format?
Response: The ``Other'' line under the ``Modified Total Direct Cost
and F&A Rates'' section of the standard format is used when a special
rate (other than On-Campus or Off-Campus) is developed for any major
functions included in the F&A proposal. Examples of special rates are
research vessel rates and overseas training rates.
Comment: Some commenters suggested combining the categories of
``Research Training Awards,'' ``Other Awards,'' and ``Non-Federal
Sources'' under the ``Composition of Rate Base'' in Part I of Schedule
B of the standard format into one category called ``Other Awards (not
based on negotiated rates).'' They suggested that the requested
breakout is not necessary for the F&A proposal review.
Response: OMB disagreed. The breakout for the composition of rate
base is necessary in two ways. First, the Federal Government wants to
track the percentage of awards that are not fully reimbursed at the
negotiated rates by source of funding and by types of awards. Secondly,
the breakout is important to verify the reasonableness of space cost
allocation to benefitting activities.
Comment: Where is the cost sharing amount reported under the
``Composition of Rate Base'' in Part I, Schedule B of the standard
format?
Response: The amount of cost sharing, representing the costs on
research projects that are borne by the universities, is reported under
the ``Organized Research'' column on the ``Non-Federal Sources'' line
item.
Comment: Under the ``Miscellaneous Statistics'' section of Part I,
Schedule B of the standard format, data related to facilities' finance
costs ( ``percent of ASF Financed'') should not be required if the
university does not claim interest expenses on the F&A cost proposal
(as some public universities do not). In addition, this information
should only be requested for buildings that are more than 50 percent
dedicated to research activities.
Response: OMB agreed that this information is not necessary when
the university does not claim any interest costs for its facilities on
its F&A cost proposal. The note (1) is changed to allow such exemption.
However, for comparative analysis, data must be collected for all
buildings regardless of their portion dedicated to research activities.
This information is helpful in explaining the cost of research
facilities and any increase of F&A rates over a period of time.
Part II--Standard Documentation Requirements
Comment: Item 1 in the General Information section of Part II of
the standard format contains the phrase ``financial statements
including any affiliated organizations.'' What is the meaning of
affiliated organizations and why is this data needed?
Response: Many large institutions provide administrative services
to various units within their corporate structure. A school, for
example, may furnish certain administrative services to an
``affiliated'' hospital. The school's financial statements would
probably exclude these costs and the hospital's financial statements
would include these costs. In this case, a review of consolidated
financial statements, which include the affiliated unit, will be needed
to support (i) the total cost of the shared services and (ii) the
assignment of costs on the financial statements of the school and the
hospital. The affiliated organizations exclude non-monetary
relationships (e.g., teaching rotation for medical students).
Comment: Under item 2 of the General Information section of the
standard format, what does OMB mean by ``relevant detail supporting the
financial statement?'' Does ``detail'' include all journal entries?
Response: In preparing an F&A proposal, a university is expected to
start with its audited financial statements, prepared under generally
accepted accounting principles (GAAP), and reclassify the accumulated
costs into direct functions and cost pools as defined in Circular A-21.
A reconciliation that includes all major reclassifications and
adjustments must exist between these two documents to explain the
differences. For example, all administrative costs are reported under
``Institutional Support'' on the university's financial statements.
These costs could be reclassified to the general administrative,
departmental administrative and sponsored project administrative cost
pools for A-21 purposes. This provision requires that the university
report the reclassified amounts along with a note to explain the nature
of the reclassification. Detailed journal entries are not necessary for
this request. In the final revision, the word ``detail'' is replaced
with the word ``data.''
[[Page 26862]]
Comment: Several commenters indicated that the organized research
base breakdown by college or school into four categories: (a) Federal
awards receiving F&A cost based on the negotiated rate agreement, (b)
Federal awards receiving less than the negotiated rates, (c) non-
Federal awards, and (d) cost sharing (as requested in Part II,
``General Information,'' item 5) is not readily available and would
require extensive effort to produce. Some suggested that the
information, in a summary level, is already available in Part I,
Schedule B, under the ``Composition of Rate Base'' section of the
standard format.
Response: In light of the possible excessive effort to produce the
level of detail required for this request, OMB deleted this data
requirement. OMB also agreed that similar data, in a summary level, is
available in Part I, schedule B, ``Composition of Rate Base'' of the
standard format.
Comment: Some commenters suggested that the requirement for a
statement concerning the physical inventory requirement (Part II,
``General Information,'' item 9.d of the standard format) be deleted
because this requirement duplicates those required under section
J.12.e, ``Depreciation and use allowances,'' of the Circular.
Response: OMB agreed. The proposed statement of assurance regarding
the physical inventory for equipment is removed in the final revision.
Section J.12.e of Circular A-21 requires that ``charges for use
allowances or depreciation must be supported by adequate property
records, and physical inventories must be taken at least once every two
years to ensure that the assets exist and are usable.'' By completing
the ``Certificate of F&A Costs,'' as required in Section K.2.b of
Circular A-21, the university certifies that it complies with the
requirement of Section J.12.e of Circular A-21 for a biannual equipment
physical inventory.
Comment: Some commenters suggested that the assurance statements
regarding the compensation limits (Part II, ``General Information,''
item 9.e of the standard format) be deleted because such assurance is
already included in the Certification of F&A costs (Part II, ``General
Information,'' item 9.a of the standard format). If required, can the
university include such an assurance statement with other assurance
statements required under this section?
Response: The Certification of F&A costs, as required by Section K.
of the Circular, does not currently provide any assurance regarding the
compensation limits, established under separate program statutes. Such
assurances are necessary to ascertain that costs charged against
Federal programs do not exceed limits established by program statutes.
The assurance statement regarding compensation limits can be (1) added
to the Certification of F&A costs, (2) issued as a separate statement,
or (3) combined with other assurance statements required by the
Circular (e.g., lobbying certification).
Comment: Some commenters suggested that the reference to
``voluntary cost sharing'' in Part II, ``Rate Proposal Summary By Major
Function,'' item 3.(a) of the standard format be deleted until the
current debate on the reporting requirements for voluntary cost sharing
is finalized.
Response: OMB agreed. The reference to ``voluntary'' cost sharing
is deleted. The breakout between mandatory and voluntary cost sharing
is therefore not required. Only the total cost sharing amount, as it is
computed and reported on the institution's F&A rate proposal, is
required for Schedule B of Part I, ``Miscellaneous Statistics,'' and
item 3.(a) of Part II, ``Rate Proposal Summary'' of the standard
format.
Comment: Regarding the space survey required in Part II of the
standard format, does it cover all buildings at the university or just
the research buildings?
Response: The space survey should include all buildings at the
university. An university's total square footage information by major
functions is necessary to allocate the space related costs such as
operation and maintenance, building and equipment depreciation (or use
allowances), and interest costs.
Comment: In Part II of the standard format, under the ``Operation
and Maintenance,'' ``General Administrative,'' ``Departmental
Administration,'' and ``Sponsored Projects Administration'' sections,
OMB should delete the requirement for a breakout of total costs by
labor and non-labor costs. Some commenters questioned the usefulness of
this requirement for the cognizant agency's review, particularly when
the administrative rates are capped at 26 percent.
Response: The requirement for breakout of total costs by labor and
non-labor costs for the ``General Administrative'' and ``Sponsored
Projects Administration'' is deleted; only total cost amounts are
required for these two cost pools. However, this breakout is necessary
for the review of the ``Operation and Maintenance'' (e.g., analysis of
various utility costs and maintenance project costs) and the
``Departmental Administration'' cost pools (e.g., analysis of the
direct charge equivalent computation).
Issued in Washington, DC, April 28, 2000.
Joshua Gotbaum,
Executive Associate Director and Controller.
OMB proposes to add the following section and Appendix to Circular
A-21.
1. Add Section G.12 to read as follows:
12. Standard Format for Submission. For facilities and
administrative (F&A) rate proposals submitted on or after July 1,
2001, educational institutions shall use the standard format, shown
in Appendix C, to submit their F&A rate proposal to the cognizant
agency. The cognizant agency may, on an institution-by-institution
basis, grant exceptions from all or portions of Part II of the
standard format requirement. This requirement does not apply to
educational institutions which use the simplified method for
calculating F&A rates, as described in Section H.
2. Add Appendix C (shown below):
Appendix C
OMB Circular A-21 Documentation Requirements for Facilities and
Administrative (F&A) Rate Proposals Claiming Costs Under the
Regular Method
The documentation requirements for F&A rate proposals consist of
two parts. Part I provides a schedule of summary data on the
institution's F&A cost pools and their allocations, and the proposed
F&A rates. For illustration, an example of a completed Part I is
included. Part II describes the standard documentation to be
submitted with the institution's F&A rate proposal.
Part I: Summary Data Elements for F&A Rate Proposal--Schedule A
Name of Institution:--------------------------------------------------
Organization Number: (Federal Use Only)
Address:---------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Cognizant Federal Agency Rate Setting:__ Audit:__
b. Type of Institution Private ( ) Public/State ( )
c. Fiscal Year ________
d. Institution Population (FTE)
Students:__
Faculty:__
Staff:____
e. Status of Disclosure Statement
Required to Submit (Y/N)? ____
Due Dates: Initial: ____ Revised: ____
Date Submitted ____
Approved ( )Yes ( ) No Date: ____
f. Most Current F&A Rates (i.e., final, predetermined, fixed)
(Last three fiscal years)
[[Page 26863]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of rate On-campus On-campus organized Off-campus Off-campus
Type of rate Fiscal year covered agreement instruction Research On-campus OSA* instruction organized research Off-campus OSA*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.................... .................... .................... .................... ................... ................... ................... ...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*OSA= Other Sponsored Activities)
g. Base year costs associated with new buildings placed into
service within the last five years (i.e., base year and four preceding
years) by major functions proposed (in thousands).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organized
research OSA
-----------------------------------Instruction--------------------------
Building Depreciation or Use ........... ........... ...........
Allowance.......................
Interest Expense................. ........... ........... ...........
Operation and Maintenance........ ........... ........... ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
h. Dollar amounts by major functions proposed--Base Year (in
thousands)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organized
Instruction research OSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries & Wages/Fringes......... ........... ........... ...........
Non-labor Costs.................. ........... ........... ...........
Modified Total Direct Costs...... ........... ........... ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
i. Percentage of cost pool dollars allocated to major functions
proposed--Base Year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organized
Instruction research OSA Other*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Building Depreciation or Use Allowance...................... ........... ........... ........... ...........
Equipment Depreciation or Use Allowance..................... ........... ........... ........... ...........
Interest Expense............................................ ........... ........... ........... ...........
Operation and Maintenance................................... ........... ........... ........... ...........
Library..................................................... ........... ........... ........... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ``Other'' includes other major institutional functions for which F&A rates are computed such as primate
centers or applied physics laboratories.
j. Proposed methodology for library costs: Standard Method:
__Special Study:
k. Procedure for claiming fringe benefit costs: Specific
Identification:__
Negotiated Rate:__
Other (see attached)__
Part I: Summary Data Elements for F&A Rate Proposal--Schedule B
--Name of Institution:
--Historical Base Year:
Base Year Rate Calculation Summary by Major Function (dollars in
thousands)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organized
Instruction research OSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACILITIES GROUP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Depreciation/Use Allowance
Buildings.......... $ $ $ %
Equipment.......... $ % $ $ %
Land Improvements.. $ % $ % $ %
Interest Expense................ $ % $ % $ %
Operation & Maintenance......... $ % $ % $ %
Utility Cost Adjustment......... $ % $ % $ %
Library......................... $ % $ % $ %
[[Page 26864]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General......................... $ % $ % $ %
Departmental.................... $ % $ % $ %
Sponsored Projects.............. $ % $ % $%
Student Services................ $ % $ % $ %
Adjustment for 26% Limitation... % % %
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MODIFIED TOTAL DIRECT COST AND F&A RATES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-Campus....................... $ % $ % $%
Off-Campus...................... $ % $ %
Other........................... $ % $ % $%
Total MTDC...................... $ $ $
------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPOSITION OF RATE BASE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Awards
On-Campus (negotiated rates) $ $ $
Off-Campus (negotiated $ $ $
rates).
Research Training Awards........ $ $ $
Other Awards (not based on $ $ $
negotiated rates).
Non-Federal Sources............. $ $ $
Total........................... $ $ $
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost Sharing in Rate Base....... $ $ $
Reassignable Square Feet (ASF) $ $ $
by Major Function.
Percent of ASF Financed (1)..... ............... ............. ......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Ratio of ASF subject to financing divided by total
ASF. If 20% of a building's acquisition cost is financed, then 20%
of the ASF is considered ASF financed. This information is not
required if the institution does not claim any interest costs on its
F&A proposal.
Part I--Example: Summary Data Elements for F&A Rate Proposal--
Schedule A
Name of Institution: University of XYZ
Organization Number: (Federal, Use Only)
Address: 100 Main St., Somewhere, ST 12345
a. Cognizant Federal Agency Rate Setting: HHS Audit: HHS
b. Type of Institution Private ( ) Public/State (X)
c. Fiscal Year July 1, 1997-June 30, 1998.
d. Institution Population (FTE)
Students: 12,000
Faculty: 1,759
Staff: 2,798
e. Status of Disclosure Statement
Required to Submit (Y/N)? Yes
Due Dates: Initial: 06/30/98 Revised: 12/31/98
Date Submitted: 12/10/98
Approved (X) Yes ( ) No
Date: 06/13/ 99
f. Most Current F&A Rates (i.e., final, predetermined, fixed) (Last
three fiscal years)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of rate On-campus On-campus organized Off-campus Off-Campus
Type of rate Fiscal year covered agreement instruction research On-Campus OSA* instruction organized research Off-campus OSA*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pred 1999 09/15/96 78.0% 52.5% 38.3% 26.0% 26.0% 20.0%
Pred 1998 09/15/96 78.0% 52.5% 35.0% 26.0% 26.0% 20.0%
Pred 1977 09/15/96 76.0% 53.0% 35.0% 26.0% 26.0% 20.0%
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*OSA=Other Sponsored Activities)
g. Base year costs associated with new buildings placed into
service within the last five years (i.e., base year and four preceding
years) by major functions proposed (in thousands).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organized
Instruction research OSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Building Depreciation or Use 729 2,639 0
Allowance.......................
Interest Expense................. 0 1,794 0
Operation and Maintenance........ 1,280 4,632 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26865]]
h. Dollar amounts by major functions proposed--Base Year (in
thousands)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organized
Instruction research OSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries & Wages/Fringes......... 36,400 63,750 11,050
Non-labor Costs.................. 19,600 21,250 1,950
--------------------------------------
Modified Total Direct Costs...... 56,000 85,000 13,000
--------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
i. Percentage of cost pool dollars allocated to major functions
proposed--Base Year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organized
Instruction research OSA Other*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Building Depreciation or Use Allowance.......... 40.0% 44.0% 2.5% 7.0%
Equipment Depreciation or Use Allowance......... 34.2% 27.7% 2.1% 10.0%
Interest Expense................................ 29.9% 32.4% 1.9% 0.0%
Operation and Maintenance....................... 32.8% 35.6% 2.1% 15.0%
Library......................................... 75.3% 10.9% 0.9% 0.0%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ ``Other'' includes other major institutional functions for which F&A rates are computed such as primate
centers or applied physics laboratories.
j. Proposed methodology for library costs:
Standard Method: Yes
Special Study: No
k. Procedure for claiming fringe benefit costs:
Specific Identification: No
Negotiated Rate: Yes
Other (see attached)----
Part I--Example: Summary Data Elements for F&A Rate Proposal--
Schedule B
Name of Institution: University of XYZ
Historical Base Year: 07/01/97 to 06/30/98
Base Year Rate Calculation Summary by Major Function (dollars in thousands)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instruction Organized Research OSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($) (%) ($) (%) ($) (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACILITIES GROUP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Depreciation/Use Allowance
--Buildings............. 4,861 9.6 5,278 6.9 306 2.6
--Equipment............. 3,082 6.1 2,496 3.3 194 1.7
--Land Improvements..... 1,992 4.0 133 0.2 17 0.1
Interest Expense............ 1,944 3.9 2,111 2.8 122 1.0
Operation & Maintenance..... 8,532 16.9 9,264 12.1 536 4.6
Utility Cost Adjustment..... 0 0.0 994 1.3 0 0.0
Library..................... 7,910 15.7 1,146 1.5 96 0.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General..................... 1,535 2.7 2,330 2.7 356 2.7
Departmental................ 11,991 21.4 17,239 20.3 2,797 21.5
Sponsored Projects.......... 89 0.2 2,693 3.2 412 3.2
Student Services............ 4,166 7.4 0 0.0 0 0.0
Adjustment for 26 Limitation ............ -5.7 ............ -0.2 ............ -1.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MODIFIED TOTAL DIRECT COST AND F&A RATES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-Campus................... 50,400 82.2 76,500 54.2 11,700 36.8
Off-Campus.................. 5,600 26.0 8,500 26.0 1,300 26.0
Other....................... 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Total MTDC.................. 56,000 ............ 85,000 ............ 13,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPOSITION OF RATE BASE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Awards
On-Campus (negotiated 1,000 ............ 46,000 ............ 900 ............
rates).................
Off-Campus (negotiated 120 ............ 5,000 ............ 400 ............
rates).................
Research Training Awards 0 ............ 0 ............ 0 ............
Other Awards (not based 1,680 ............ 8,500 ............ 2,600 ............
on negotiated rates)...
Non-Federal Sources......... 53,200 ............ 25,500 ............ 9,100 ............
Total....................... 56,000 ............ 85,000 ............ 13,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26866]]
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost Sharing in Rate Base... (10,000) ............ 10,000 ............ 0 ............
Assignable Square Feet (ASF) 83,611 ASF ............ 90,778 ASF ............ 5,256 ASF ............
by Major Function..........
Percent of ASF Financed (1). 7.0 ............ 20.0 ............ 30.0 ............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Ratio of ASF subject to financing divided by total
ASF. If 20 of a building's acquisition cost is financed, then 20 of
the ASF is considered ASF financed. This information is not required
if the institution does not claim any interest costs on its F&A rate
proposal.
Part II
Introduction
This Part contains the standard documentation requirements that are
needed by your cognizant agency to perform a review of your
institution's F&A rate proposal. This documentation supports the
development of proposed rates shown in Part I and will be submitted
with your F&A rate proposal.
This listing contains minimum documentation requirements.
Additional documentation may be needed by your cognizant agency
before completing a proposal review.
If there are any questions about these requirements, please contact
your cognizant agency.
Documentation requirements would be cross-referenced to appropriate
schedule(s) within the submitted F&A rate proposal.
General Information
Reference:
__ 1. Copy of audited financial statements including any affiliated
organizations. The statements must be reconciled to the F&A base year
cost calculation. Copy of most recently issued Circular A-133 audit
reports
__ 2. Copy of relevant data supporting the financial statement,
including a reconciliation schedule for each cost pool and rate base in
the F&A base year cost calculation. A reconciliation schedule will show
each reclassification and adjustment to the financial statements to
arrive at the cost pools and rate bases in F&A base year cost
calculation. Each reclassification and adjustment must be explained in
notes to the reconciliation schedule
__ 3. Cost step-down schedule showing allocation of each F&A cost
pool to the Major Functions and other cost pools
__ 4. Explanation for each proposed organized research rate
component which exceeds the prior negotiated rate component by 10%
__ 5. Schedules clearly detailing composition and allocation
base(s) of each F&A cost pool in base year cost calculation. If the
institution has filed a Disclosure Statement (DS-2) submission,
specific references (rather than narrative descriptions) from the DS-2
may be used
__ 6. Narrative description of composition of each F&A cost pool
and allocation methodology. If the institution has filed a DS-2
submission, specific references (rather than narrative descriptions)
from the DS-2 may be used
__ 7. Narrative description of changes in accounting or cost
allocation methods made since the institution's last F&A submission. If
the institution has filed a DS-2 submission, specific references
(rather than narrative descriptions) from the DS-2 may be used
__ 8. Copy of reports on the conduct and results of special studies
performed under Section E.2.d, when applicable
__ 9. Copy of the following:
(a) The Certificate of F&A Costs
(b) Lobbying Certification
(c) Description of procedures used to ensure that awards issued by
the Federal Government do not subsidize the F&A costs allocable to
awards made by non-Federal sources (e.g., industry, foreign
governments)
(d) Assurance Certification--for those institutions listed on
Exhibit A--concerning disposition of Federal reimbursements associated
with claims for depreciation/use allowances
(e) Assurance statement that institution is in compliance with
Federal awarding agency limitations on compensation (e.g., NIH salary
limitation, executive compensation)
__ 10. If applicable, reconciliation of carry-forward amounts from
prior years used in the current proposal
__ 11. Transmittal letter stipulating the type(s) of rates
proposed, the fiscal year(s) covered by the proposal and the base year
used
Rate Proposal Summary by Major Function
__ 1. Summary of F&A base year rates calculated by Major Function
and special rates (e.g., vessel rates) if applicable by component.
These would be grouped by Administrative Components and Facilities
Components. Total base year calculated rates would be disclosed, as
well as allowable rates after the 26 percent limitation on
Administrative Components
__ 2. A breakout of Modified Total Direct Cost (MTDC) rate base
figures for each major function (and special rates, if applicable) by:
(a) On-Campus and Off-Campus amounts
(b) Federal awards
--Based on Negotiated Rates--On-Campus
--Based on Negotiated Rates--Off-Campus
--Research Training Awards
--Other Awards (not based on negotiated rates)
(c) Non-Federal Sources
__ 3. Miscellaneous Statistics including:
(a) Cost Sharing in the Rate Base
(b) Assignable Square Feet (ASF) by Major Function
(c) Percentage of ASF which is financed (by Major Function)
(d) A breakout of MTDC by Direct Salaries and Wages/ fringe
benefits and non labor costs by major functions
__ 4. Future rate adjustments, if necessary, related to material
changes since the base year. A clear description of the justification
for each of the following:
(a) Changes by cost pool by year
(b) Changes in MTDC base by year
(c) Changes in F&A rates for future years
__ 5. Summary of future F&A rates, if necessary, by Major Function
and special rates (e.g., vessel rates) which lists each administrative
and facilities component by year.
[[Page 26867]]
Building Use Allowance and/or Depreciation
__ 1. Reconciliation of building cost used to compute use allowance
and/or depreciation with the financial statements. If depreciation is
claimed in the F&A proposal and disclosed on the financial statements,
provide a reconciliation of depreciation amounts with the financial
statements.
Note: If an institution's financial statements do not disclose
depreciation expense (e.g., those subject to GASB), a reconciliation
of claimed depreciation expense to the financial statements is not
possible.
__ 2. A schedule showing amount by building of use allowance and/or
depreciation distributed to all functions
__ 3. If a method different from the standard allocation method,
described in section F.2.b, was used, describe method. Provide
justification for its use and a schedule of allocation. If the
institution has filed a DS-2 submission, claimed allocation methodology
may be referenced to specific section of the DS-2
__ 4. If depreciation is claimed, describe what useful lives by
group and component have been used
Equipment Use Allowances and/or Depreciation
__ 1. Reconciliation of equipment cost used to compute use
allowance and/or depreciation with the financial statements. If
depreciation is claimed in the F&A proposal and disclosed on the
financial statements, provide a reconciliation of depreciation amounts
with the financial statements.
Note: If an institution's financial statements do not disclose
depreciation expense (e.g., those subject to GASB), a reconciliation
of claimed depreciation expense to the financial statements is not
possible.
__ 2. A schedule showing amount by building of use allowance and/or
depreciation distributed to all functions
__ 3. If a method different from the standard allocation method,
described in section F.2.b, was used, describe the method. Provide a
justification for its use and a schedule of allocation. If the
institution has filed a DS-2 submission, claimed allocation methodology
may be referenced to specific section of the DS-2
__ 4. If depreciation is claimed, describe what useful lives by
asset class and component have been used
Interest
__ 1. Reconciliation of interest cost used in the F&A base year
calculation to the financial statements
__ 2. A schedule showing amount of interest cost assigned to each
building and a distribution to all benefitting functions within each
building for each proposed ``Major Function''
Space Survey
__ 1. A summary schedule of square footage by school, department,
building and function
__ 2. The same schedule should then be sorted by school, building,
department, and function
__ 3. Copies of space inventory instructions, forms, and
definitions
Operation and Maintenance (O&M)
__ 1. A summary schedule of each major activity (or subpool) in O&M
cost pool. It must show the costs by S&W/fringe benefits and all non-
labor cost categories
__ 2. A schedule showing amount of O&M costs distributed to all
functions
General Administration (G&A)
__ 1. A summary schedule of each activity (or subpool) in the G&A
cost pool
__ 2. A schedule of costs in the modified total costs (MTC)
allocation base
__ 3. If a method different from the standard MTC allocation method
was used, describe the method. Provide a justification for its use and
a schedule of allocation. If the institution filed a DS-2 submission,
claimed allocation methodology may be referenced to specific section of
the DS-2
Departmental Administration (DA)
__ 1. Schedules of the DA summary by school, department and
allocated to Major Functions by department
__ 2. Schedule identifying costs by S&W/fringe benefits and non-
labor costs by department for the following functions:
(a) Direct (Major Functions)
--Instruction
--Organized Research
--Other Sponsored Activities
--Other
(b) Departmental Administration (excluding Deans)
(c) Dean's office
(d) Other, as appropriate
S&W/fringe benefits shall be further identified as follows:
(a) Faculty and other professional
(b) Administrative (e.g., business officers, accountants, budget
analysts, budget officers)
(c) Technicians (e.g., lab technicians, glass washers)
(d) Secretaries and clerical
__ 3. Complete description of allocation method, bases and
allocation sequences (e.g., direct charge equivalent, 3.6 percent
allowance). If a method different from the standard MTC allocation
method was used, describe the method. Provide a justification for its
use and a schedule of allocation. If the institution filed a DS-2
submission, claimed allocation methodology may be referenced to
specific section of the DS-2
__ 4. Show a detailed example (i.e., illustration of your Direct
Charge Equivalent (DCE) methodology) of the allocation process used for
one department which has Instruction and Organized Research functions
from each of the following schools: Medicine, Arts & Sciences and
Engineering, as applicable
Sponsored Projects Administration (SPA)
__ 1. A summary schedule for each activity (or subpool) included in
SPA cost pool
__ 2. A schedule of the sponsored projects direct costs in the MTC
allocation base
__ 3. If a method different from the standard sponsored projects
MTC allocation method was used, describe method. Provide justification
for its use and a schedule of allocation. If the institution filed a
DS-2 submission, claimed allocation methodology may be referenced to
specific section of the DS-2
Library
__ 1. A summary schedule for each activity included in library cost
pool. It would show costs by salaries and wages, books, periodicals,
and all other non-labor cost categories
__ 2. Schedule listing all credits to library costs
__ 3. A schedule of Full Time Equivalents (FTE) and salaries and
wages in the bases used to allocate library costs to users of library
services
__ 4. If the standard allocation methodology was not used, describe
the alternative method and provide justification for its use. Provide
schedules of allocation statistics by function. If school filed a DS-2
submission, claimed allocation methodology may be referenced to
specific section of the DS-2
Student Services
__ 1. If the proposed allocation base(s) differs from the
stipulated standard allocation methodology provide:
(a) Justification for use of a nonstandard allocation methodology;
(b) Description of allocation procedure; and
(c) Statistical data to support proposed distribution process
[[Page 26868]]
If the institution filed a DS-2 submission, claimed allocation
methodology may be referenced to specific section of DS-2.
[FR Doc. 00-11540 Filed 5-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P