April 17, 2026

April Q&A and March follow up

Meeting materials are available for your review along with a list of links shared during the session. Q&A from our session are included here for reference and are available in the MRAM announcements.

Within a week or so following every MRAM, an email like this one typically goes out with Q&A from the session and a link to the meeting materials.

PAFC Hot Topic: GIM 35 Updates & GIM 38

Q: When will updates to GIM 35 & GIM 38 be published?
A: GIM 38 was retired and updates to GIM 35 were published 4/09/2026 following the April MRAM.

PAFC Hot Topic: Effort Reporting

Q1: Is there any central campus coordination regarding retro payroll issues such as the recent SEIU premium pay that was not issued by UW Payroll until 2/2026 & 3/2026 which is now triggering ECC recert going back to FY26 Q1?
A1: Yes, there are currently discussions between Workday support, Payroll, and central units regarding the retro pay issues impacting sponsored awards across the University and potential changes to increase compliance and reduce administrative burden on campus research units.

Q2: I’m trying to remove my security role in certifying effort. How do I know if I have that security role as my goal is to not be a coordinator?
A2: Please reach out to effortreporting@uw.edu and the team can assist you in editing or correcting any roles in the effort system, ECC.

NIH Update – Recent Policy Changes

Q1: Are there any times when you would recommend that we go with ” Option 2″ on proposals, where we use the capped salary amount in the budget instead? I sometimes submit NIH proposals that include an IBS that’s 3-4x higher than the salary cap amount, and including the full IBS in the proposal budget could definitely lead to a budget that doesn’t match how we would actually spend during the award stage.
A1: Option 2 is recommended when the sponsor has a cost limit/ceiling for the proposed budget.

Q2: Do we anticipate most universities will be aware they need to include that extra language in their LOIs as part of their subcontract packets?
A2: We expect collaborating institutions are aware, but we should still confirm. It could be helpful to mention the language when requesting the LOI while the requirement is still new.

Q3: How does including the certification statement in LOIs work with the new policy of not putting the actual LOIs in the proposal, but instead including statements about who is doing the work?
A3: We will have the certification in our files, uploaded to the SAGE eGC1 as part of the subaward package. This way, we can provide proof of the language if the sponsor requests it.

Q4: Is NIH honoring payments to existing foreign subawards?
A4: If NIH approved the continuation of the foreign subaward, we would expect them to allow payments. Please reach out to ospsubs@uw.edu with questions about specific situations.

Q5: Does a subrecipient have to provide an updated LOI with the new statement for ongoing reporting? Or is it sufficient to have the new statement on invoices?
A5: Typically, the final invoice functions as the financial report for a subaward. Therefore, it is fine to rely on the certification on the invoices.

Q6: What documentation is required for OSP to know that NIH approved prior approval for domestic subaward — what kind of documentation do we need to provide for SAGE MODS/ ASR.
A6: Your prior approval requests to NIH should be sent to OSP on a SAGE Award Modification so that OSP can submit the request in the eRA Commons. Therefore, the approval will typically include OSP in the approval response. If instead you receive prior approval from NIH directly, please attach the documentation to the SAGE Award Modification.

New Workday Reports Overview

Q1: Can we search on Applicant PI?
A1: We can only search by the Principal Investigator role that is assigned on the grant.

Q2: Can the data group please add “last 48 periods” to the Time Period drop down? We are going into year 4 of Workday in July. Last 36 periods will no longer give us all the data we need.
A2: Our presenter (Stepanka) believes that is already in the works but will double check with the UWIT team.

Q3: Is r1212 only for grant expenditures or ALL expenditures?
A3: Only for grant expenditures. It can’t be expanded, we are using Prism data source where we only export grant expenditures.

Q4: Is it possible to extract these reports in Excel? Workday does not seem to allow that.
A4: yes, you should be able to export all to Excel. You can also extract to excel the list of journals you get when you click each of the individual numbers.

SAGE Update

Q1: Any timeline on when the list of awards might filter out processed ones automatically?
A1: The completion of a “processed awards” separate list has not been prioritized in the near future. However, one feature update recently released was that your award request list filters will now “stick” as you open and close requests from the list. So if at the start of your day you de-select “processed” requests, they should remain hidden as you open and close requests within that same tab.

Q2: With some of our awards we have to enter the budget by year during the application process, but all funds come as a single pot, so the budget is modified to the award, is this going to work with the new adaptation?
A2: When the full multi-year award is given in a lump sum, and the sponsor does not require you to break out periods for reporting purposes, then the choice will be yours on whether to submit a budget with a single period for the full duration, or if year-by-year periods is helpful for your own tracking purposes.

GCA Escalations & Impacts to Campus Customers

Q: If an ASR is returned to campus, does it move back to the end of the GCA processing line?
A: No, when SAGE items are returned from campus with all required corrections, they are put back to the front of GCA’s processing queue.

March Follow Up: Industry Clinical Trials

Q1: How will the transitioned CTAs be routed to GCA for set-up in Workday? Or will another unit be responsible for Workday set-up?
A1: There should be no change from the way that campus interacts with SAGE for eGC1s/ASRs currently.

Q2: Is there a link where we can see step by step how we can work with CTO for clinical trials? for example, when should we engage CTO, what kind of documentations should be provided for ASR, etc.
A2: See the UW CTO Start-up Guide or the UW Office of Research: Clinical Research – Getting Started with eGC1 Review & Approval

Q3: Will the UW CTO now handle amendments for Clinical Trial Agreements that were previously negotiated by OSP?
A3: Yes, but the process for requesting these has not changed. You will still request a Clinical Trial Agreement Changes via the SAGE Award Modification process.

Q4: Where can I find the new subject injury language/guidance?
A4: UWM and/or HSD should be the custodian for subject injury language/guidance for campus.