Blog Viewer

Managing Portfolios from Different Ends of the Spectrum | Part 3: Managing Overfunded Principal Investigators

This three-part series delves into best practices for managing principal investigators (PIs) with either too little or too much contract and grant funding. In Part I, we learned the 5-step process to determine the root causes of under- and over-funding. Part II put those skills to use in managing underfunded principal investigators (PIs). This final part addresses overfunded scenarios.

For these scenarios, we’ve applied step 1. Realize the Problem, and now we have our detective’s cap on for step 2. Gathering Data.  For overfunded PIs (like the three highlighted in yellow in Figure 1), it’s smart to first compare your awarded project budgets with actual expenditures. 

Figure 1. Awarded funds, expenditures, and balances

Scenario: Not-Spending Sven
It’s obvious from Figure 1 that Dr. Sven’s main issue is that he isn’t spending nearly as much as budgeted. Other clues include frequent no-cost extensions (NCEs) and a history of trying to squeeze in expenses at the last minute. This is enough data to move on to Step 3 where we ask “But why?” until we understand the root cause.

Is the underspending in a particular category (e.g., personnel)? Were there delays with the study? Is he distracted by other projects? Was this a case of poor fiscal forecasting, or did he deliberately overinflate costs when budgeting?

Let’s assume you’ve discovered that he doesn’t have enough staff to meet project goals. Now Star-Lord can come in and take action.

• Address personnel issues:
  • New hires: provide PI with resources for writing job descriptions, posting, interviewing, hiring, and training. Ensure he has administrative support to navigate internal processes in a timely manner to get new staff on board.
  • Turnover: provide management training, appoint a staff manager, or request guidance from leadership to address continued issues with retaining existing staff.
  • Encourage collaborations with other research teams to avoid reinventing the wheel.
• If no improvement,
  • Escalate to leadership (especially if turnover is an issue)
  • Restrict future proposals until progress is made with current awards
  • Do not take extreme measures to avoid return of unspent funds (failure is often the best teacher)
• Other possible courses of action to help Not-Spending Sven, depending on various other root causes:
  • Mandate recurring monthly meetings with fund manager to monitor burn rate
  • Work with him to develop an appropriate spending plan
  • Review best practices for accurate proposal budgeting, and document everything!

Scenario: Overcommitted Fred
Figure 2 shows us that Dr. Fred is bringing in a lot of research funding and his burn rate is fairly good, but not great. We need more data. 

Figure 2. Dr. Fred’s expenditure detail by project

We also discover that he is dedicating effort without pay on many projects, and his Other Support pages are complex. The data in Figure 2 shows us that Dr. Fred is spending down in all categories except his own effort. It’s now clear to us that Dr. Fred is over-committed. 

Is he submitting too many proposals or agreeing to be Co-I on too many collaborative projects? Is he overbudgeting how much of his own effort is needed, or is it the quantity of projects? Are deliverables delayed? Is he able to do quality work?

Possible course of action: Create an internal spreadsheet that breaks down effort by total monthly effort as well as total budget-period effort for each project. Include the budgeted effort as well as minimum allowable effort so you can determine when prior approval might be required to reduce effort. 

• If there is no improvement, you may need to: obtain prior approval from sponsors to reduce effort beyond allowable limits; request NCE’s if deliverables are not accomplished within project period; consider effort without pay on future projects (if appropriate) or decline future collaborations until existing projects are under control

Figure 3. Sample Monthly Effort Distribution Plan

Scenario: Won’t-Delegate Delilah
Dr. Delilah’s data in Figure 1 tells us she doesn’t have a great burn rate, but we need more data.

Figure 4. Dr. Delilah’s expenditure detail by project 

Figure 4 tells us she is overspending on her own effort, and massively underspending in other personnel. Is there difficulty hiring/retaining staff? Not delegating to existing staff? Was this poor fiscal planning or poor staff management? Are project deliverables being met?

• Possible action plans:
  • Develop appropriate spending plan and mandate recurring monthly meetings with fund manager to monitor burn rate
  • Review best practices for accurate proposal budgeting (document everything!)
  • Encourage collaborations with other investigators
  • Provide or refer to additional training on staff management, hiring, motivation, and delegating
• If you do not see improvement, escalate your response to include these possible actions:
  • Request permission from sponsors to re-budget funds from other personnel toward her own effort
  • Obtain NCEs as needed
  • Mandate management training if turnover is the root cause
  • Decline future projects until existing studies are under control. 

Key takeaways: When dealing with issues of either under- or over-funding, remember that you must first determine the root cause, and then you can create a tailor-made plan of action to address any problem. 

Authored by Laura W. Sheehan, Manager of Research Administration, Department of Family Medicine
University of California Los Angeles 

#june2024
#Catalyst