Skip to main content

System Status: 

SPO Proposal Review and Timely Submission

Read about proposal submission deadlines for all proposals submitted to the Sponsored Projects Office (SPO).

UC San Diego is one of the top research universities in the country. The campus administration supports our researchers by staying up to date on the requirements of the 1600+ entities from which we receive contracts or grants as well as changing state and federal requirements for these entities. To ensure researchers have the best chance of having their research projects funded, we need to ensure compliance with ever-changing regulations and identify inaccuracies or errors that can be fixed before proposals are reviewed by funding agencies. 

The SPO, through their contract and grant officers and analysts, has designated delegated authority to solicit, accept, and execute extramural contracts and grants. The SPO is responsible for reviewing and endorsing extramural proposals, or Institutional Review, on behalf of The Regents of the University of California.

  • integrity in research
  • appropriateness of the activity to the University’s mission
  • protection of human and animal subjects
  • use of University facilities and resources
  • cost-sharing
  • adherence to personnel policies as it relates to sponsored research
  • intellectual property
  • conflict of interest
  • recovery of costs (both direct and indirect/F&A)
  • liability, insurance and indemnification, and
  • export controls
That is why we are advising faculty and research administrators to adhere to the following:

Institutional Review Timeline

A complete and accurate KR record and final proposal package, with required documents uploaded to both KR and sponsor’s portal (if applicable), will be prioritized by the order routed to an officer stop and reviewed in accordance with the Proposal Submission Timeline below (NOTE: For Scripps Institution of Oceanography see the Late Submission Waiver Process

Institutional Review of
KR Record and Proposal
Institutional Review of KR Record
As-Is Submission of the proposal itself
No Guaranteed Submission
5 Business Days before the published deadline date. Less than 2 Business Days before the published deadline date. After 8:00 a.m. on the published deadline date.
  • Final proposals routed to an officer stop before 4:30 p.m. on the 2nd Business Day prior to the deadline due date, fall into the Institutional Review category.
  • The SPO will conduct an institutional review based on institutional risk, for consistency with institutional policies/requirements, and identification of possible errors and/or warnings that would prevent proposal submission (if applicable).
  • All records must contain a complete and accurate KR  record prior to submission.
  • Final proposals routed to an officer stop less than 2 Business Days before the deadline are considered an “As-Is” submission.
  • As-Is submissions are submitted but without a guaranteed and thorough review of any documents or possible errors and/or warnings.
  • It is common for As-is submissions to be rejected by the sponsor.
  • No guaranteed submission for proposals routed to an officer stop after 8am on the published deadline day.
  • Proposals routed to an officer stop that fall under this category will be evaluated for possible submission by management based on risk.
  • In an effort to provide the appropriate service level to customers who routed proposals timely, last-minute proposals will be reviewed in the order they were received, and only after other proposals that arrived at the officer stop prior are reviewed and submitted.

Institutional Review Criteria

An Institutional Review is a focused review of extramural funding proposals by UC San Diego’s Sponsored Projects Offices (SPO) of key areas of institutional risk that could create financial, audit, and/or policy risks for the University. 

Under Institutional Review, Contract and Grant (C&G) Officers do not review the technical or administrative sections of proposals, save for those noted in items 9-11 below. Principal Investigators (PIs) and their submission teams will be responsible for the technical substance of a proposal.

Through training, outreach, and ongoing collaboration, the Sponsored Projects Offices will work in partnership with researchers and department research administrators to understand sponsor policies and requirements that apply to proposal submission. 

SPOs will review for the following elements:

1. Review institutional eligibility requirements and ensure all identifying proposal information provided about UC San Diego, the Sponsored Projects Offices, and/or The Regents is required, accurate, and/or correct. 
2. Review all items that trigger a compliance review such as human subjects, animal subjects, conflict of interest, export control, background IP, exceptional PI status, etc.
3. Check to ensure that effort is budgeted for all Single and/or Multiple PD/PIs (for NIH, this also applies to Co-I, Sr/Key Persons).  Also for NIH Other Significant Contributors or UCSD consultants who do not have a measurable effort on the application, it should be listed at 0% in PD (for COI purposes). The proposal package and the KR PD record must match.
4. Confirm that the appropriate Facilities & Administrative (F&A)/Indirect Cost (IDC) rate and base are applied to the proposal budget.
5. Ensure specific University costs are applied as required.
6. Review budgeted costs to ensure they are aligned with sponsor policies.
7. Verify that there is appropriate documentation of any committed/in-kind University or third-party cost sharing.
8. Review the proposal package to see if it is specified that new space is needed to complete the project and if so, ensure the KR PD record question is answered accordingly.
9. Ensure all required internal documents have been included in the KR PD record.
10. Determine if anything in the sponsor’s guidelines or award terms would prevent submission of the proposal or acceptance of an award if the proposal is funded.
11. Review and signature of certifications, assurances, and representations.
12. Communicate issues and concerns identified during the Institutional Review.

For more information or questions email