A New Agreement with Institutions to Replace the MOU

This note describes the initiative by CIHR, NSERC, and SSHRC to replace the current Memorandum of Understanding on the Roles and Responsibilities in the Management of Federal Grants and Awards, by an updated and revised agreement to be signed with research institutions by December 2012.

Background

Since 2001, the Agencies have signed a standard agreement, known as "the MOU", with each of more than 250 institutions, setting out the basic requirements for an institution to obtain and maintain eligibility to administer grant and award funds. Signature of the MOU is a condition of eligibility for Agency funding. The current MOUs with institutions were signed in 2007 with a commitment to review them after five years. The Agencies have prepared a draft of a new version for consultation, with the goal of having new agreements signed by December 15, 2012.

Objectives of the current review

Drawing on the experience of the past five years, the Agencies have worked to simplify and streamline the current MOU in order to clarify what the Agencies expect in return for funding research. In doing so, the Agencies removed text that was repetitive, topics that were outside the mandate of the Agencies, as well as terms that were too vague or, in other cases, too detailed and technical.

The new agreement does not introduce changes that significantly affect the responsibilities of either the Agencies or the institutions. The modifications are intended to provide a clearer description of expectations and accountabilities, to assist both the institutions and the Agencies in maintaining the very high standards expected in the management of over $2.6 billion in public funds annually.

Formatting and Structural changes

The current MOU consists of a main part which has:

• A 2-page summary of the responsibilities of the Institutions
• A summary of each of the MOU's 15 Schedules.

The rest of the MOU is made up of the 15 Schedules dealing with various financial and other research-related policies.

The revised agreement consists of:

• An introductory section setting out background information, objectives, general principles, and a summary of the role of each party.
• A series of sections, each dealing with a general topic such as Finance or Ethics, and each referring to the relevant Agency policies or manuals (e.g. TCPS-2) that set out the detailed requirements and commitments of the Institutions for that topic.

References to researchers' responsibilities have been removed as these will be the subject of agreements between the researchers and the Agencies specific to each grant and award. The Agencies are currently starting to work on templates for agreements with researchers that would clearly set out their grant and award-specific obligations.

A section has been added to the agreement that codifies the current practices, and rights of the Agencies, in the rare instance where there is a breach of an Agency requirement.

Some text has been deleted

To simplify the agreement, some text has been removed, with most of it relocated to other documents such as procedures or policies. In particular, the following types of provisions were removed:

• Those that were self-evident, vague or non-essential. For example, the MOU requires that institutions "support researchers in managing their research funds through the provision of appropriate working advice (…). This has been removed as it is vague and because institutions will do what is required in this respect even in the absence of this provision.
• Procedural commitments on the part of the Agencies. Commitments by the Agencies, such as to "provide timely and consistent responses to requests for information", have been removed and relocated to Agency policy and procedure manuals. Other overly general or vague obligations on the Agencies (for example: to "promote a collegial working relationship with the Institution and researchers aimed at achieving continuous improvement of accountability for funds and ensuring best practices in financial management") have been removed.
• Entire Schedules that were mainly descriptive or exhortative were removed and will be relocated. For example,
  • Schedule 6: Peer Review has been removed as it does not contain clear obligations or accountabilities and is more in the nature of a guidelines document.
  • Schedule 7: Statement of Principles: Postdoctoral Fellows has been dropped for it also is mainly a description of principles and good practices and, therefore, belongs elsewhere.
  • Schedule 9: Transfer of Funds From a Primary Institution to a Secondary Institution has been removed and will be found in the Tri-Agency Financial Administration Guide.
• Provisions that were outdated, or not used have been removed. For example, schedule 8 to the MOU sets out a process for resolving disputes. This has been superseded by the new Tri-Agency Framework: Responsible Conduct of Research, and by the provisions in Article 4 of the Agreement. Schedule 15: Public Communication has been removed and an updated Public Communications Policy of the Federal Research Funding Organizations has been developed.
• Provisions that were not central to the Agencies' mandates were removed. For example, Schedule 13: Research Involving Biohazards deals with a legislated program that is the responsibility of another government Agency, the Public Health Agency of Canada.

Consequential changes to other documents

As a result of the changes to the agreement, other Agency documentation will also have to be amended. Over the next few months, the Agencies will be adding most of the information removed from the new agreement to other documents such as the Financial Administration Guide. Institutions will be provided with information about these changes as they occur, as well as opportunities for consultation if required.

In addition, the new agreement will require changes to references in other Agency documents. For example, the many references to an "MOU" will have to be changed to reflect the new title.

Consultation process

From April to June, 2012, the Agencies will consult with the 250 institutions that receive funding, as well as with a number of associations, including AUCC, ACCC, ACAHO, CAURA, and CAUBO. The Agencies will review all comments received, and prepare a final version to be distributed to institutions in the early fall, for signature by all parties by December 15, 2012.