Offering Cost Sharing (including Matching and In-Kind Contributions) on Sponsored Projects

The terms "cost sharing," "matching," and "in-kind"refer to that portion of the total project costs not borne by the sponsor. These terms are often used interchangeably. Attention should be given to sponsor definitions of each of these  terms. The University's use of these terms is included in the Definitions section of the policy.

Voluntary uncommitted cost sharing by ANY project personnel does not need to be certified. However, if voluntary uncommitted cost sharing by any project personnel is used to meet effort obligations to the sponsor, it becomes voluntary committed cost sharing and must be tracked in a cost share chartfield string and certified as effort associated with the sponsored project.

Unquantified general expressions of support in the proposal are not cost sharing commitments. However, University policies as well as federal regulations require the project Pl devote 1% effort during one effort period per year. If it is not charged to the project, it must be certified as committed cost sharing. Only student support (e.g., fellowship or doctoral dissertation), equipment, conference, master agreements, and training grants are excluded from this regulation.

Any effort you put into the project above and beyond that 1% is uncommitted cost sharing and you do not have to add it to the effort statements. This effort should be accounted for on non-sponsored fund sources.

Yes. You will still be reporting 100% of your effort on the effort statement. You will not, however, be identifying and assigning uncommitted cost shared effort to specific projects. Uncommitted cost shared effort is lumped together in an unidentified way with all other effort on non-sponsored fund sources.

This is committed cost sharing because it was included in the proposal. This cost sharing will be listed on the NOGA and certified in the effort reporting system. Note that this would be true even if you volunteered that effort in the proposal and the agency were silent on the matter of your cost sharing in the award documents; the presumption would be that the agency "took you up on your offer" to commit 5% of your effort.

If the Co-Pl is a faculty member, the hours/effort over the committed level would be an example of uncommitted cost sharing and need not be incorporated into the effort certification system. Normally, this researcher would certify only the 10% direct charged and the 10% committed cost sharing on the effort statements. If, however, the Co-Pl wished to use these additional hours to satisfy the Co-Pl's overall effort obligations on the project (e.g. potentially reduce the Co-Pl's 20% effort in a future effort period but still be able to claim an average effort of 20% for the year), it is permissible to certify the extra effort as belonging to the project. In this case, the effort should be treated as committed cost sharing (charged to a cost share chart string for that project and certified as project effort)

You may be able to direct charge those costs, if the sponsor allows flexibility in how the cost sharing commitment is fulfilled; check your sponsor's terms and conditions or consult Sponsored Projects Administration (SPA) for assistance. However, unless you receive approval from the sponsor, you cannot reduce your overall 30% cost sharing commitment. In this situation, you should write to the sponsor (with countersignature from SPA) to request a reduction in your level of cost sharing.

Most federal projects require some level of effort but this can be provided at any time of the year (summer, academic term or both). Since 2012, the effort periods have been constructed so that some of the summer time period is included in each of the two cycles; you should therefore be able to certify the minimum 1% by the effort that was devoted in either or both of the two effort periods.

If the proposal included the recommended statement that the University will reduce its cost sharing proportionate to any funding reduction awarded by the sponsor, then the SPA Grant and Contract Officer (GCO) will automatically reduce the cost sharing commitment to 17% (.85 of the 20%). If the original award amount was going to be $100,000, this means that the $20,000 cost share originally contemplated would be reduced to 17% of the $85,000 award, or $14,450.

However, if the statement was not included in the proposal, 20% cost sharing will still be required, unless the Pl requests agency approval to reduce it. Note, however, that the actual dollars needed to fulfill the cost sharing will be lower (e.g., 20% of 100,000 requested= $20,000 whereas 20% of $85,000 awarded= $17,000).

The agency may take any number of actions, up to requiring the University to pay back the full amount of the award. More commonly, an agency might consider a request from the University to reduce or eliminate cost sharing following receipt of an explanation of why we were unable to fulfill our original commitment, particularly if the commitment was not a statutory or RFP-level requirement for cost sharing to have taken place. Another possibility is that the agency will reduce its final award to be proportional with the level of cost sharing that was achieved (e.g., if we were required to do $75,000 of cost sharing but could only do $50,000, the agency might reduce the final dollar value of its award by 1/3). Another possibility is asking the agency to allow a retroactive no-cost time extension to allow the Pl more time to fulfill the cost sharing requirement. PIs and their department administrators should confer closely with Sponsored Financial Reporting (SFR) and SPA if this problem arises in order to determine the best solution for their particular circumstance.

When an employee was paid on a sponsored project and their salary has exceeded the current salary cap, the difference between the employee's salary and the salary cap must be cost-shared. Please refer to the Salary Cap Payroll and Cost Sharing Calculations job aid for more information about the NIH salary cap.