Summarize with:

Securing federal funding is a significant achievement. The months of writing, revising, and coordinating pay off with the arrival of a Notice of Award. However, the real work begins after that. Winning the grant marks the start of a 3-5 year journey of active management. 

The National Council of University Research Administrators recognized this in 2000 when it launched the Financial Research Administration Conference with 300 attendees. By 2024, that number hit 1,300. That fourfold growth tells a clear story that post-award management has become one of the most critical aspects of research administration—either it translates into successful research or gets tangled in compliance issues and administrative problems. 

In this article, let's explore what makes post-award management so demanding, why the burden keeps growing, and how institutions can use integrated research administration platforms to manage grants more effectively.

The Challenges of Post-Award Grant Management 

Post-award administrators rarely manage just one grant. Most juggle dozens of active awards simultaneously. Each grant comes with its own sponsor rules, compliance deadlines, and reporting requirements. A few challenges of post-award grant management are as follows. 

  • Managing Finances Across Multiple Sponsors

NIH, NSF, and DOD each apply different thresholds for rebudgeting, prior approvals, and allowable costs. What's acceptable on one award may be unallowable on another. This creates three persistent challenges:

  • Cost transfers create frequent pressure, especially those made more than 90 days after the original charge. 
  • Items prohibited under 2 CFR 200 appear on grant accounts more often than expected and must be identified before financial reports go out. 
  • Spending patterns raise questions too. For instance, overspending suggests poor controls, underspending suggests stalled research, and both trigger sponsor inquiries.

Compliance That Runs Continuously

Federal grants come with continuous compliance obligations that operate on fixed timelines. This creates several ongoing challenges:

  • Effort reporting under 2 CFR 200.430 requires salaries to accurately reflect work performed. For PIs working across multiple awards, this means frequent certifications, making it one of the most time-intensive compliance activities.
  • Prior approvals create recurring risk. PIs don't always realize a change needed sponsor approval until after it happened, forcing administrators into retroactive requests and detailed explanations.
  • Subrecipient monitoring adds substantial complexity. Institutions must assess risk, monitor performance, review audits, and issue management decisions for every subaward throughout the entire grant period.

Personnel Changes and Scope Management

Research teams are dynamic, and every change creates administrative ripple effects. This includes several common scenarios:

Research teams are dynamic, and every change creates administrative ripple effects. This includes several common scenarios:

  • When a PI leaves the institution or moves to another university, the grant must be formally transferred with sponsor approval.
  • Adding or removing key personnel from a grant requires sponsor notification. When people's time commitments change, those effort reallocations must be documented in payroll systems and certified.
  • Scope changes require careful judgment. Research naturally evolves, but administrators must distinguish between acceptable evolution and changes requiring sponsor approval. For instance, pursuing the same research question using different methods is usually acceptable, but shifting to fundamentally different research objectives requires prior approval. The challenge is timing. By the time administrators identify a potential scope issue, research may already be underway.

How Integrated Systems Address These Challenges

The major reasons post-award activities are tedious is because of manual processes, disconnected systems, and lack of automation. The good news is that all these are technology problems, and they're solvable.

Key Solutions eGrants platform addresses post-award challenges through an integrated approach. The platform connects pre-award proposal development, post-award financial management, effort reporting, and compliance tracking in one system. This integration addresses several critical needs:

  • Automated workflow management: Electronic routing moves prior approval requests through institutional offices automatically. Reviews happen in parallel where appropriate, and institutions report reducing approval times from weeks to days.
  • Effort reporting with system integration: The platform integrates with institutional payroll systems to streamline effort certification. This maintains documentation required under 2 CFR 200.430 while reducing the administrative burden identified in faculty surveys.
  • ERP system connectivity: Key Solutions integrates with Banner, PeopleSoft, Oracle, and other institutional systems. This means data flows between financial systems and research administration platforms without duplicate entry.
  • Centralized compliance tracking: The system monitors deadlines and certification periods across active grants. Automated reminders help ensure reporting requirements don't fall through the cracks.
  • Complete audit documentation: Every approval, modification, and certification is captured with timestamps and electronic signatures. When auditors arrive, the complete record exists in organized format.

The platform also includes conflict of interest management (eCOI) that integrates with grants management, creating connections between disclosure requirements and funded research activities.

The Difference Integration Makes

Managing post-award grants with disconnected systems means spending time reacting to problems: discovering discrepancies in monthly reports, chasing missing signatures, manually tracking deadlines, reconciling data between systems that don't talk to each other.

Managing with integrated systems means proactively managing awards: identifying potential issues before they become problems, routing approvals efficiently, monitoring compliance automatically, and providing PIs with information when they need it.

Key Solutions provides a modular approach. The platform includes pre-award proposal development, post-award financial management, effort reporting, conflict of interest management, and subrecipient monitoring. These modules work together, but institutions can implement them in phases based on where they need help most.

Institutions can start with real-time financial dashboards if budget monitoring is the biggest challenge. They can add automated compliance tracking when ready. The integrated architecture means data flows automatically once modules are connected.

Final Thoughts

Winning the grant is an achievement. The quality of post-award management determines whether that funding translates into successful research outcomes.

Strong post-award management means PIs can focus on research. Compliance requirements get met without consuming excessive time. Audit findings are rare because systems prevent errors. Institutional reputation for stewardship remains strong.

The NCURA FRA Conference growth from 300 to 1,300 attendees reflects a profession that has recognized post-award management as mission-critical. The question is whether institutions have the systems necessary to manage this complexity effectively.

Generic financial systems weren't built to handle subrecipient monitoring under 2 CFR 200.332. Spreadsheets can't provide real-time visibility into spending across 200 active grants.

Key Solutions works with institutions managing this complexity daily. The platform integrates financial management, compliance tracking, workflow automation, effort reporting, subrecipient monitoring, and audit documentation in one system.

If your team is spending hours on manual reconciliation, chasing missing certifications, or preparing for audits, schedule a consultation with Key Solutions research administration specialists to discuss specific challenges. We'll walk you through how integrated systems eliminate your bottlenecks.

Frequently Asked Questions

Integrated platforms streamline effort reporting by connecting directly to institutional payroll systems. When payroll processes, the system automatically pulls that data to pre-populate certification forms based on actual salary charges. This eliminates manual data entry that typically consumes most certification time.

Electronic signatures and automated reminders replace paper routing and follow-up emails. These systems maintain the documentation required under 2 CFR 200.430 while reducing the time faculty spend on each certification from about 30 minutes to under 5 minutes.

Institutions need centralized systems that track sponsor-specific requirements alongside federal baseline rules. These systems store different rebudgeting thresholds, prior approval triggers, and allowable cost rules for each sponsor in one database. When administrators work on an NIH grant, the system applies NIH rules. When they switch to an NSF grant, NSF rules apply automatically. This approach allows administrators to manage multiple sponsor requirements in one place rather than switching between separate databases or spreadsheets for each federal agency.

Auditors examine several key areas during post-award reviews such as:

  • Cost transfer justifications
  • Effort certifications
  • Subrecipient monitoring records
  • Prior approval requests to see if required changes got sponsor permission before implementation

Throughout all of this, they verify that timestamps, electronic signatures, and complete audit trails exist. Systems that capture every transaction automatically create organized documentation that auditors can access immediately, which is much stronger than manually compiled records assembled after an audit notice arrives.

Yes, modern research administration platforms integrate directly with institutional ERP systems through established data connections. Key Solutions eGrants connects with Banner, PeopleSoft, Oracle, and other enterprise systems used by universities. These integrations allow financial data to flow automatically between systems in both directions.

When a budget gets approved in the grant system, it transfers to the financial system. When charges post in the financial system, they appear in the grant system. This eliminates duplicate entry and ensures consistency between grant budgets and institutional ledgers without requiring manual reconciliation.

Return on investment comes from several measurable improvements:

  • Time savings on manual tasks: Administrators spend significantly less time on data entry, reconciliation, and chasing signatures. This freed-up time can be redirected to higher-value activities like strategic planning and PI support.
  • Fewer audit findings: The system enforces compliance automatically, which protects institutional reputation and avoids costly corrective actions that result from audit findings.
  • Faster approval cycles: Electronic routing means research can start sooner, keeping projects on timeline and maintaining strong relationships with sponsors.
  • Reduced cost transfers: Early problem identification catches budget issues before charges post, which reduces the volume of cost transfers needed and the audit scrutiny they trigger.

Institutions typically measure these benefits in hours saved per grant per month. Many report that administrative workload drops significantly while the quality of compliance documentation actually improves.

In manual post-award management, issues are discovered reactively, often after a delay. Administrators track deadlines in spreadsheets, chase missing signatures via emails and calls, and manually reconcile data. Automated management is proactive. It identifies issues in real-time, routes approvals electronically, sends deadline reminders, and syncs data across systems for continuous reconciliation. This allows for faster corrections and better visibility.

Siloed platforms require administrators to enter and update data in multiple systems, manually reconcile reports, and switch between different software interfaces, creating inefficiency. Integrated platforms connect all functions in one system, allowing data to flow seamlessly across modules. Changes are updated everywhere simultaneously, and data reconciliation happens automatically, reducing errors and saving time.

Essential features address the core challenges of post-award work.

  • ERP system integration to pull financial data automatically from Banner, PeopleSoft, or Oracle so administrators see current spending without manual report generation.
  • Automated compliance deadline tracking to monitor all grants simultaneously and sends reminders before deadlines arrive.
  • Electronic workflow routing to move prior approval requests through institutional offices without paper or manual forwarding.
  • Effort reporting that should connect directly to payroll systems to pre-populate certifications and reduce manual entry.
  • Subrecipient management tools to centralize monitoring documentation required for compliance.
  • Complete audit documentation capturing every transaction with timestamps and electronic signatures, creating records that satisfy auditor requirements.

Key Solutions eGrants provides these capabilities in a modular platform that institutions can implement in phases based on which areas need help most urgently.

Generic financial systems are designed to track financial transactions across an entire institution. They excel at general ledger accounting, accounts payable, and financial reporting. However, they weren't built to handle the specific requirements that federal research grants impose.

They don't understand subrecipient monitoring requirements under 2 CFR 200.332, which mandate risk assessment and ongoing oversight throughout grant periods. They don't provide effort certification workflows that satisfy 2 CFR 200.430 requirements linking salaries to actual work performed. They don't enforce sponsor-specific prior approval rules that vary between NIH, NSF, and DOD.

Research administration platforms are purpose-built for these regulatory requirements. They understand federal grant regulations and automate the compliance workflows that auditors expect to see, creating documentation that generic financial systems simply don't capture.

Integration creates several interconnected benefits that compound over time. These platforms:

  • Eliminate duplicate data entry because information flows automatically between modules rather than requiring manual re-entry.
  • Provide real-time visibility across the entire grant lifecycle, so administrators see how proposals, awards, spending, and compliance all connect.
  • Automate compliance monitoring by checking requirements continuously rather than relying on people to remember deadlines.
  • Maintain audit-ready documentation automatically by capturing every action with proper timestamps and signatures as transactions occur.
  • Reduce manual reconciliation because the system keeps data synchronized internally.

Platforms like Key Solutions eGrants demonstrate these benefits by connecting pre-award proposal development, post-award financial management, effort reporting, and compliance functions in one system. Data flows automatically throughout the platform rather than requiring administrators to manually transfer information between disconnected tools, which is where most administrative time gets consumed.

Tags:

Post-Award Grant Management
Research Administration Software
Effort Reporting
Subrecipient Monitoring
2 CFR Part 200
Grant Compliance
Audit Readiness

Categories

Research Compliance

IRBIBC SoftwareSCROPost Approval Monitoring

Animal Research

IACUC Protocol SoftwarePost Approval Monitoring

Research Administration

Grants ManagementeCOI

Related Posts

February 10, 2026

Understanding Multi-Institution Grants: What Research Institutions Should Know About Subrecipient Monitoring

February 10, 2026

Why It's Time for Research Institutions to Rethink Grant Management Workflows

February 10, 2026

Effort Reporting in Modern Research Administration: How to Balance Compliance with Efficiency

Table of Contents

Summarize with:

Securing federal funding is a significant achievement. The months of writing, revising, and coordinating pay off with the arrival of a Notice of Award. However, the real work begins after that. Winning the grant marks the start of a 3-5 year journey of active management. 

The National Council of University Research Administrators recognized this in 2000 when it launched the Financial Research Administration Conference with 300 attendees. By 2024, that number hit 1,300. That fourfold growth tells a clear story that post-award management has become one of the most critical aspects of research administration—either it translates into successful research or gets tangled in compliance issues and administrative problems. 

In this article, let's explore what makes post-award management so demanding, why the burden keeps growing, and how institutions can use integrated research administration platforms to manage grants more effectively.

The Challenges of Post-Award Grant Management 

Post-award administrators rarely manage just one grant. Most juggle dozens of active awards simultaneously. Each grant comes with its own sponsor rules, compliance deadlines, and reporting requirements. A few challenges of post-award grant management are as follows. 

  • Managing Finances Across Multiple Sponsors

NIH, NSF, and DOD each apply different thresholds for rebudgeting, prior approvals, and allowable costs. What's acceptable on one award may be unallowable on another. This creates three persistent challenges:

  • Cost transfers create frequent pressure, especially those made more than 90 days after the original charge. 
  • Items prohibited under 2 CFR 200 appear on grant accounts more often than expected and must be identified before financial reports go out. 
  • Spending patterns raise questions too. For instance, overspending suggests poor controls, underspending suggests stalled research, and both trigger sponsor inquiries.

Compliance That Runs Continuously

Federal grants come with continuous compliance obligations that operate on fixed timelines. This creates several ongoing challenges:

  • Effort reporting under 2 CFR 200.430 requires salaries to accurately reflect work performed. For PIs working across multiple awards, this means frequent certifications, making it one of the most time-intensive compliance activities.
  • Prior approvals create recurring risk. PIs don't always realize a change needed sponsor approval until after it happened, forcing administrators into retroactive requests and detailed explanations.
  • Subrecipient monitoring adds substantial complexity. Institutions must assess risk, monitor performance, review audits, and issue management decisions for every subaward throughout the entire grant period.

Personnel Changes and Scope Management

Research teams are dynamic, and every change creates administrative ripple effects. This includes several common scenarios:

Research teams are dynamic, and every change creates administrative ripple effects. This includes several common scenarios:

  • When a PI leaves the institution or moves to another university, the grant must be formally transferred with sponsor approval.
  • Adding or removing key personnel from a grant requires sponsor notification. When people's time commitments change, those effort reallocations must be documented in payroll systems and certified.
  • Scope changes require careful judgment. Research naturally evolves, but administrators must distinguish between acceptable evolution and changes requiring sponsor approval. For instance, pursuing the same research question using different methods is usually acceptable, but shifting to fundamentally different research objectives requires prior approval. The challenge is timing. By the time administrators identify a potential scope issue, research may already be underway.

How Integrated Systems Address These Challenges

The major reasons post-award activities are tedious is because of manual processes, disconnected systems, and lack of automation. The good news is that all these are technology problems, and they're solvable.

Key Solutions eGrants platform addresses post-award challenges through an integrated approach. The platform connects pre-award proposal development, post-award financial management, effort reporting, and compliance tracking in one system. This integration addresses several critical needs:

  • Automated workflow management: Electronic routing moves prior approval requests through institutional offices automatically. Reviews happen in parallel where appropriate, and institutions report reducing approval times from weeks to days.
  • Effort reporting with system integration: The platform integrates with institutional payroll systems to streamline effort certification. This maintains documentation required under 2 CFR 200.430 while reducing the administrative burden identified in faculty surveys.
  • ERP system connectivity: Key Solutions integrates with Banner, PeopleSoft, Oracle, and other institutional systems. This means data flows between financial systems and research administration platforms without duplicate entry.
  • Centralized compliance tracking: The system monitors deadlines and certification periods across active grants. Automated reminders help ensure reporting requirements don't fall through the cracks.
  • Complete audit documentation: Every approval, modification, and certification is captured with timestamps and electronic signatures. When auditors arrive, the complete record exists in organized format.

The platform also includes conflict of interest management (eCOI) that integrates with grants management, creating connections between disclosure requirements and funded research activities.

The Difference Integration Makes

Managing post-award grants with disconnected systems means spending time reacting to problems: discovering discrepancies in monthly reports, chasing missing signatures, manually tracking deadlines, reconciling data between systems that don't talk to each other.

Managing with integrated systems means proactively managing awards: identifying potential issues before they become problems, routing approvals efficiently, monitoring compliance automatically, and providing PIs with information when they need it.

Key Solutions provides a modular approach. The platform includes pre-award proposal development, post-award financial management, effort reporting, conflict of interest management, and subrecipient monitoring. These modules work together, but institutions can implement them in phases based on where they need help most.

Institutions can start with real-time financial dashboards if budget monitoring is the biggest challenge. They can add automated compliance tracking when ready. The integrated architecture means data flows automatically once modules are connected.

Final Thoughts

Winning the grant is an achievement. The quality of post-award management determines whether that funding translates into successful research outcomes.

Strong post-award management means PIs can focus on research. Compliance requirements get met without consuming excessive time. Audit findings are rare because systems prevent errors. Institutional reputation for stewardship remains strong.

The NCURA FRA Conference growth from 300 to 1,300 attendees reflects a profession that has recognized post-award management as mission-critical. The question is whether institutions have the systems necessary to manage this complexity effectively.

Generic financial systems weren't built to handle subrecipient monitoring under 2 CFR 200.332. Spreadsheets can't provide real-time visibility into spending across 200 active grants.

Key Solutions works with institutions managing this complexity daily. The platform integrates financial management, compliance tracking, workflow automation, effort reporting, subrecipient monitoring, and audit documentation in one system.

If your team is spending hours on manual reconciliation, chasing missing certifications, or preparing for audits, schedule a consultation with Key Solutions research administration specialists to discuss specific challenges. We'll walk you through how integrated systems eliminate your bottlenecks.

Frequently Asked Questions

Integrated platforms streamline effort reporting by connecting directly to institutional payroll systems. When payroll processes, the system automatically pulls that data to pre-populate certification forms based on actual salary charges. This eliminates manual data entry that typically consumes most certification time.

Electronic signatures and automated reminders replace paper routing and follow-up emails. These systems maintain the documentation required under 2 CFR 200.430 while reducing the time faculty spend on each certification from about 30 minutes to under 5 minutes.

Institutions need centralized systems that track sponsor-specific requirements alongside federal baseline rules. These systems store different rebudgeting thresholds, prior approval triggers, and allowable cost rules for each sponsor in one database. When administrators work on an NIH grant, the system applies NIH rules. When they switch to an NSF grant, NSF rules apply automatically. This approach allows administrators to manage multiple sponsor requirements in one place rather than switching between separate databases or spreadsheets for each federal agency.

Auditors examine several key areas during post-award reviews such as:

  • Cost transfer justifications
  • Effort certifications
  • Subrecipient monitoring records
  • Prior approval requests to see if required changes got sponsor permission before implementation

Throughout all of this, they verify that timestamps, electronic signatures, and complete audit trails exist. Systems that capture every transaction automatically create organized documentation that auditors can access immediately, which is much stronger than manually compiled records assembled after an audit notice arrives.

Yes, modern research administration platforms integrate directly with institutional ERP systems through established data connections. Key Solutions eGrants connects with Banner, PeopleSoft, Oracle, and other enterprise systems used by universities. These integrations allow financial data to flow automatically between systems in both directions.

When a budget gets approved in the grant system, it transfers to the financial system. When charges post in the financial system, they appear in the grant system. This eliminates duplicate entry and ensures consistency between grant budgets and institutional ledgers without requiring manual reconciliation.

Return on investment comes from several measurable improvements:

  • Time savings on manual tasks: Administrators spend significantly less time on data entry, reconciliation, and chasing signatures. This freed-up time can be redirected to higher-value activities like strategic planning and PI support.
  • Fewer audit findings: The system enforces compliance automatically, which protects institutional reputation and avoids costly corrective actions that result from audit findings.
  • Faster approval cycles: Electronic routing means research can start sooner, keeping projects on timeline and maintaining strong relationships with sponsors.
  • Reduced cost transfers: Early problem identification catches budget issues before charges post, which reduces the volume of cost transfers needed and the audit scrutiny they trigger.

Institutions typically measure these benefits in hours saved per grant per month. Many report that administrative workload drops significantly while the quality of compliance documentation actually improves.

In manual post-award management, issues are discovered reactively, often after a delay. Administrators track deadlines in spreadsheets, chase missing signatures via emails and calls, and manually reconcile data. Automated management is proactive. It identifies issues in real-time, routes approvals electronically, sends deadline reminders, and syncs data across systems for continuous reconciliation. This allows for faster corrections and better visibility.

Siloed platforms require administrators to enter and update data in multiple systems, manually reconcile reports, and switch between different software interfaces, creating inefficiency. Integrated platforms connect all functions in one system, allowing data to flow seamlessly across modules. Changes are updated everywhere simultaneously, and data reconciliation happens automatically, reducing errors and saving time.

Essential features address the core challenges of post-award work.

  • ERP system integration to pull financial data automatically from Banner, PeopleSoft, or Oracle so administrators see current spending without manual report generation.
  • Automated compliance deadline tracking to monitor all grants simultaneously and sends reminders before deadlines arrive.
  • Electronic workflow routing to move prior approval requests through institutional offices without paper or manual forwarding.
  • Effort reporting that should connect directly to payroll systems to pre-populate certifications and reduce manual entry.
  • Subrecipient management tools to centralize monitoring documentation required for compliance.
  • Complete audit documentation capturing every transaction with timestamps and electronic signatures, creating records that satisfy auditor requirements.

Key Solutions eGrants provides these capabilities in a modular platform that institutions can implement in phases based on which areas need help most urgently.

Generic financial systems are designed to track financial transactions across an entire institution. They excel at general ledger accounting, accounts payable, and financial reporting. However, they weren't built to handle the specific requirements that federal research grants impose.

They don't understand subrecipient monitoring requirements under 2 CFR 200.332, which mandate risk assessment and ongoing oversight throughout grant periods. They don't provide effort certification workflows that satisfy 2 CFR 200.430 requirements linking salaries to actual work performed. They don't enforce sponsor-specific prior approval rules that vary between NIH, NSF, and DOD.

Research administration platforms are purpose-built for these regulatory requirements. They understand federal grant regulations and automate the compliance workflows that auditors expect to see, creating documentation that generic financial systems simply don't capture.

Integration creates several interconnected benefits that compound over time. These platforms:

  • Eliminate duplicate data entry because information flows automatically between modules rather than requiring manual re-entry.
  • Provide real-time visibility across the entire grant lifecycle, so administrators see how proposals, awards, spending, and compliance all connect.
  • Automate compliance monitoring by checking requirements continuously rather than relying on people to remember deadlines.
  • Maintain audit-ready documentation automatically by capturing every action with proper timestamps and signatures as transactions occur.
  • Reduce manual reconciliation because the system keeps data synchronized internally.

Platforms like Key Solutions eGrants demonstrate these benefits by connecting pre-award proposal development, post-award financial management, effort reporting, and compliance functions in one system. Data flows automatically throughout the platform rather than requiring administrators to manually transfer information between disconnected tools, which is where most administrative time gets consumed.

Tags:

Post-Award Grant Management
Research Administration Software
Effort Reporting
Subrecipient Monitoring
2 CFR Part 200
Grant Compliance
Audit Readiness

Discover What Our Integrated Solutions Can Do For Your Organization

Get in touch with us today, and one of our experts will connect with you shortly.