Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR)

Background

Each year, the NIH requires us to submit a Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) for any NIH award. These are used to describe scientific progress, report on personnel, identify any major changes to aims or other elements of the project, and define your plans for the next budget period of the award. The purpose of this page is to provide an outline of what you as PI should prepare, and what administrative staff can do for you. An FAQ page from NIH is maintained here: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/rppr/faqs.htm.

RPPR Initiation

This step must be performed by the project director/principal investigator (PD/PI) or their delegate. If you haven’t already, please add Taylor Cluff (Commons ID tcluff) as a delegate in eRA Commons. You can find more info on adding a delegate here: https://era.nih.gov/commons/Commons/1_Admin/delegations/delegate_auth_own.htm

While administrators can help with much of the RPPR process, only you are in a position to speak to the scientific progress of your project. For that reason, there are specific sections you should prepare as PI:

B1. What are the major goals of the project, and have they changed?

This section is for you to simply state your aims for the project, particularly if any changes have happened since the last reporting period.

B2. What was accomplished under these goals?

Here you will break down what you accomplished during the reporting period by aim and with references included.

B4. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?

Please describe specific opportunities that have benefitted specific members of your lab. Please note that the following text should be included in all descriptions provided for section B4:

The University of Wisconsin-Madison requires that all graduate students and postdoctoral researchers supported by NIH funding utilize Individual Development Plans to set academic and career goals and facilitate conversations with their mentors. Additionally, the University recommends that all graduate students and postdoctoral researchers utilize IDPs, regardless of funding source.

The University offers a collection of resources and tools to support mentees, mentors, and PIs in implementing IDPs. These include a UW-Madison IDP template, workshops for mentees (both face-to-face and online videos), peer learning groups for mentees, as well as guidelines for mentors. More information can be found here: http://grad.wisc.edu/pd/idp.

IDP activity for NIH-funded graduate students and postdoctoral researchers is tracked in the university’s IDP reporting system, a tool that maintains mentee privacy yet allows mentors and PIs to monitor IDP-related activity.

B6. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish these goals?

This is again broken down by aim. A detailed paragraph for each is sufficient.

C1. Are there publications or manuscripts accepted for publication in a journal or other publication (e.g. book, one-time publication, monograph) during the reporting period resulting directly from this award?

If yes, these must be added to the report from MyNCBI. If you are already registered with MyNCBI, you can log in with the link at the top of section C1. If not, you can register here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK3842/#MyNCBI.Getting_Started.

Most of these questions are generally answered “no” or “nothing to report” in most BMC cases, but may be applicable to your project. Please note if any of these questions apply to you. Some exceptions previously seen in BMC reports are bolded.

B3. Are there any related competitive revisions and administrative supplements?

B5. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?

C2, C3, C4. Report on resultant Websites, Technologies/Techniques, and Inventions/Patent Applications/Licenses respectively.

C5. Report on any other relevant resource sharing.

E1, E2, E3. Describe any impact on human resources, infrastructure, and/or technology transfer.

E4. Is funding being spent in foreign countries? If so, how much?

F1. Are there any changes in approach? If so, why?

F2. Actual or anticipated challenges or delays and actions or plans to solve them

F3. Significant changes to changes to human subjects, vertebrate animals, biohazards, and select agents

G1. Special notice of award terms

G2. Responsible conduct of research

G3. Mentor’s report or sponsor comments

G4-5. Does the project involve human subjects? If yes, provide inclusion enrollment data.

G6. Are human embryonic stem cells used? If yes, provide lines.

G7. Does this project involve vertebrate animals?

G9. Foreign component

G11. Is program income anticipated for the next budget period?

D1. What individuals have worked on the project?

All listed personnel must now have an eRA Commons ID. If any of your listed personnel do not have one, administrators will work with them and SMPH to obtain an ID.

G10. Is it anticipated that an estimated unobligated balance (including prior year carryover) will be greater than 25% of the current year’s total approved budget?

We will provide an estimated unobligated balance (if over 25%) and work with the PI to outline how this balance will be spent down within the next reporting period.