Year 1 Capstone

Thinking Like a Research Administrator

Look back across Year 1 and practice what the project story reveals about compliance, budget monitoring, documentation, internal controls, and administrative judgment.

Interactive Story Recap

Before the capstone, review the Year 1 story

Move through the story one scene at a time. Each scene shows how the project moved from a funded idea into active post-award management.

Dr. Aneka Brown

Scene 01

Every project begins with a problem

Dr. Aneka Brown wanted to understand why residents in underserved communities were delaying preventive healthcare until conditions became serious.

Before there was a grant to manage, there was a public health question.

Notice of Award Funded
Project Budget $350,000
IRB Status Pending

Scene 02

Funding is not the finish line

The project received a three-year award, but that did not mean every activity could begin immediately.

The project moved from pre-award planning into post-award responsibility.

Marcus Rivera

Scene 03

Marcus enters the story

Marcus Rivera reviewed the award, compliance status, budget activity, project documents, and communications from the team.

His job was not to stop the project. His job was to help it move forward responsibly.

David Patel

Scene 04

Financial reports tell a story

David Patel helped identify spending patterns that needed review. Salary savings, low burn rate, and delayed activity all pointed to the same lesson.

The numbers mattered because they revealed what was happening operationally.

Jasmine Lewis

Scene 05

The project becomes active

Jasmine Lewis joined the project and supported recruitment, survey logistics, data collection, documentation, and participant incentive tracking.

Strong operations made strong post-award oversight possible.

Dr. Aneka Brown Marcus Rivera David Patel Jasmine Lewis

Scene 06

Marcus did not work in a vacuum

Dr. Brown provided project context. David identified financial trends. Jasmine managed day-to-day records. Marcus connected the requirements, facts, risks, and documentation.

Research administration is collaborative problem-solving.

Year 1 Capstone

Scene 07

Now you step into Marcus’s role

The capstone asks you to review the facts, identify the risk, ask the right questions, and document a responsible decision.

Think like a research administrator.

Year 1 Review

These were never separate problems

Over the course of Year 1, Dr. Aneka Brown’s project experienced several situations that are common in sponsored research. Some involved compliance. Others involved finances. Some required difficult judgment calls. Others required careful documentation and monitoring.

At first glance, these situations may appear unrelated: a delayed approval, a vacant position, a conference invitation, a restaurant charge, an equipment purchase, and a discrepancy in participant incentive records.

But each event revealed something important about the role of research administration. Together, they tell a larger story about stewardship, accountability, and decision-making.

This capstone is not simply about remembering what happened. It is about understanding why these situations mattered and how Marcus approached them.

Year 1 Story Arc

What happened across the first year

Year 1 was not a series of unrelated problems. Each event revealed a different kind of post-award responsibility: confirming approvals, reading financial signals, reviewing costs, documenting decisions, and strengthening controls before the project moved deeper into active work.

01

Human Subjects Compliance Delay

Funding was awarded, but participant recruitment could not begin until final IRB approval was received.

Lesson: Funding and authorization are not always the same thing.
02

Hiring Delay

The Research Coordinator position remained vacant, creating salary savings and lower-than-expected personnel spending.

Lesson: A budget variance is usually telling you something.
03

Burn Rate Problem

Research Finance noticed that overall project spending was below forecast across multiple categories.

Lesson: Financial reports tell a project story.
04

Conference Opportunity

Dr. Brown received an invitation to present project findings, but Marcus had to review whether travel costs could be charged to the award.

Lesson: Having money does not mean you can spend it.
05

Questionable Expense

A restaurant charge required follow-up documentation to determine whether the expense supported the project.

Lesson: Documentation creates defensibility.
06

Unexpected Equipment Purchase

The project needed tablets for data collection, but the purchase was not included in the original budget.

Lesson: Projects rarely follow the original plan.
07

Participant Incentive Question

Marcus reconciled participant counts, gift card distribution records, and incentive documentation.

Lesson: Internal controls protect everyone.

Administrator Toolkit

The frameworks Marcus used throughout Year 1

Marcus did not approach each event as a one-off problem. He used repeatable questions and review frameworks that helped him gather information, understand requirements, document decisions, and support the project.

Compliance Review

Used when deciding whether project activity can begin.

  • Have approvals been obtained?
  • Are sponsor or institutional restrictions in place?
  • Can the activity begin now?

Financial Monitoring

Used when spending does not match expectations.

  • Does spending match project activity?
  • Are there significant variances?
  • Is project implementation behind schedule?

Expense Review

Used before deciding whether a cost belongs on the award.

  • Is it allowable?
  • Is it allocable?
  • Is it reasonable?
  • Is it documented?

Documentation Review

Used when records need to support a decision.

  • Does the documentation explain what happened?
  • Does it explain why it happened?
  • Would someone unfamiliar with the project understand it?

Rebudgeting Review

Used when project needs change from the original budget.

  • Why is the change needed?
  • Which budget categories are affected?
  • Are sponsor approvals required?

Internal Control Review

Used when records, transactions, or processes need verification.

  • Can transactions be verified?
  • Are reconciliations performed?
  • Are discrepancies investigated?

Marcus’s repeated pattern: stop, gather information, understand the requirements, document the decision, and support the project.

Capstone Practice

Work through new Year 1 scenarios on your own

This capstone is self-paced and ungraded. The goal is to practice the way Marcus thinks: review the situation, identify the concern, decide what documents matter, and explain what should happen next.

Practice Scenario Set

You are Marcus Rivera. Near the end of Year 1, Dr. Brown and the project team bring several new situations to your attention. These are not the same events you already reviewed, but they use the same post-award thinking.

Before flipping each card, pause and decide what you would recommend. Then reveal Marcus’s review and compare it to your own thinking.

Scenario 1

Unplanned Community Event

Jasmine wants to reserve space at a neighborhood health fair to recruit participants. The opportunity supports outreach, but the vendor requires payment this week and the cost was not listed separately in the original budget.

Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.

Marcus’s Review

Review budget, allowability, and timing

  • Main concern: Outreach may be allowable, but the cost was not separately budgeted.
  • Review: Approved budget, award terms, outreach plan, vendor quote, and procurement rules.
  • Ask: Is this event connected to approved recruitment activity?
  • Document: Project purpose, cost reasonableness, budget category, and approval path.

Click to return.

Scenario 2

Delayed Invoice

David notices an invoice from a survey platform vendor that covers services used three months ago. The invoice is valid, but it was submitted late and would affect the current quarter’s spending report.

Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.

Marcus’s Review

Match the cost to the project period and service dates

  • Main concern: Late invoices can distort financial monitoring.
  • Review: Invoice, service dates, purchase approval, project period, and financial report impact.
  • Ask: Were the services received and used for this project?
  • Document: Why the charge is late, what period it supports, and how reporting is affected.

Click to return.

Scenario 3

Staff Time Question

Jasmine helped prepare outreach materials for the project and also supported a related department event during the same week. Marcus needs to confirm whether the salary charged to the award matches the work that directly benefited the project.

Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.

Marcus’s Review

Confirm whether the salary charge matches project benefit

  • Main concern: Salary must reflect work that benefited the award.
  • Review: Payroll records, effort support, work assignments, and project activity logs.
  • Ask: Which activities directly supported this project?
  • Document: Allocation basis and any needed payroll correction.

Click to return.

Scenario 4

Missing Meeting Notes

Dr. Brown held a project planning meeting with community partners, but the agenda and attendance notes were not saved in the project folder. The meeting appears project-related, but the documentation is incomplete.

Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.

Marcus’s Review

Reconstruct the project record

  • Main concern: The activity may be valid, but the file does not explain it.
  • Review: Calendar invite, emails, agenda draft, attendee list, and meeting purpose.
  • Ask: What project decisions or recruitment activities were discussed?
  • Document: Meeting purpose, attendees, project connection, and follow-up notes.

Click to return.

Scenario 5

Supply Purchase Near Year-End

The project team wants to purchase outreach supplies before the end of Year 1. The supplies may be useful in Year 2, but Marcus needs to determine whether the timing and purpose support charging the cost now.

Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.

Marcus’s Review

Watch for timing and stockpiling concerns

  • Main concern: Buying supplies near year-end can create timing and necessity concerns.
  • Review: Supply list, outreach schedule, remaining budget, project period, and purchasing policy.
  • Ask: Are the supplies needed now for current project activity?
  • Document: Project need, timing, quantity, and expected use.

Click to return.

Scenario 6

Participant Complaint

A participant contacts the project team saying they completed the survey but did not receive the promised gift card. Jasmine has partial records, but Marcus needs to help determine what happened and how the issue should be documented.

Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.

Marcus’s Review

Reconcile participant activity and incentive records

  • Main concern: Participant incentive records must support what was promised and distributed.
  • Review: Survey completion record, incentive log, gift card inventory, and acknowledgment forms.
  • Ask: Was the participant eligible, and was a gift card issued?
  • Document: Resolution, any correction, and improvements to tracking.

Click to return.

There is no score. The purpose is to practice administrative judgment and prepare for more complex Year 2 situations.

Completion Criteria

What successful Year 1 completion means

Completing Year 1 means the learner has worked through the foundational post-award concepts and can apply administrative thinking to common project management situations.

Complete the curriculum

Review the pre-award story, Events 01–07, and the Year 1 capstone.

Review the materials

Use the Year 1 review, timeline, key concepts guide, and administrator toolkit to reinforce the learning.

Complete the practice scenarios

Work through the capstone practice scenarios and think through the documents, questions, risks, and next steps.

Demonstrate administrative thinking

Show that you can gather information, identify risks, evaluate expenditures, interpret financial information, recognize documentation requirements, and apply internal control concepts.

Completion is self-paced. Learners are ready to move into Year 2 when they can explain the issue, identify the records to review, ask the right follow-up questions, and document a reasonable administrative decision.

Reflection Questions

Prepare your Year 1 administrative review

Use these questions to write or discuss a short Year 1 review memo from Marcus’s perspective.

  1. Which Year 1 issue created the greatest compliance risk?
  2. Which Year 1 issue created the greatest financial monitoring concern?
  3. Which issue depended most heavily on documentation?
  4. Where did collaboration between roles improve the outcome?
  5. What should Marcus monitor most closely at the start of Year 2?
  6. What does this project teach about the relationship between financial activity and project activity?

The strongest response connects the events together instead of treating them as separate checklist items.

Year 1 Mindset

The pattern Marcus used all year

Understand the requirements

Marcus checks sponsor terms, institutional policies, federal rules, IRB status, and approved budgets.

Review the facts

Marcus uses emails, financial reports, receipts, logs, cost estimates, and project records to understand what happened.

Ask questions

Marcus requests missing information instead of guessing or assuming.

Document the decision

Marcus records the basis for decisions so the project can defend them later.

Support the project

Marcus helps Dr. Brown and the project team keep moving responsibly.

Protect the institution

Marcus reduces compliance, financial, documentation, and audit risk.

This is the mindset that separates administrative processing from research administration.

Transition to Year 2

From startup to active award management

By the end of Year 1, the project is no longer in startup mode. Participant recruitment is underway, data collection is active, expenditures are increasing, and operational processes have been established.

Payroll and effort

Year 2 will focus more closely on whether payroll charges are accurate and whether effort matches salary support.

Community partnerships

As participation expands, partnership documentation and monitoring become more important.

Subrecipient monitoring

If project funds are provided to another organization, oversight responsibilities expand.

Cost transfers

As activity increases, mistakes may need correction, and corrections must be documented.

Reporting responsibilities

Sponsors expect accurate reports, tracked deadlines, and documented performance.

More complex judgment

Year 2 builds on Year 1, but the situations become less obvious and the risks become greater.

Year 1 asked: “Can we start?” Year 2 increasingly asks: “Are we managing the project appropriately?”

Back to Year 1 Continue to Year 2