Year 2 Capstone
Year 2 moved the project into active award management. Now Marcus must look across payroll, effort, subrecipient oversight, cost transfers, and documentation to assess the health of the award.
Before You Begin Year 2
Year 2 builds on the administrative lessons from Year 1. Move through the recap one scene at a time before continuing into active award management.
Year 2 Review
By the end of Year 2, the Community Access to Preventive Healthcare Initiative is no longer a new project. Recruitment is active, community outreach has expanded, CHAN has joined the work through a subaward, and project spending is more complex.
Dr. Brown continues to lead the scientific work. Jasmine supports day-to-day operations. David reviews financial activity and payment-related issues. Karen Mitchell and CHAN bring community expertise. Marcus helps connect the administrative pieces by gathering information, reviewing documentation, coordinating with the appropriate offices, and watching for risks.
The Year 2 events were not separate problems. Together, they show that active award management requires continuous monitoring, documentation, communication, coordination, and judgment.
Year 1 asked whether the project could start. Year 2 asks whether the active project is being managed responsibly.
Year 2 Story Arc
Year 2 showed what happens after a project becomes active. The issues were no longer only about whether work could begin. They were about whether the people, partners, charges, documentation, and corrections still matched the approved award.
David identified a salary charge that did not appear to match Jasmine’s approved salary allocation. Marcus reviewed the award documentation and helped gather the support needed for correction review.
Lesson: Payroll monitoring checks whether salary charges are posted correctly and supported by records.Dr. Brown took on new university-wide responsibilities, raising questions about whether her project effort still matched sponsor commitments.
Lesson: Salary and effort are related, but they are not the same thing.CHAN entered the project, and Marcus reviewed whether the organization’s proposed role appeared to meet subrecipient characteristics rather than routine contractor services.
Lesson: The nature of the work determines the relationship, and institutional routing may be required before work begins.David flagged CHAN’s invoice package because the required quarterly progress report was missing. Marcus followed up with Karen, documented the monitoring action, and updated Research Finance once the package was complete from the monitoring side.
Lesson: Monitoring includes financial review and performance review.A department requested that older outreach expenses be moved to the grant four months after the original charges occurred. Marcus reviewed the support and routed the request through the institutional cost transfer process.
Lesson: Late corrections require strong documentation, justification, and proper approval routing.Capstone Activity
In this capstone, you step into Marcus’s role and review the overall status of the award at the end of Year 2. The goal is not to memorize the events. The goal is to explain what the events reveal about the project’s financial health, personnel management, subrecipient oversight, compliance activity, documentation, and administrative risk.
Did salary charges match approved allocations, project work, and supporting records?
Did key personnel involvement still align with sponsor commitments and project needs?
Was CHAN’s role reviewed correctly, and were the appropriate agreement, routing, and oversight expectations identified?
Were invoices, reports, deliverables, and performance records reviewed before payment moved forward?
Were cost transfers supported, timely explained, and routed through the appropriate process?
Which Year 2 issues could become larger Year 3 risks if not monitored carefully?
Administrator Toolkit
Marcus used several repeatable review frameworks throughout Year 2. These frameworks helped him move beyond isolated transactions and evaluate the health of the active award.
Marcus’s Year 2 pattern: compare records, confirm commitments, gather missing information, coordinate with the right offices, document the basis for action, and monitor what could become a future risk.
Capstone Practice
This capstone is self-paced and ungraded. Before flipping each card, pause and decide what you would recommend. Then reveal Marcus’s review and compare it to your own thinking.
You are Marcus Rivera. Near the end of Year 2, the project is active and more complex. Review each situation and decide what you would do before revealing the suggested administrative review.
Scenario 1
A monthly payroll report shows Jasmine charged at a higher percentage than expected. The project has been busy, but the approved salary allocation was not formally updated.
Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.
Marcus’s Review
Click to return.
Scenario 2
Dr. Brown has accepted another leadership role. She says the project is still important, but Marcus notices fewer project meetings and delayed PI reviews.
Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.
Marcus’s Review
Click to return.
Scenario 3
CHAN begins helping shape outreach strategy, participant recruitment messaging, and workshop design. The original conversation described CHAN as a “community vendor.”
Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.
Marcus’s Review
Click to return.
Scenario 4
CHAN submits an invoice that matches the budget, but the progress report is missing and there is no summary of outreach completed during the period.
Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.
Marcus’s Review
Click to return.
Scenario 5
A department asks to move outreach supply charges to the grant several months after the original expense. The reason given is: “The grant still has funding available.”
Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.
Marcus’s Review
Click to return.
Scenario 6
Marcus notices several small issues across the year: payroll adjustments, delayed reporting, and late financial corrections. None appears severe alone.
Pause first. Then click to reveal Marcus’s review.
Marcus’s Review
Click to return.
There is no score. The purpose is to practice administrative judgment and prepare for Year 3, where oversight issues become more interconnected.
Completion Criteria
Completing Year 2 means the learner can connect active award management issues across payroll, effort, external partners, monitoring, and financial corrections.
Review Events 08–12 and the Year 2 capstone practice scenarios.
Show that payroll charges and effort commitments are connected but distinct review areas.
Describe why classification creates monitoring, reporting, and documentation responsibilities.
Identify risks, request documentation, evaluate timing, connect costs to activity, and recommend appropriate follow-up.
Completion is self-paced. Learners are ready to move into Year 3 when they can explain how active award management issues connect across people, partners, costs, reports, and controls.
Reflection Questions
Use these questions to write or discuss a short Year 2 assessment from Marcus’s perspective.
The strongest response connects people, activity, costs, documentation, and oversight instead of treating each event as a separate checklist item.
Year 2 Mindset
Marcus compares payroll reports, effort records, subaward documents, invoices, progress reports, and transfer requests.
Marcus checks whether project work, personnel effort, and partner responsibilities still match what was approved.
Marcus requests missing information before recommending, correcting, rejecting, routing, or escalating an issue.
Marcus documents why a correction, classification review, routing decision, or follow-up action is appropriate.
Marcus looks for recurring issues that may signal a control, communication, or training problem.
Marcus supports the project team and partners while protecting the award, the institution, and the sponsor’s expectations.
Year 2 shows that post-award administration is not just transaction review. It is active stewardship of an award that is changing over time.
Transition to Year 3
By the end of Year 2, the project is active, complex, and connected to external partners. Year 3 will require Marcus to think about final spending, reporting, deliverables, unresolved issues, and closeout readiness.
Year 3 will require closer review of whether remaining funds are spent appropriately and on time.
Sponsors will expect accurate financial, performance, and administrative reporting.
CHAN’s final invoices, reports, and deliverables will need to be reviewed before closeout.
Any late transfers, payroll adjustments, or documentation gaps must be resolved before the award closes.
The project file should explain what happened, what was reviewed, and why decisions were made.
As the end date approaches, rushed decisions and incomplete documentation can create risk.
Year 2 asked: “Are we managing the active project appropriately?” Year 3 will increasingly ask: “Are we ready to close this award cleanly?”