Proposal and award forms contain tabs that provide important supplemental information, such as History and Routing.
Routing Tab Overview
The Routing tab allows reviewers to see who is on the routing chain for the proposal or award, and other relevant status information.
- Review Order: This column displays the review order value defined for a rule in the rule builder.
- Team: Refers to the context of the activated rule. For team review rules, this is the name of the team. For unit review rules, this is the unit that triggered the review. For certification rules, this is the role name that triggered the review.
- Members: Before the review is completed, this column contains a list of users that will be able to complete the review. After the review is completed, this column only displays the person who completed the review, along with a check or X depending on if they approved or rejected/deferred the review.
- Status: Displays the status of each review rule in the routing chain.
- Date: Displays date and time associated with the latest review rule status change.
- Comment: Any comments entered during the review process.
To access, open the proposal or award form, then click the Routing tab.
Learn more about Review Order, Status and Date columns below.
History Tab Overview
The History tab allows reviewers to see the full historical scope of the proposal or award, including creation date.
- Currently Assigned: Displays the assigned administrator for the record, if applicable, while the edit link allows appropriate users to add or modify the assignment.
- Action: Explanation of what change occurred.
- Name: Who made the change.
- Date: When the change was made.
- Comment: Any remarks left about the change taking place.
To access, open the proposal or award form, then click the Award or Proposal History tab.
Additional Details: Routing Tab
Review Order column
If a record goes through multiple routing rounds, any completed rows from previous routing rounds will have a Review Order value of "--" to indicate they are in the table for historical reference and not part of the active routing round
Please note: A new "routing round" is created, and displayed on the Routing Tab, when a proposal is moved from any other status back to the In Development status or when an award is moved back from any other status to the Set Up in Progress status. (more on this in the Limitations/Corner Cases section)
- The Review Order column is sortable. This column will be sorted in ascending order by default, but selecting the arrows in the column header will alternate the sorting between ascending and descending.
- When sorted in ascending order, any rows with "--" will be listed below any rows with numerical values
- When sorted in descending order, any rows with "--" will be listed above any rows with numerical values
Status column
- The Status column is not sortable.
- The Status column is populated in the following manner for the "typical" case:
- Before a rule is active in the routing chain = "Not Yet Active"
- When a rule is active in the routing chain = "Pending"
- When a rule is completed, populated with the review decision according to the following
- Certification Rule = “Certified”
- Non-certification rule
- proposal/award review approved = “Approved”
- proposal review rejected = “Declined”
- award review deferred = “Deferred”
Please note:
- Before a rule is active in the routing chain means any time from when a form field is answered that would trigger that rule up until the rule becomes the one that is active in the routing chain.
- When a rule is active in the routing chain means the record has been routed AND all rules for the previous review order(s) have been completed. In other words, a rule is "active" when a user can log in and complete that review, but has not completed the review yet.
- When a rule is completed means a valid user has completed the review workflow for that rule.
Status: Uncommon Scenarios
- If a record is moved "forward" before the routing process is complete, any rows that were not completed will have a Status column value of "Not Completed".
- If a record is moved "back" before the routing process is complete, any rows that were not completed will be removed. (see when a new routing round is created details below).
- In both cases, any rows that had been completed will be kept.
Please note:
Moved "forward" means the status transitioned to one beyond the typical review status:
- For proposals, this would mean transitioning the proposal from Under Review to Approved, Submitted to Sponsor, or Closed
- For awards, this would mean transitioning the proposal from In Review & Negotiation to Active, In Closeout, or Closed
Moved "back" means the status transitioned to one before the typical review status
- For proposals, this would mean transitioning the proposal from Under Review back to In Development
- For awards, this would mean transitioning the proposal from In Review & Negotiation back to Set Up in Progress
Date Column
- The Date column is sortable. Selecting the arrows in the column header will alternate the sorting between ascending and descending order.
- When sorted in ascending order, any rows with an empty value are put after any rows with a date/time value
- When sorted in descending order, any rows with an empty value are put before any rows with a date/time value
- The Date column is populated in the following manner for the "typical" case:
- Before a rule is active in the routing chain = empty
- When a rule is active in the routing chain = display date and time when rule became active (this would indicate when notifications were sent to the applicable users, if notifications enabled for the rule type)
- When a rule is completed = display date and time when the review/certification workflow was completed
Date: Uncommon Scenarios
- If a record is moved "forward" before the routing process is complete, any rows that were not completed will have a Date column value that is empty
- If a record is moved "back" before the routing process is complete, any rows that were not completed will be removed. (see when a new routing round is created details below)
- In both cases, any rows that had been completed, will be kept
Unit “Rollup”Review Behaviors
Additional Resource: Unit Rollup Review Video (5 min view time)
When "rollup" reviews are included, they will be executed sequentially, and the routing tab Review Order column will indicate this. If a rule that has rollup enabled is review order 2, then any additional rollup reviews will be numbered 2.1, 2.2, etc to indicate each one will be executed in order after the original review is completed. In this example, the routing chain will not proceed to the review order 3 rules (if any are triggered) until all 2 and 2.X rules have been completed.
In the event that there are multiple rules with rollup enabled with the same review order, their sequential execution will be independent of each other. For example, let's say there are research team review rules for the PI and Co-PI roles, and both are review order 2. Let's say on a particular record, the PI and Co-PI's internal associations both require two levels of additional review, meaning on the routing tab, there will be two instances of 2, 2.1, and 2.2 listed in the routing tab, one for the PI's unit rollup chain, and one for the Co-PI's unit rollup chain. Both instances of the review order 2 rules will become active at the same time, but each 2.1 instance will be activated as soon as its applicable review order 2 review is complete. In other words, both 2.1 rules are independent and don't require all review order 2 rules to be complete before they become active.
See below for an example.
Example:
Set up
- Proposal form is set up with a research team review rule for the PI role and Co-PI, both of which are review order 2 in the routing rules and both of which are configured to enable additional reviews
- There is a researcher, Researcher 1, who has an internal association with Child1 Unit
- In the Admin module, Child1 Unit's SP Routing Profile page section is set up to require additional review and lists Parent1 Unit as the Unit Required to Review
- In the Admin module, Parent1 Unit's SP Routing Profile page section is set up to require additional review and lists Grandparent1 Unit as the Unit Required to Review
- In the Admin module, Grandparent1 Unit's SP Routing Profile page section is not set up to require additional review
- There is a researcher, Researcher 2, who has an internal association with Child2 Unit
- In the Admin module, Child2 Unit's SP Routing Profile page section is set up to require additional review and lists Parent2 Unit as the Unit Required to Review
- In the Admin module, Parent2 Unit's SP Routing Profile page section is set up to require additional review and lists Grandparent2 Unit as the Unit Required to Review
- In the Admin module, Grandparent2 Unit's SP Routing Profile page section is not set up to require additional review
Execution
On a proposal, Researcher 1 is listed as the PI on the research team object and Researcher 2 is listed as the Co-PI. This would trigger the research team review rules and require a review from users with the SP Proposal Reviewer role for Child1 Unit to review for the PI and Child2 Unit for the Co-PI, both of which would be review order 2.
Because Child1 Unit is configured to require additional review, this would also result in the routing tab showing a review for users with the SP Proposal Reviewer role for Parent1 Unit, with review order 2.1. Additionally, because Parent1 Unit is configured to require additional review, this would also result in the routing tab showing a review for users with the SP Proposal Reviewer role for Grandparent1 Unit, with review order 2.2. Because Grandparent1 Unit is not configured to require additional review, there would be no more "rollup" reviews added to the proposal for the triggered research team review rule for the PI.
On the Co-PI side, the Admin module configuration would result in the routing tab showing a review for Parent2 Unit with review order 2.1 and Grandparent2 Unit with review order 2.2 as well.
Once all review order 1 rules are complete, both the Child1 Unit and Child 2 Unit reviews, as well as any other review order 2 rules, would become active.
Once the Child1 Unit review is completed, the Parent1 Unit review becomes active (whether the Child2 Unit, or any other review order 2 reviews were completed or not).
Once the Parent1 Unit review is completed, the Grandparent1 Unit review becomes active, again independent of the completion of any other review order 2 or 2.X reviews.
Likewise, once Child2 Unit's review is completed, Parent2 Unit's review becomes active, and once that review is completed, Grandparent2 Unit's review becomes active.
The routing chain will not move forward to any review order 3 rules (or whatever rules are next after review order 2) until all review order 2 and 2.X reviews are completed.
Limitations
- The Review Order column won't be displayed for records created prior to the January 2024 release unless they are routed after the deployment of this release. Once those existing records are routed, the Review Order column will be displayed and populated according to the behaviors described above.
- Making changes that affect routing while the record is in the middle of the routing chain can cause issues with the routing. If changes are made in edit mode that result in the warnings about the routing being affected, it is best to move the record back to an editable state and re-route after making the changes.
- When a new routing round is created on a record:
- any rows that had a Status value of "Not Completed" will be removed from the table
- a new set of rows for all activated rules will be displayed with a status of "Not Yet Active"