Progress/Technical Reports
For NSF-funded projects, technical reporting is a critical component of grant compliance and transparency. Principal Investigators (PIs) are required to submit Annual Project Reports through Research.gov no later than 90 days before the end of the current budget period. These reports must detail accomplishments aligned with project goals, results achieved, significant products (such as publications or data), participant information, and any notable changes or challenges encountered. Upon project completion, a Final Project Report and a Project Outcomes Report for the General Public are both due within 120 days. The Final Report provides a comprehensive summary of the project’s progress and findings, while the Outcomes Report is a concise, non-technical summary intended for public dissemination.
For NIH grants, the primary reporting mechanism is the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR), submitted via eRA Commons. The RPPR is typically due 45 days before the next budget period and must address progress toward specific aims, research outcomes, any publications or products, personnel effort, and changes in scope or compliance. At the end of the award, a Final RPPR is required within 120 days, covering the entire project period.
Other federal grant agencies, such as the Department of Energy (DOE), require recipients to submit Progress or Technical Reports detailing the status and accomplishments of funded projects.
The Importance of Detail and Timing. Federal grant reporting requires detailed content comparing actual accomplishments with proposed goals to demonstrate alignment and accountability. Timely submission of progress or technical reports—whether annual, quarterly, or final—is essential to remain in compliance with sponsor guidelines, such as those outlined in the NSF PAPPG or NIH policies. Delays in reporting can jeopardize current and future funding, emphasizing the importance of adhering to submission timelines and providing thorough, accurate updates on research progress and outcomes.
Financial Reports
For federally funded grants, Financial Reports are typically submitted using the Federal Financial Report (FFR) format or a sponsor-specific template (such as NIH), depending on the agency’s requirements. These reports are generally due quarterly or annually, with specific deadlines outlined in the terms and conditions of the award. The purpose of the FFR is to provide a clear accounting of how federal funds have been spent, including details on expenditures, unobligated balances, and cost-sharing (if applicable). To ensure accuracy and compliance, it is essential that internal financial records be carefully reconciled with the figures reported to the sponsor, ensuring consistency and identifying any discrepancies before submission.
2 CFR § 200.328 outlines the financial reporting requirements for recipients and subrecipients of federal awards. Federal agencies must utilize only OMB-approved, government-wide data elements for financial reports, such as the Federal Financial Report (SF-425). These reports are to be collected at least annually and no more frequently than quarterly, unless specific conditions necessitate more frequent reporting. Recipients and subrecipients are required to submit financial reports within 30 days after the reporting period for quarterly or semiannual reports, and within 90 days for annual reports. Final financial reports are due no later than 120 days after the end of the period of performance for recipients, and 90 days for subrecipients. Extensions to these deadlines may be granted with proper justification.
Rebudgeting and Amendments
Communicating changes to sponsor program officers
For federally funded grants, communicating project changes to sponsor Program Officers is an essential aspect of award management and compliance. Principal Investigators (PIs) or Authorized Organizational Representatives (AORs) should promptly notify the sponsor of any significant changes that may affect the approved scope, objectives, timeline, or budget of the project. Communication should be clear, detailed, and typically submitted in writing—often via email or through official agency portals (e.g., eRA Commons for NIH or Research.gov for NSF). Depending on the agency and the nature of the change, prior written approval may be required before implementing modifications such as re-budgeting across major categories, initiating a no-cost extension, changing key personnel, or altering the project’s scope. It's best practice to consult the awarding agency’s policies and contact the assigned Program Officer early when considering changes, to ensure proper procedures are followed and to avoid potential non-compliance.
Rebudgeting and Prior Approval Requests
In federal grants per the 2 CFR § 200.308 , re-budgeting refers to the internal reallocation of funds between approved budget categories. Prior approval requests, per the 2 CFR § 200.407, are often needed for significant rebudgeting, are formal notifications submitted to the sponsoring agency to obtain authorization for changes that require explicit permission, such as significant scope or budget modifications.
For NIH re-budgeting, Section 8.1 of the NIH Grants Policy Statement (NIHGPS) provides guidance on changes in project and budget for NIH grant recipients. Recipients are generally allowed to rebudget within and between budget categories to address unforeseen needs and make certain post-award changes, provided these adjustments remain within NIH-established limits. However, specific modifications require NIH's prior written approval, such as significant changes in scope, alterations and renovations exceeding 25% of the total approved budget, capital expenditures, and the addition of foreign components. Recipients must notify NIH promptly about developments that significantly impact award-supported activities, including substantial changes in other support or issues that impair the project's objectives. Section 8.1.3 of the NIH Grants Policy Statement outlines the procedures for submitting prior approval requests for changes to NIH-funded projects. Recipients must submit these requests to the designated Grants Management Officer (GMO) at least 30 days before the proposed change. E-mail requests must be clearly identified as prior approval requests, must reflect the complete grant number in the subject line, and should be sent by the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) to the Grants Management Officer (GMO) that signed the Notice of Award (NoA).
For NSF, internal re-budgeting is allowed as long as it does not affect categories that require prior approval. NSF Guidance states that prior approval is required for reduction of PI effort by 25% or more, transfer of funds budgeted for Participant support out to other categories, any adjustment to cost sharing commitments, and some other specific cases, or in cases identified via the NSF Prior Approval Matrix. All other re-budgeting between otherwise reasonable, allocable, and allowable costs is allowed, unless it represents a change in scope. To obtain NSF prior approval, notifications and requests are submitted via Research.gov and initiated by the PI. Once the PI initiates in Research.gov, the notification or request will route to CGA (Sponsored Projects Office) for approval before being submitted to NSF.
Federal grant agencies beyond NIH and NSF—such as the Department of Energy (DOE) also have re-budgeting guidelines that generally permit internal reallocation of funds within approved categories unless the changes affect the project scope or involve restricted cost areas. These agencies often also require prior approval for significant budget adjustments, especially those involving capital expenditures, subawards, or changes that could impact programmatic outcomes.
Internal Budget Adjustments
Requests may be required to track money between sub accounts related to a specific grant. Your Grant Budget Analyst may tell you when this is needed, and request that you fill out a
Budget Adjustment Request Form
No Cost Extensions
No Cost Extensions are an approved extension of the project period that allows a recipient additional time to complete project objectives without additional funding from the sponsoring agency.
NIH allows a one-time no-cost extension (NCE) of up to 12 months, which can be processed internally through eRA Commons, but any subsequent extensions require formal approval. Changes to the project or budget that affect the scope or compliance should be communicated to the assigned NIH Program Officer (PO) or Grants Management Specialist (GMS) for guidance prior to formal requests.
NSF awards may be eligible for a single grantee-approved no-cost extension for up to 12 months when there are unspent funds remaining in your award account and additional time is needed to successfully complete the original scope of the work.
Additional no-cost extensions and other special creativity extensions may be approved by NSF should your project meet certain criteria. Consult PAPPG VI.D.3.c for a detailed explanation of the circumstances that must be met for a no-cost extension. Follow the instructions on Research.gov on how to submit a no-cost extension notification or request online.
Federal grant agencies such as the Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Education (ED), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) allow no-cost extensions (NCEs) under specific conditions, typically to enable completion of project objectives without additional funding. These agencies often require a formal request—usually submitted at least 30 days before the project end date—with justification and assurance that remaining funds are sufficient to support the extended work.
Early termination
Early termination is the premature ending of a grant award before the originally approved project period is completed. This can occur due to various reasons, including the recipient’s withdrawal, institutional decisions, loss of key personnel, or a sponsor’s determination that the grantee has failed to comply with award terms or fulfill project objectives.
NIH: Section 12.13.3 of the NIH Grants Policy Statement outlines procedures for the early termination.. Early termination may occur due to institutional decisions, scholar resignation, or if NIH determines that the recipient has materially failed to comply with award terms or fulfill the award's purpose. In such cases, NIH will provide written notification detailing the termination decision, reasons, effective date, and information on the right to appeal.