Re: Cayuse connection issues?
by Mayra Meza
Hi,
Yes it is really slow.
Mayra Meza, MPAC
Research Administrator II
Research Administration |Klesse College of Engineering and Integrated Design (KCEID)
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249-1644
BSE 2.106 | (210) 458-6802 | mayra.meza(a)utsa.edu<mailto:mayra.meza@utsa.edu>
[cid:image001.png@01DCD8B9.941BEE00]
Important Reminders:
* *15/5 Rule* for UTSA Proposals: https://research.utsa.edu/osp/ProposalDeadlines.html
* NSF: Starting now, all Personnel Docs must be prepared using SciENcv.
* REDKE is excited to announce LabArchives,<https://research.utsa.edu/manage/labarchives.html> Electronic Lab Notebook (ELN) software for research at no cost to UTSA Faculty and Staff, plus there is no limit on data storage space!
From: Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2026 3:52 PM
To: Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>
Subject: [Rowdy.research] Cayuse connection issues?
Hi All,
Is it just me or are others having serious uploading and updating issues in cayuse in the last 30 minutes to an hour?
Elizabeth H. Escoto (formerly Tilley), PhD
Sr. Research Administrator
COS College Research Administration Teams
Office of Research
The University of Texas at San Antonio
cell: 347.299.1641
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249-3209
________________________________
1 month, 3 weeks
Cayuse connection issues?
by Elizabeth Tilley
Hi All,
Is it just me or are others having serious uploading and updating issues in cayuse in the last 30 minutes to an hour?
Elizabeth H. Escoto (formerly Tilley), PhD
Sr. Research Administrator
COS College Research Administration Teams
Office of Research
The University of Texas at San Antonio
cell: 347.299.1641
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249-3209
________________________________
1 month, 3 weeks
Re: Genesis Mission Proposals
by Elizabeth Tilley
Hi, Dr. Sooby and All,
I can accept that OSP may need this for their internal assurance and record, although, at this juncture I believe it is moot. When the decision was made to make the attachment necessary on April 17, it was unclear how all of this would play out.
I'm still fine with attaching an email; however, the problem arises when OSP rejects a proposal with no notification over an internal form that is not required by the sponsor. The delays and back and forth are inefficient. My suggestion is to simply put it in the review checklist and have the RA attach when making corrections.
Thank you,
Liz
From: Elizabeth Sooby <elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2026 8:39 PM
To: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu>; Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu>; Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>; Claudia Delgado <claudia.delgado2(a)utsa.edu>
Cc: Monica Trevino <monica.trevino3(a)utsa.edu>
Subject: Re: Genesis Mission Proposals
Hey All,
Is this not clear from the structure of the submission?
Elizabeth S. Sooby, PhD
Associate Dean for Research, College of Sciences
Associate Professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249
elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu<mailto:elizabeth.sooby@utsa.edu>
[Image]
________________________________
From: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu<mailto:Jennifer.Silver@utsa.edu>>
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2026 8:37:18 PM
To: Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu<mailto:elizabeth.tilley@utsa.edu>>; Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu<mailto:rowdy.research@lists.it.utsa.edu>) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu<mailto:rowdy.research@lists.it.utsa.edu>>
Cc: Elizabeth Sooby <elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu<mailto:elizabeth.sooby@utsa.edu>>; Monica Trevino <monica.trevino3(a)utsa.edu<mailto:monica.trevino3@utsa.edu>>
Subject: Re: Genesis Mission Proposals
Hi Liz,
This documentation is for the internal validation of the lead PI's choice of a subrecipient or collaborative proposal type.
I met with Claudia regarding FOA Amendment 2 when it was released and we decided the documentation should be included in the proposal record.
An email or statement from the PI to the RA during the planning is acceptable.
Thanks!
Jennifer
Jennifer Silver, CRA
Senior Director
Office of Sponsored Projects
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249
O: 210.458.4234<tel:+12104584234>
utsa.edu<http://utsa.edu/>
[image]
________________________________
From: Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu<mailto:elizabeth.tilley@utsa.edu>>
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2026 7:11:27 PM
To: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu<mailto:Jennifer.Silver@utsa.edu>>; Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu<mailto:rowdy.research@lists.it.utsa.edu>) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu<mailto:rowdy.research@lists.it.utsa.edu>>
Cc: Elizabeth Sooby <elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu<mailto:elizabeth.sooby@utsa.edu>>; Monica Trevino <monica.trevino3(a)utsa.edu<mailto:monica.trevino3@utsa.edu>>
Subject: RE: Genesis Mission Proposals
Hi Jennifer,
I just had a proposal rejected with no notice over the email you describe below. I am just wondering if this is the most efficient practice?
1. The memo is not required by DoE, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
2. I would suggest instead of rejecting a proposal over an internal memo that is not required by the sponsor, can reviewers request it in the review checklist to add after review vs. rejecting. This will avoid delayed back and forth.
3. Also we have proposals that were initially set up as subawards and they never changed. Is it necessary to provide a memo for those proposals?
If this is something required by DoE, I understand. I am suggesting putting in the review checklist to make the process more efficient as we have numerous proposals coming through.
Thank you!
From: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu<mailto:Jennifer.Silver@utsa.edu>>
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2026 4:15 PM
To: Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu<mailto:rowdy.research@lists.it.utsa.edu>) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu<mailto:rowdy.research@lists.it.utsa.edu>>
Subject: [Rowdy.research] Genesis Mission Proposals
Everyone,
After confirming with the Department of Energy regarding the amended FOA, we were informed that they are strongly encouraging a single application with a subrecipient(s) under a lead institution. While one is not encouraged over the other, collaborative applications will be accepted, reviewed, and not penalized in any manner. The amendment 000002 applies to both Phase I and Phase II.
With this guidance, please discuss this option with your faculty and follow their direction in packaging their preferred way. Finally, emphasize that the internal deadlines for submissions by OSP still stand.
Documentation from the faculty of this preference (collaborative vs. subawards) is required for the proposal file.
Thank you,
Jennifer
Jennifer Silver, CRA
Senior Director
Office of Sponsored Projects
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249
O: 210.458.4234
utsa.edu
[https://www.utsa.edu/_files/images/email-sigs/ut-san-antonio-regental-log...]
1 month, 3 weeks
Re: Genesis Mission Proposals
by Elizabeth Sooby
Hey All,
Is this not clear from the structure of the submission?
Elizabeth S. Sooby, PhD
Associate Dean for Research, College of Sciences
Associate Professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249
elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu
[Image]
________________________________
From: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2026 8:37:18 PM
To: Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu>; Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>
Cc: Elizabeth Sooby <elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu>; Monica Trevino <monica.trevino3(a)utsa.edu>
Subject: Re: Genesis Mission Proposals
Hi Liz,
This documentation is for the internal validation of the lead PI's choice of a subrecipient or collaborative proposal type.
I met with Claudia regarding FOA Amendment 2 when it was released and we decided the documentation should be included in the proposal record.
An email or statement from the PI to the RA during the planning is acceptable.
Thanks!
Jennifer
Jennifer Silver, CRA
Senior Director
Office of Sponsored Projects
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249
O: 210.458.4234<tel:+12104584234>
utsa.edu<http://utsa.edu/>
[image]
________________________________
From: Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2026 7:11:27 PM
To: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu>; Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>
Cc: Elizabeth Sooby <elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu>; Monica Trevino <monica.trevino3(a)utsa.edu>
Subject: RE: Genesis Mission Proposals
Hi Jennifer,
I just had a proposal rejected with no notice over the email you describe below. I am just wondering if this is the most efficient practice?
1. The memo is not required by DoE, but please correct me if I’m wrong.
2. I would suggest instead of rejecting a proposal over an internal memo that is not required by the sponsor, can reviewers request it in the review checklist to add after review vs. rejecting. This will avoid delayed back and forth.
3. Also we have proposals that were initially set up as subawards and they never changed. Is it necessary to provide a memo for those proposals?
If this is something required by DoE, I understand. I am suggesting putting in the review checklist to make the process more efficient as we have numerous proposals coming through.
Thank you!
From: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2026 4:15 PM
To: Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>
Subject: [Rowdy.research] Genesis Mission Proposals
Everyone,
After confirming with the Department of Energy regarding the amended FOA, we were informed that they are strongly encouraging a single application with a subrecipient(s) under a lead institution. While one is not encouraged over the other, collaborative applications will be accepted, reviewed, and not penalized in any manner. The amendment 000002 applies to both Phase I and Phase II.
With this guidance, please discuss this option with your faculty and follow their direction in packaging their preferred way. Finally, emphasize that the internal deadlines for submissions by OSP still stand.
Documentation from the faculty of this preference (collaborative vs. subawards) is required for the proposal file.
Thank you,
Jennifer
Jennifer Silver, CRA
Senior Director
Office of Sponsored Projects
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249
O: 210.458.4234
utsa.edu
[https://www.utsa.edu/_files/images/email-sigs/ut-san-antonio-regental-log...]
1 month, 3 weeks
Re: Genesis Mission Proposals
by Jennifer Silver
Hi Liz,
This documentation is for the internal validation of the lead PI's choice of a subrecipient or collaborative proposal type.
I met with Claudia regarding FOA Amendment 2 when it was released and we decided the documentation should be included in the proposal record.
An email or statement from the PI to the RA during the planning is acceptable.
Thanks!
Jennifer
Jennifer Silver, CRA
Senior Director
Office of Sponsored Projects
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249
O: 210.458.4234<tel:+12104584234>
utsa.edu<http://utsa.edu/>
[image]
________________________________
From: Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2026 7:11:27 PM
To: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu>; Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>
Cc: Elizabeth Sooby <elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu>; Monica Trevino <monica.trevino3(a)utsa.edu>
Subject: RE: Genesis Mission Proposals
Hi Jennifer,
I just had a proposal rejected with no notice over the email you describe below. I am just wondering if this is the most efficient practice?
1. The memo is not required by DoE, but please correct me if I’m wrong.
2. I would suggest instead of rejecting a proposal over an internal memo that is not required by the sponsor, can reviewers request it in the review checklist to add after review vs. rejecting. This will avoid delayed back and forth.
3. Also we have proposals that were initially set up as subawards and they never changed. Is it necessary to provide a memo for those proposals?
If this is something required by DoE, I understand. I am suggesting putting in the review checklist to make the process more efficient as we have numerous proposals coming through.
Thank you!
From: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2026 4:15 PM
To: Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>
Subject: [Rowdy.research] Genesis Mission Proposals
Everyone,
After confirming with the Department of Energy regarding the amended FOA, we were informed that they are strongly encouraging a single application with a subrecipient(s) under a lead institution. While one is not encouraged over the other, collaborative applications will be accepted, reviewed, and not penalized in any manner. The amendment 000002 applies to both Phase I and Phase II.
With this guidance, please discuss this option with your faculty and follow their direction in packaging their preferred way. Finally, emphasize that the internal deadlines for submissions by OSP still stand.
Documentation from the faculty of this preference (collaborative vs. subawards) is required for the proposal file.
Thank you,
Jennifer
Jennifer Silver, CRA
Senior Director
Office of Sponsored Projects
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249
O: 210.458.4234
utsa.edu
[https://www.utsa.edu/_files/images/email-sigs/ut-san-antonio-regental-log...]
1 month, 3 weeks
Re: Genesis Mission Proposals
by Elizabeth Tilley
Hi Jennifer,
I just had a proposal rejected with no notice over the email you describe below. I am just wondering if this is the most efficient practice?
1. The memo is not required by DoE, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
2. I would suggest instead of rejecting a proposal over an internal memo that is not required by the sponsor, can reviewers request it in the review checklist to add after review vs. rejecting. This will avoid delayed back and forth.
3. Also we have proposals that were initially set up as subawards and they never changed. Is it necessary to provide a memo for those proposals?
If this is something required by DoE, I understand. I am suggesting putting in the review checklist to make the process more efficient as we have numerous proposals coming through.
Thank you!
From: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2026 4:15 PM
To: Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>
Subject: [Rowdy.research] Genesis Mission Proposals
Everyone,
After confirming with the Department of Energy regarding the amended FOA, we were informed that they are strongly encouraging a single application with a subrecipient(s) under a lead institution. While one is not encouraged over the other, collaborative applications will be accepted, reviewed, and not penalized in any manner. The amendment 000002 applies to both Phase I and Phase II.
With this guidance, please discuss this option with your faculty and follow their direction in packaging their preferred way. Finally, emphasize that the internal deadlines for submissions by OSP still stand.
Documentation from the faculty of this preference (collaborative vs. subawards) is required for the proposal file.
Thank you,
Jennifer
Jennifer Silver, CRA
Senior Director
Office of Sponsored Projects
The University of Texas at San Antonio
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249
O: 210.458.4234
utsa.edu
[https://www.utsa.edu/_files/images/email-sigs/ut-san-antonio-regental-log...]
1 month, 3 weeks
Re: Request for Communications regarding Genesis DoE on listserv
by Elizabeth Tilley
Thank you, Jennifer. I understand, but the chats are a continually interruption if we are trying to focus. The chat you are speaking about is a meeting chat, I believe?
Please add SGDMs and relevant parties to the listserv. I have asked that in the past and have been told that only RA's should be on it. My goal is efficient communication that is not disruptive.
I cannot guarantee if any of you have posted something relevant on a meeting chat that I will have seen it, unfortunately.
Liz
From: Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2026 9:48 AM
To: Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu>; Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>; Justin Marmolejo <Justin.Marmolejo(a)utsa.edu>; Ana Gonzalez <ana.gonzalez7(a)utsa.edu>
Cc: Elizabeth Sooby <elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu>; Monica Trevino <monica.trevino3(a)utsa.edu>; Carlos Aguirre <Carlos.Aguirre2(a)utsa.edu>; Claudia Delgado <claudia.delgado2(a)utsa.edu>; Monique Long-White <Monique.Long-White(a)utsa.edu>
Subject: RE: Request for Communications regarding Genesis DoE on listserv
Hi Liz, we can add updates to the Rowdy Listserv, too. The only Teams chat that OSP is using for Genesis is the one coordinated by SRD which includes the SGDMs, who are vital partners in this push. Also, you can update your settings in Teams for priority and pin specific chats to keep them at the top of your feed.
Jennifer
From: Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu<mailto:elizabeth.tilley@utsa.edu>>
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2026 9:22 AM
To: Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu<mailto:rowdy.research@lists.it.utsa.edu>) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu<mailto:rowdy.research@lists.it.utsa.edu>>; Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu<mailto:Jennifer.Silver@utsa.edu>>; Justin Marmolejo <Justin.Marmolejo(a)utsa.edu<mailto:Justin.Marmolejo@utsa.edu>>; Ana Gonzalez <ana.gonzalez7(a)utsa.edu<mailto:ana.gonzalez7@utsa.edu>>
Cc: Elizabeth Sooby <elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu<mailto:elizabeth.sooby@utsa.edu>>; Monica Trevino <monica.trevino3(a)utsa.edu<mailto:monica.trevino3@utsa.edu>>; Carlos Aguirre <Carlos.Aguirre2(a)utsa.edu<mailto:Carlos.Aguirre2@utsa.edu>>; Claudia Delgado <claudia.delgado2(a)utsa.edu<mailto:claudia.delgado2@utsa.edu>>; Monique Long-White <Monique.Long-White(a)utsa.edu<mailto:Monique.Long-White@utsa.edu>>
Subject: Request for Communications regarding Genesis DoE on listserv
Dear @Jennifer Silver<mailto:Jennifer.Silver@utsa.edu>, @Justin Marmolejo<mailto:Justin.Marmolejo@utsa.edu>, @Ana Gonzalez<mailto:ana.gonzalez7@utsa.edu>,
As the proposal packaging teams are trying to focus on getting Genesis (and other) proposals to OSP as early as possible this week, I'd like to request that we post any official information regarding Genesis on the listserv. The teams chats are difficult to keep up with and many of us may miss information if we are not available to see chats. For example, if someone makes a comment about the checklist or formatting, if one of us happens to be meeting with a PI or on DND, we may miss important information because it's buried in a chat with numerous responses and back and forth.
I know everyone is not a fan of emails, but is a more official venue to ask for items such as preferences in formatting and checklists. There are now several chats and a sharepoint. Chats are an unofficial way to transfer information.
Thank you for your understanding,
Liz
Elizabeth H. Escoto (formerly Tilley), PhD
Sr. Research Administrator
COS College Research Administration Teams
Office of Research
The University of Texas at San Antonio
cell: 347.299.1641
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249-3209
________________________________
1 month, 4 weeks
Re: Request for Communications regarding Genesis DoE on listserv
by Jennifer Silver
Hi Liz, we can add updates to the Rowdy Listserv, too. The only Teams chat that OSP is using for Genesis is the one coordinated by SRD which includes the SGDMs, who are vital partners in this push. Also, you can update your settings in Teams for priority and pin specific chats to keep them at the top of your feed.
Jennifer
From: Elizabeth Tilley <elizabeth.tilley(a)utsa.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2026 9:22 AM
To: Rowdy Research (rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu) <rowdy.research(a)lists.it.utsa.edu>; Jennifer Silver <Jennifer.Silver(a)utsa.edu>; Justin Marmolejo <Justin.Marmolejo(a)utsa.edu>; Ana Gonzalez <ana.gonzalez7(a)utsa.edu>
Cc: Elizabeth Sooby <elizabeth.sooby(a)utsa.edu>; Monica Trevino <monica.trevino3(a)utsa.edu>; Carlos Aguirre <Carlos.Aguirre2(a)utsa.edu>; Claudia Delgado <claudia.delgado2(a)utsa.edu>; Monique Long-White <Monique.Long-White(a)utsa.edu>
Subject: Request for Communications regarding Genesis DoE on listserv
Dear @Jennifer Silver<mailto:Jennifer.Silver@utsa.edu>, @Justin Marmolejo<mailto:Justin.Marmolejo@utsa.edu>, @Ana Gonzalez<mailto:ana.gonzalez7@utsa.edu>,
As the proposal packaging teams are trying to focus on getting Genesis (and other) proposals to OSP as early as possible this week, I'd like to request that we post any official information regarding Genesis on the listserv. The teams chats are difficult to keep up with and many of us may miss information if we are not available to see chats. For example, if someone makes a comment about the checklist or formatting, if one of us happens to be meeting with a PI or on DND, we may miss important information because it's buried in a chat with numerous responses and back and forth.
I know everyone is not a fan of emails, but is a more official venue to ask for items such as preferences in formatting and checklists. There are now several chats and a sharepoint. Chats are an unofficial way to transfer information.
Thank you for your understanding,
Liz
Elizabeth H. Escoto (formerly Tilley), PhD
Sr. Research Administrator
COS College Research Administration Teams
Office of Research
The University of Texas at San Antonio
cell: 347.299.1641
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249-3209
________________________________
1 month, 4 weeks
Request for Communications regarding Genesis DoE on listserv
by Elizabeth Tilley
Dear @Jennifer Silver<mailto:Jennifer.Silver@utsa.edu>, @Justin Marmolejo<mailto:Justin.Marmolejo@utsa.edu>, @Ana Gonzalez<mailto:ana.gonzalez7@utsa.edu>,
As the proposal packaging teams are trying to focus on getting Genesis (and other) proposals to OSP as early as possible this week, I'd like to request that we post any official information regarding Genesis on the listserv. The teams chats are difficult to keep up with and many of us may miss information if we are not available to see chats. For example, if someone makes a comment about the checklist or formatting, if one of us happens to be meeting with a PI or on DND, we may miss important information because it's buried in a chat with numerous responses and back and forth.
I know everyone is not a fan of emails, but is a more official venue to ask for items such as preferences in formatting and checklists. There are now several chats and a sharepoint. Chats are an unofficial way to transfer information.
Thank you for your understanding,
Liz
Elizabeth H. Escoto (formerly Tilley), PhD
Sr. Research Administrator
COS College Research Administration Teams
Office of Research
The University of Texas at San Antonio
cell: 347.299.1641
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249-3209
________________________________
1 month, 4 weeks
DOE Genesis Important Information
by Claudia Delgado
RA team,
At this time, Letters of Intent (LOIs) are not required for the national labs as part of the proposal.
If an award is made, we will proceed with obtaining all necessary documentation to ensure compliance.
I appreciate everyone's work on this, I know it has been a challenge and a significant lift.
Thanks,
Claudia
2 months
