Researcher's Manual in Conducting Research

The OVCRE has prepared its UPLB Research Manual in 2002, which covers basic but important information about UPLB research and how it is administered. Below are some information most needed by any staff who are currently doing or will be planning on to do research activities.
UPLB Research Manual
A digital copy (2002 information) is also available upon request through email. Please contact the publisher at ovcre(at)uplb(dot)edu(ph).

Developing capsule and detailed proposals

Developing proposals

Call for proposals from Basic Research Fund and external funding agencies (FAs) come anytime during the year. Research proponents prepare proposals in accordance with the thrusts and objectives specified by the funding agency.
Basic Research
This program provides financial assistance for basic studies in the natural sciences and mathematics, social sciences and the humanities. It is also supportive of UPLB’s teaching function and is responsive to national development needs. Priority is given to proponents who have no other research study/project and/or have recently received their MS or PhD degrees and wish to do follow-up studies on their thesis or dissertation. Under the program, there is no provision for honoraria of study leaders, equipment and capital outlay. Every last quarter of the year, the OVCRE calls for submission of basic research proposals. The deadline for submission is November, evaluation is conducted in December and implementation starts January. Funds are released on a quarterly basis.
Applied Research
Some agencies, such as the DA-BAR require the initial submission of capsule proposals, and when considered for funding, proponents are requested to submit detailed proposals. Proposal format depends on the requirement of the funding agency and the proponents, for faster proposal processing, should strictly follow the formats required by DOST and its councils, DA-BAR and other funding agencies.
Processing research proposals
Before research proposals are endorsed to the funding agency for consideration, they undergo evaluation at the UPLB level through the OVCRE. The OVCRE records and logs receipt of incoming proposals, conducts pre-evaluation based on UPLB thrusts and checks for duplication of efforts. They are referred to the identified critics for review and sent back to proponent for revision (if necessary). The OVCRE prepares endorsement of the reviewed proposal for favorable consideration by the UPLB Chancellor. The Office of the Chancellor prepares the final endorsement and transmits the proposal to the funding agency.
Pointers to proponents
The proponent should review the budgetary requirement for the project in terms of the following:
  • Salaries of the project personnel, honoraria rates should be in accordance with the salary rates approved by the funding agency, i.e. DOST, DA-BAR.
  • The administrative cost (indirect cost) of the project is dependent on the following schemes:
    • Below P100,000 (5%)
    • P101,000 – P200,000 (7%)
    • P201,000 – above (10%)
  • Payment of training fees, travel insurance, attendance in international or local conferences, collaboration with other agencies should be explicit in the MOA/MOU

Preparing and processing a MOA/ MOU

Developing a MOA or MOU

Once a research study/project is approved for implementation, a Memorandum of Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding between the funding agency and the UPLB is prepared by the proponent. There are funding agencies that have their own draft MOA/MOU that the proponent can refer to. UPLB has also its own proforma draft of the MOA/MOU and is available at the UPLB Legal Office. PCARRD, on the other hand, has an Omnibus MOA with UPLB.

Processing a MOA or MOU

The draft MOA/MOU is referred to both parties for comments. From the funding agency, the MOA/MOU is referred to the UPLB Legal Office for review, and sent back to the proponent/funding agency for revision based on the comments of the OVCRE and the Legal Office. The OVCRE studies the agreements/terms and recommends the MOA/MOU to the UPLB Chancellor who approves/signs the agreement and sends to the funding agency. The funding agency approves and notarizes the MOA/MOU. The proponent/OVCRE/Legal Office and OC are provided copies of the agreement. The OC will send copy of the MOA/MOU to UP Diliman for confirmation. After the MOA is approved, the funding agency issues the notice to proceed to the OVCRE on the attention of the proponent. The funding agency also furnishes the proponent a copy of the notice.

Processing release of project funds

The funding agency issues the check for the approved project. Upon receipt, the OVCRE gets an accounting code from the Accounting Division, deposits the check to the Cash Division and furnishes the funding agency with the copy of the official receipt. An advice of sub-allotment is prepared by the OVCRE, copies of which are furnished to the following: proponent (original copy), duplicate copy each to the Accounting/Internal Audit/Funding Agency. Funds are released on a quarterly basis. Expenses for the operation of the study shall be disbursed in accordance with the Advice of Sub-Allotment and subject to existing accounting and auditing rules.

Hiring and appointing project personnel

In preparing the appointment papers of the following:
  • Project/study leader, project staff/administrative support staff who are UPLB personnel, NGW personnel such as URA, Labroratory Technician/aide, animal caretaker, agricultural technician, laborer etc.- prepare the basic papers for each, submitted and processed through channels.
  • Contract Labor (Non-Government Worker), or NGWs hired charged against Other Services - make a letter request to hire contract labor to the dean/unit head for approval. The approved request will be attached to the appointment, processed through channels. The duration for contract labor is only for a maximum of three (3) months. Appointments maybe renewed but with a gap of one week.
  • Only permanent and temporary staffs are allowed to be assigned as administrative support staff in the project. UPLB staff whose appointment is in substitute or contractual basis is not allowed to be given additional assignment as administrative support staff.
  • Non-UPLB personnel such a study leader and project staff, make a formal request to the Chancellor to be able to appoint a study leader/project staff. The request should attach a letter from the supervisor allowing the involvement of non-UPLB personnel to the project. Upon approval of the request by the Chancellor, a letter order, will be processed and issued by the Human Resource Development Office (HRDO) that will serve as the appointment of the staff involved.

Managing the program/ project/ study

Managing the program/ project/ study

Requesting change of date of project implementation

The start and end of the project are specific in the MOA/MOU. Implementation, however, may be set depending on the release of funds or upon issuance of the notice to proceed. Proponents may want to defer or decide on when to start the project depending on the need factors such as climate, cropping season, availability of personnel and other justifiable reasons. For deferment of project implementation, the funding agency should be properly informed through an official communication coursed through channels as per Memo. No. 96 series of 2001 of the Office of the Chancellor.

Requesting for realignment/ reprogramming of program/ project funds

Researchers may request for reprogramming or transferring of funds from one line budget item to another when the need arises, provided funds are available. Reprogramming/Transfer is considered major when the transfer request is from one line-item budget to another, minor when the request is within the line-item budget. The request should pass through channels. For reprogramming request of more than 30-33% of the approved budget, the OVCRE recommends the request for approval by the funding agency in consideration of the following conditions:
  • Transfer of funds (major) from equipment to maintenance and operating expenses (MOE) or personnel services (PS); and
  • Request for additional project personnel
For DOST/PCARRD-funded projects, the OVCRE recommends to the OC the approval of reprogramming/transfer of funds for request of less than 30% of the approved budget. For more than 30%, minor or major request for reprogramming/transfer of funds is to be approved by PCARRD. Similar requests for PCIERD, PCASTRD-funded projects are to be approved by the concerned funding agency. For PHILRice and other international funding agencies, requests for reprogramming or transfer of funds (regardless of the amount) are approved by the funding agency.

Requesting for audited financial reports

An Audited Financial Report (AFR) is prepared by the Accounting Division indicating the expenditures and the remaining balance of the project for a certain period. There are funding agencies that require the submission of AFR quarterly, but there are those that require AFR every six months.

Requesting transfer of project leadership

Based on the new delegation of authority, the OVCRE approves the request for transfer of project leadership, with copy of the approved request together with the bio-data of the new project leader submitted to the funding agency.

Requesting for use of unobligated balances

Unobligated or unexpended funds maybe used while awaiting for the next release of the budget allotment. For PCARRD-funded projects, the OVCRE approves the request for use of UB. For unused balances from previous year may be used for the same line item budget for the following year and for other necessary items, provided that the use is approved by PCARRD. Unobligated balances (UB) of funds coming DOST, PCIERD and PCASTRD from the previous year may be deducted from the release for the following year unless requested as an additional budget for the following year. Request for use of UB of other grants is with the respective funding agency’s approval.

Requesting for program/ project extension

Requests for extension, renewal, termination of the projects are made through the OVCRE substantiated by written communication, evaluation results and annual reports.

Requesting for bridging funds

Researchers can tap other funds while waiting for the release of budget. The project leader can charge additional expenses of the project from the unit’s share of administrative indirect) cost on the project (40% of the 10% of the total project cost.) Through the bridging fund (Endowment Fund), the project leader can request from the OVCRE an amount to pay for unpaid salaries (maximum of three months) of project personnel. The amount must be replenished as soon as the project’s budget is released.

Preparing for program/ project review

Projects are monitored in terms of financial and technical aspects. The financial status of the project is monitored by the Accounting Division, the OVCRE also monitors the finances, as well as the appointments of personnel, various requests and the advice of sub-allotments. The monitoring of the technical aspect is left to the Technical Evaluation Team formed by the OVCRE composed of selected evaluators through the technical reports submitted by the researchers.

Guidelines for evaluators during in-house review of completed R and E projects

The in house evaluation of R&E projects is conducted to review the project vis-a-vis the accomplishments and outputs, identify weak areas, and make suggestions to improve or develop the project.

  1. The evaluators should be guided by the following points:

    Were the objectives attained through the activity/methodology undertaken?

  2. Were the activities conducted in accordance with the work plan? If there were some changes in the project, were the revisions justified and acceptable?
  3. Were the funds utilized in accordance with the scheduled activities?
  4. Were there constraints in the implementation of the project? If the constraints in the project have been attended to, what were the actions taken?
  5. Were there significant findings that may now be utilized by various clienteles?
  6. Are the potential impacts of the project relevant to the Philippines or community?


  7. During evaluation, each presenter shall be given twenty (20) minutes to present his/her project outputs and fifteen (15) minutes for the open forum/discussion..

  8. As team of evaluators, each member will review the projects during evaluation session indicated in the schedule.

    • For each project to be evaluated, a chair/moderator among members will be chosen so that each member of the team can contribute to the evaluation process. The chair/moderator will consolidate the comments and suggestions, and settle any conflicting issue on the team’s recommendations.

    • The Team may opt to give the member’s comments and suggestions to OVCRE secretariat for consolidation after the presentation and oral discussion, and to meet separately should conflicting issue arises.


  9. The evaluation team will recommend if a project is to be renewed, extended or terminated considering the objectives, accomplishments, and the relevance of the project.

  10. The individual evaluation sheet, and the consolidated/summarized evaluators' comments, suggestions and recommendations used during the review should be submitted to OVCRE after every session or anytime within the day of evaluation.

Guidelines for evaluators during in-house review of on-going R and E projects

  1. The in-house evaluation of R&E projects is conducted to review the project vis-a-vis the accomplishments and outputs, identify weak areas, and make suggestions to improve or develop the project.

  2. The evaluators shall attend at least a whole evaluation session (i.e. morning or afternoon session) and shall come on time. In case an evaluator cannot attend the evaluation proper, the evaluator should inform the Project Monitoring and Evaluation Section (PMES) at least three (3) days before the scheduled evaluation.

  3. The evaluators should read the reports to be reviewed before the presentation. The focus of the evaluation proper will be on the questions, comments and suggestions regarding the project being evaluated.

  4. The evaluators should be guided by the following points:

    • Are the objectives attained through the activity/methodology undertaken?

    • Are the activities undertaken and plan of activities in accordance with the work plan? If there are some changes in the project, are the revisions justified and acceptable? Would you recommend changes in the methodology? Why?
    • Are the funds utilized in accordance with the scheduled activities?
    • Are there constraints in the implementation of the project? If the constraints in the project have been attended to, what are the actions taken?
    • Are there significant findings that may now be utilized by various clienteles?
    • Are the potential impacts of the project relevant to the Philippines or community?


  5. During evaluation, each presenter shall be given twenty (20) minutes to present his/her project outputs and fifteen (15) minutes for the open forum/discussion.

  6. As team of evaluators, each member will review the projects during evaluation session indicated in the schedule.

    • For each project to be evaluated, a chair/moderator among members will be chosen so that each member of the team can contribute to the evaluation process. The chair/moderator will consolidate the comments and suggestions, and settle any conflicting issue on the team’s recommendations.

    • The Team may opt to give the members’ individual comments and suggestions to OVCRE secretariat for consolidation after the presentation and oral discussion, and to meet separately should conflicting issue arises.


  7. The evaluation team will recommend if a project is to be renewed, extended or terminated considering the objectives, accomplishments, and the relevance of the project.

  8. The individual evaluation sheet, and the consolidated/summarized evaluators' comments, suggestions and recommendations used during the review should be submitted to OVCRE after every session or anytime within the day of evaluation.

Guidelines for project leaders/ presenters of projects for review

Listed below are the guidelines project leaders should keep in mind when their projects will be reviewed:

  • In case the project leader is not available, the study leader may present the accomplishments of the project and answer the questions during the open forum in behalf of the project leader.

  • Once the schedule of review is finalized, it must be strictly followed. In case a postponement is unavoidable, request for postponement of the review must be made not later than one week after the receipt of notice of evaluation. A written request with justification for the postponement of the evaluation should be submitted to the Vice-Chancellor for Research and Extension (VCRE) noted by the unit head/director and college dean. Submission of request and justification does not guarantee its approval.

  • One week before the presentation, the project leader should inform the OVCRE on the equipment needed during the presentation. The presenters are encouraged to use audiovisual aids in the presentation.

  • Presenters should come at least ten (10) minutes earlier than their scheduled time of evaluation.

  • During evaluation, each presenter shall be given twenty (20) minutes for the project presentation and fifteen (15) minutes for the open forum/discussion.

  • The presentation should be comprehensive and should focus on the accomplishments for the period under review (outputs, activities undertaken etc.) vis-à-vis the project's objectives.

  • The presenter should take note of the questions, comments and suggestions of the panel regarding the accomplishments of the project being evaluated in relation to its objectives.

Guidelines in the evaluation of programs and projects

Project evaluation is done by the Project Monitoring and Evaluation Section of the Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Research and Extension.

Below are the important information related to project evaluation in the university:

Schedule of evaluation

  • The evaluation of ongoing UPLB research projects both internally (i.e., UPLB Basic Research Fund, Research Trust fund) and externally funded (i.e., DA-BAR, DOST, PCARRD, NRCP, CHED) shall be conducted once a year
  • The PMES shall coordinate with the funding agency a synchronized schedule of evaluation of UPLB with that of the funding agency. As much as possible, a joint evaluation between UPLB and funding agency shall be conducted.
  • In case a joint evaluation is not possible, the funding agency shall invite a representative from the UPLB team of evaluators to attend the funding agency's evaluation, and provide UPLB-OVCRE, a copy of the summary of evaluation results.
  • The schedule of UPLB evaluation shall be done quarterly- in February, May, August, and November.
  • For projects due for completion, the evaluation shall be scheduled before the termination of the project.
    • Projects ending in April, May, June will be reviewed on February
    • Projects ending in July, August, September will be reviewed on May
    • Projects ending in October, November, December will be reviewed on August
    • Projects ending in January, February, March of succeeding year will be reviewed on November
  • Evaluation, however, may take place at a later date in consideration of the following:
    • The funding agency approved the change of implementation date.
    • The funding agency approved the extension of project to complete activities and/or use of unexpended balance.
    • The nature of the project (i.e., short duration, seasonality of crops).
    • The project shall not request for extension and shall instead present completed research for evaluation
  • The PMES staff shall finalize the schedule of evaluation, and accordingly send communication to the project leaders and funding agencies in this regard.

Identification of projects to be evaluated

  • The PMES shall identify the programs/projects to be evaluated and shall notify the researchers whose projects are due for evaluation at least two months before the scheduled evaluation.
  • The PMES shall acquire an updated copy of a complete listing of projects from OVCRE comptrollers. List should include project title, project leader, funding agency, project duration and date of recent budget release.
  • The PMES, in comparison, shall check the project title, project leader, funding agency, project duration and date of recent budget release of newly acquired list of ongoing projects with the previous list. For discrepancies, the PMES staff shall confer with the comptrollers, funding agency or project leader concerned. The PMES staff shall indicate previous entry (i.e. project title, project leader etc.) with parentheses for future reference.
  • The project duration may not indicate the actual project implementation, hence, the PMES staff shall confirm with the OVCRE comptrollers and/or researchers the actual date of implementation of the project and schedule the evaluation based on the actual implementation date.
  • The PMES staff shall prepare a list of projects to be evaluated for each evaluation session.

UPLB Evaluators

  • Two months before the year ends, a pool of UPLB evaluators for applied (externally funded) and basic (internally funded) researches shall be constituted for recommendation to the Chancellor for approval. In the selection of the members in the pool, their expertise and the current list of ongoing researches to be reviewed for the following year shall be considered.
  • The pool of evaluators shall consist of: a) core evaluators with expertise in the areas of statistics, crops, livestock, social sciences and economics, and who shall be present in all evaluation sessions, if possible; and b) specialist evaluators who shall be selected based on the area of discipline of the research projects being evaluated.
  • Before the evaluation, the PMES staff shall select the evaluators from the pool of evaluators as to their availability. The evaluators shall confirm their availability at least a week before the start of the evaluation and the PMES staff shall remind them three days before the start of the evaluation.
  • The PMES staff shall provide the evaluators report of the project leaders at least ten (10) days before the scheduled evaluation.
  • The honoraria for the evaluators shall be processed twice a year (i.e., midyear and end of the year).

Notification of Evaluation

  • For projects to be evaluated, the PMES staff shall send a notice of evaluation, a written report format, accomplishment report format, and guidelines for presentation to the project leaders concerned. The letter of notice shall include the name of the project leader, title of the project to be evaluated, the date of evaluation, deadline of submission of reports, number of copies of annual report to be submitted and other instructions.
  • The PMES shall confirm with the project leaders and/or project staff the receipt of notice of evaluation, deadline of submission of reports, number of copies of annual report to be submitted, and if there is any change in the evaluation schedule.

Documents for Evaluation

  • The PMES shall follow up the annual reports with cover letter properly coursed through channels, signed by the project leader and noted by the dean/director of the college/unit. The cover letter should indicate request for extension if there is a plan for any.
  • The PMES shall record the receipt of annual reports in the Incoming/Outgoing Research Report Logbook. The entry shall include date of receipt, where the report was received (Administration or DA-BAR RDE Network Headquarters Office), funding agency, program/project title, project leader, number of copies, presence or absence of cover letter, PMES ID and remarks.
  • The PMES shall send copies of the annual reports with summary of accomplishments, comment sheet, guidelines for evaluators and schedule of evaluation to the evaluators ten (10) days before the start of evaluation. The written report and evaluation sheets should be properly labeled with a PMES ID.

Venue and Facilities

  • The PMES shall reserve the venue four (4) weeks before evaluation and order snacks from accredited food caterer three (3) days before evaluation.
  • The PMES shall inquire from the project leaders the equipment and materials they shall need for presentation. The presenters shall be informed that those who are going to do a power point presentation should bring their own computers.
  • The PMES shall make sure the availability of the equipment needed during the presentation including slide projector, overhead projector, LCD projector, projector screen, laser pointer, sound system and computers.

Evaluation Procedures

  • The PMES shall provide the evaluators with a copy of the Guidelines of the Review of UPLB Completed and Ongoing R&D Projects and the presenters with a copy of the Guidelines and Format for Presenters of UPLB Ongoing Research Projects and Report Format before the evaluation.
  • The PMES shall make the necessary physical arrangements on the venue, facilities, food and materials to be used during the evaluation.
  • The PMES shall document the proceedings during the evaluation through audio and written records.
  • The PMES shall remind the evaluators of the submission of the evaluation sheets and/or synthesized comments of the evaluators after every session or within the day.
  • The PMES shall designate the moderator who shall see to the smooth conduct of the evaluation and providing a summary/recapitulation of the evaluation.

Transmittal of Evaluation Documents

  • The PMES shall collect the evaluation sheets from the evaluators and/or the synthesized comments, suggestions and recommendations of the evaluators within the day of evaluation and encode them in the computer.
  • The PMES shall transcribe the tapes or notes on the proceedings and prepare a draft of evaluation result in case the evaluators for the session were not able to formulate their synthesized comments, suggestions and recommendations.
  • The PMES send the evaluation result to the evaluators concerned for checking and/or addition of comments, suggestions and recommendations, collect the edited draft and finalize the evaluation results.
  • The PMES shall prepare transmittal letters regarding the results of the evaluation, and send them to the project leaders concerned.
  • The PMES shall send the evaluation result and annual reports of the projects to the funding agency concerned. The project titles, project leader and project duration shall be indicated. The PMES shall ensure that OVCRE has a copy of the receipt of evaluation results with the funding agency's proof of receipt as required by the internal audit. This is required by COA as a proof that the project had submitted the report.
  • The PMES shall accordingly inform the funding agency on the continuance or changes in the evaluation.

Preparing and submitting reports

  • Six (6) copies of progress report are submitted to the funding agency
  • 14 copies of the annual report are submitted for use in the joint UPLB and funding agency annual in-house review of projects; and
  • five (5) copies of the terminal report are submitted two months after the termination or completion of the project.
Both ongoing and completed research projects under the applied/basic research grants, research trust, and those funded by DOST, PCARRD, DAR, DA-BAR and other government agencies are required to be presented in an annual in-house review. The evaluators recommend the renewal or extension of the research projects. Completed projects, on the other hand, are also evaluated prior to the submission of the terminal report 30 days after the termination of the project. Researchers are required to present their results.

Applying for a copyright, registration or patent

University authors and inventors are assisted by the Intellectual Property Rights Office (IPRO) in their application for Copyright and patents for copyrightable works and potential patentable technology, respectively. The IPRO shall assist the creator(s)/author(s) or inventors in the preparation of the required documents. For more forms and information, please contact the IPRO's focal person at ebabaojr(at)yahoo(dot)com.

Applying for a copyright

  1. All copyrightable works will be jointly owned by the Creator/Author and UPLB.
  2. The Creator/s or Author/s (Assignor/s) and UPLB (Assignee) execute(s) a Deed of Assignment wherein they are made joint authors. The authors shall submit to IPRO two (2) copies of the written work for deposit to the Copyright Office.
  3. The accomplished Deed of Assignment is notarized.
  4. The IPRO accomplishes the Application for Copyright, have the form notarized by any notary public.
  5. The IPRO submits the following to the Copyright Office and shall pay the necessary fees and documentary stamps:
    • Deed of Assignment
    • Copyright Application
    • Two (2) copies of the written work
  6. All fees (notarial, application, documentary stamps) shall be shouldered by UPLB.
  7. The IPRO receives and files the copyright registration.

Applying for a patent

  1. The unit (where the inventor comes from) informs the IPRO of a potential patentable technology (product, process, utility model, etc.)
  2. The IPRO confers/meets with the inventor for a preliminary evaluation of the technology. If found patentable, the inventor is advised to prepare all the required documents, namely:
    • Abstract
    • Disclosure
    • Detailed background
    • Review of related literature
    • Invention disclosure report
  3. The IPRO reviews/collates all the required documents, prepares patent application papers and prepares endorsement signed by the Vice Chancellor for Research and Extension to the Chancellor through the UPLB Legal Office.
  4. The Legal Office reviews and endorses the Patent Application to the Chancellor.
  5. The Chancellor signs the Patent Application.
  6. The IPRO submits the notarized Patent Application to the IP Philippines Office.
For more information on the intellectual property rights, visit the IP Philippines website.