Our vendor, Huron Consulting Group, is sunsetting its current research administration product, which supports U-M eResearch systems including Proposal Management, Regulatory Management, eRAM, and M-Inform (Conflict of Interest). Huron initially announced that the product will no longer be supported after October 2031. In April 2026, they extended support through November 2034. After discussions with project sponsors and eResearch leadership, it was determined that, while the extended support period provides additional flexibility, it does not change the university’s overall project direction, anticipated timeline, or continued momentum toward replacing eResearch.
All customers using Huron Consulting Group’s research administration portal product, including U-M's enterprise systems for eResearch Proposal Management (eRPM), eResearch Regulatory Management (eRRM), eRAM, and M-Inform, as well as peer institutions nationwide will need to migrate to new solutions.
Through 2026, your day-to-day work in eResearch systems won't change. During this time, the university community will have opportunities to provide critical input by collaborating with project working groups on business requirements, vendor analysis, and feedback. After we engage with our vendor partner(s), we’ll share a timeline for when each module will move to the new system. At that point, some of the ways you do your work will change, and training will be offered to help you learn new tools or processes.
The migration will include transitioning to to-be-determined software solutions, reengineering business processes, building new training materials, reestablishing system integrations – within the eResearch product lines (including eResearch Proposal Management (eRPM), eResearch Regulatory Management (eRRM), eRAM, and M-Inform), and to other enterprise U-M systems, like M-Pathways Financials & Physical Resources System and Human Resource Management System (HRMS) – and rebuilding reporting mechanisms. The scope includes planning to migrate active records to new systems, and ensure historical records are accessible via an archive.
The current eResearch systems including eResearch Proposal Management (eRPM), eResearch Regulatory Management (eRRM), eRAM, and M-Inform will continue to be supported while the replacement journey is underway. Routine system functionality improvements and fixes continue to be made as planned. At some point prior to the new system migration, there will be a determination surrounding functionality enhancements and customizations, and any changes will need to be evaluated and prioritized. Eventually, there will be a freeze on changes to the current systems.
MiCores, InfoReady, and other software used for research administration that are not currently on the Huron Consulting Group platform are not currently in scope.
The university community will have opportunities to provide critical input through collaboration with project working groups on business requirements, vendor product analysis, evaluation criteria, and survey feedback. The project team is reaching out as the planning effort progresses for your insights, expertise, and recommendations.
The U-M Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) effort includes modernizing M-Pathways and regional medical legacy business systems for Financials, Human Resources, and Student Administration. As part of eResearch Replacement, integrations with these systems and data will be maintained, but they are separate projects.
Grants management at U-M includes more than financial management. Managing our grants portfolio requires capabilities for research oversight, sponsor interactions, proposal and award administration, compliance, and financial management. No single ERP grants module is expected to meet all of these needs on its own.
The future research administration system and the ERP Grants functionality will work together to support the full grants lifecycle. The research administration system will continue to support research-specific business processes such as proposal development and submission, award negotiation and setup, sponsor communications, compliance-related activities, and institutional research oversight. The ERP will support financial management activities such as budgets, expenditures, accounting, billing, reporting, and other financial controls.
The Office of Research and Sponsored Projects (ORSP) and Sponsored Programs will work together to determine which business processes and data belong in each platform, how the systems will integrate, and how to provide a cohesive experience for faculty, staff, and administrators. The goal is not to duplicate functionality, but to ensure that U-M has the right capabilities across both systems to manage sponsored research effectively and compliantly.
A dedicated team of change management, communications and training professionals is developing a comprehensive organizational change management (OCM) strategy and implementation plan. The OCM work will ensure that everyone affected by this change stays informed, supported, and actively engaged throughout the process. By focusing on the people side of this technical transition, the team will prepare staff through targeted training, engagement with key collaborators to advocate for their units' specific needs, and equip all impacted groups with the resources they need to successfully adopt new systems.
Questions, suggestions, or feedback can be sent to the project team at [email protected] or shared via this feedback form.
A Request for Information (RFI) helps University of Michigan (U-M) staff gather important details about the research administration software market. However, we cannot make purchases based solely on an RFI. By gathering information through the RFI process, we will be better prepared to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP), evaluate different suppliers, and make informed decisions. The RFI process enables U-M staff to ask questions and gain insights into the latest features and limitations of the software, as well as obtain preliminary pricing data to help us budget appropriately for the later RFP phase.
A RFI (Request for Information) is a general inquiry asking suppliers of research administration software for information. It cannot be used to make a purchase. The RFI process is usually shorter and involves collecting written responses from suppliers and possibly product demonstrations. In contrast, an RFP (Request for Proposal) is a competitive bidding process that allows U-M to enter into contract negotiations with the top supplier after evaluations are complete. The RFP process is typically more thorough, involving written responses, product demonstrations, and proofs of concept with hands-on evaluations of the leading suppliers. This ensures that we can make the best final selection based on comprehensive evaluations.
A Proof-of-Concept, or hands-on evaluation will be conducted with vendor finalists. A POC typically involves short-term access to a “sandbox” environment with mock U-M data or forms, in order to demonstrate how a proposed solution will work in a real-world setting before a full commitment is made. It helps evaluate the vendor’s capabilities and ensures the solution meets specific requirements and expectations. The purpose of a hands-on evalutation is to finalize product selections. There will be opportunities closer to the design and launch of a new module for advanced access for refining configurations, testing and training.
At this time, building a custom "home-grown" solution is not recommended. Developing and operating a platform as complex as eResearch would require substantial upfront investment, dedicated technical staffing, and ongoing costs for maintenance, security, accessibility, and regulatory compliance. The university would need to continually update the system to keep pace with changing federal requirements and evolving research workflows.
By contrast, adopting an established, externally-supported Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solution is a more cost-effective and reliable choice that enables us to dedicate our resources and time to advancing research rather than reinventing infrastructure. SaaS providers typically deliver regular upgrades, monitor regulatory changes, and respond quickly as requirements evolve—capabilities that are difficult and risky to sustain with a highly customized, campus-built solution, especially if key personnel leave. Research Administration functions are not where we typically innovate or differentiate the university, so commercial products make sense for us to use.
After a vendor is selected, the university can still address any unmet needs by configuring the platform and, where necessary, developing supplemental applications or integrations to support critical functionality not initially available.
The eResearch Leadership group will assess vendors using a weighted scoring system based on detailed business requirements and project priorities for a fair and transparent selection. Top-scoring vendors will be invited to provide presentations, participate in exercises, and deliver hands-on proofs of concept for further evaluation. Scoring will be updated throughout each phase, incorporating feedback from surveys, focus groups, and other contributors. Finalists will be recommended by the Steering Committee, with executive sponsors (Office of the Vice President for Research; Office of the Vice President for Information Technology) having ultimate decision authority. Multiple vendors may be chosen.
Yes, we plan to migrate active records to the new systems and ensure historical records are accessible. Cross-central office working groups will review historical data, and according to data retention policies, determine what should be migrated to new systems and what data could be accessed via an archival system. The approach may differ module to module.
It is possible that the labeling naming convention could change. Once we have selected vendor(s), we will work with them to identify the best approach.