Correction to This Article
A Feb. 13 Federal Page article misstated the cost of the federal program. It is $22 million, not $22 billion.
Page 2 of 2   <      

New Grant System Excludes Mac Users

But the promise of making accessible to everyone remains unfulfilled because of a decision by Grumman and HHS to give a small Canadian company called PureEdge Solutions the job of creating the electronic forms.

The PureEdge solution, it turns out, works only with the Windows operating system. And that is especially galling, several scientists said, as at least one major grant-making agency, the National Science Foundation, has for many years been using a "platform-independent" system that works seamlessly with all kinds of computers.

Mike Atassi, program manager for Grumman's system integration team and an avowed fan of Macintosh computers, said the choice of PureEdge was logical given that the contract demanded full implementation within seven months and because more than 90 percent of computer users nationwide use PCs.

Critics note that in contrast to the domination of PCs in the business community, Macs constitute about one-third to one-half of the computers scientists and academicians use.

A long-standing PureEdge promise to make its forms Mac-compatible came into question last summer when IBM bought the company. Last week, an IBM spokesman said the company is "still planning to fully support the Mac," probably by fall.

Atassi said if he receives a test version from IBM by this fall, it could be ready by the following spring.

Meanwhile, the government is steering people to certain "workarounds" -- ways to make Macs behave as though they were PCs -- which can be purchased or downloaded from the Internet. But those systems are receiving mixed reviews.

At the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass. -- one of the nation's premier research institutions, where every senior scientist has a personal grants administrator -- Mac users have used an in-house version of a Web server called Citrix to get around's limitations, said Mary Anne Donovan, administrative lab manager for a Whitehead researcher.

The process has advantages over paper applications, Donovan said. "I can't tell you how many times I've had to take a cab to the airport at the last minute to FedEx my nine paper copies," she said. "If you can just press a button and send it, that's got to be better."

But others who have turned to the workarounds recommended by have not fared as well.

Nancy Wray, who directs the office at Dartmouth College that handles federal grant applications, said a recent attempt to use the Citrix server workaround was a bust. After struggling though lingo-laden government instructions "an awfully long time," she said, the grant applicant "just gave up."

Christine Sell, who works with Tumeo at Cleveland State, called the workarounds "a walk in the wilderness." Mac users loathe one approach recommended by the government -- a "PC emulation" program -- because it is susceptible to PC-specific viruses they normally do not have to worry about.

Other glitches plague the system, said Wendy Baldwin, executive vice president for research at the University of Kentucky, who told of a researcher who filed on time but did not find out until two days later that the electronic form had not gone through.

"When it takes 48 hours to get a 'fatal error' notice back, you're screwed," she said. "This is supposed to be a partnership. . . . If you crank off your investigators and they don't make their deadlines, that's a terrible thing."

In an interview, HHS's Havekost acknowledged that "there's been plenty of hue and cry," adding that applicants can apply for waivers to use paper if need be. Asked to confirm that the workarounds were at least "workable" -- a word he had used twice earlier in the conversation -- he pulled back.

"That's not my word," Havekost said. "There will be a firestorm if you say I said it is workable."

<       2

© 2006 The Washington Post Company