Making Successful Grant Applications Chris Veal (Research Development Manager) How to sell yourself

Agenda Basic philosophical approach - selling Warwick contacts Focus on Research Council proposals and procedures

Philosophy of Approach - Buying and Selling The manufacturer is applying to have its beans accepted by you. It is saying “Pick Me” Assessment Criteria: Quality, Track Record, Value for Money, Impact, Appearance, Fit to Need

Warwick Research Support Contacts Biological Sciences – Elizabeth Cromwell WMS – Bekki Gibbs WMG – Barry Turner / Chris Veal Engineering (not WMG) – Rachel Corke Chemistry/Psychology – Katherine Branch Physics – James Smith Maths/Stats/Comp Sci/Sys Bio – Chris Veal

Types of RC Project Responsive mode research grant (1st Grant) Fellowship Travel / Conference Network Equipment Symposia / Workshops Plan well ahead. Ensure excellent science. Proposal should be: well packaged, have impact, suitable price, fit for purpose

Research Council Proposals Detailed layout varies across RCs but much basic content is the same Common elements Form Track record and /or CV Research environment Background / Importance Aims / Objectives Programme and Methodology Relevance to beneficiaries Impact Plan (Dissemination and Exploitation) (2 pages) Justification of resources (1 page) Work plan (1 page) 8 pages Read the instructions. Follow closely the suggested layout

Never forget the customer Observations (1) Never forget the customer Lay Out One column or two Never use font size below minimum specified Make sure proposal is easy to read, split into sections of manageable size, Avoid large blocks of continuous text which can look unappealing Can mix font styles, font sizes on headings for emphasis or to increase readability Tables / Diagrams – reasonable size, check numbers, can be very useful

Do what works for you and your project Observations (2) Lay Out (continued) Attention grabbing opening section – summarise background, aims, impact in ca 3 sentences Preliminary results useful Risk analysis/risk management Boxes with “take home” messages MRC has an Abstract which is very important Do what works for you and your project

Observations (3) Impact Increasing emphasis from RCs Increased involvement of users (Industry, Government, other researchers), focus on public engagement Who will benefit, how will they benefit, what will be done to ensure they do benefit Need a credible plan, build on existing initiatives Letters of support Must show commitment, added value for collaborator or company, value of contribution etc. Must be real. Very important for referees Avoid a standard letter – write it yourself? Leave enough time

You can’t go back for more if the money runs out Observations (4) Methodology Ensure well structured and clear In multi participant proposals say who will do what and when? In collaborative proposals how will this be managed? Resources Consider carefully what you need – don’t be greedy or cheap, think what the sponsor can afford JoR - ensure each cost line item included and justified BBSRC cuts requested budgets, EPSRC doesn’t You can’t go back for more if the money runs out

Observations (5) Refereeing Referee form – read it Choosing your referees someone who will give a fair and well-informed assessment Not your mates Conflict of interest. Refereeing process Expert referees selected by EPSRC/BBSRC/MRC Receipt of referees’ comments Response to comments (seek help) Panels (EPSRC) or Committees (BBSRC)

Summary Seeking research funding is very competitive and likely to get more so Writing proposals is all about selling yourself – your track record and ideas. Always consider the customer There are a wide range of schemes and funding agencies. Seek advice to ensure you are applying to the right one in the right way Always bear in mind Allen’s Axiom “When all else fails read the instructions