Perspectives on research funding: the why, what and how of commissioning excellence with impactMelanie Knetsch, Nina Marshall and Lauren Winch (ESRC), with Frank Hardman (University of York)

Welcome and overviewSession aim: to explore the research commissioning process from multiple perspectives, with time to reflect on barriers and how they can be overcomeSession structure:

– Part 1: A (brief) orientation overview of ESRC research commissioning processes: the lifecycle of a proposal and key points on applications, assessment and decision-making

– Part 2: Focus in on key elements of successful proposals – case for support and pathways to impact – as well as barriers to success in these

– Final Q&A

Part 1: A (brief) orientation overview of ESRC research commissioning processes

▶ Bitesize orientation not a detailed how-to guide▶ Overview of the lifecycle of a proposal, with focus on:

▪ The proposal writing stage▪ Peer review and feedback▪ Decision points

▶ Based on a generic process – specifics will differ between calls, particularly where other funders are involved/ leading

▶ Illustrates how ESRC core values – quality, impact, independence – drive our processes

▶ Helps understand how different roles in the process you might undertake fit together

Lifecycle of a Proposal

Applicant writes proposal

Office Checks

Office Reject

Reviewer Reject

Reviewer Selection/Invitation

Peer Review comments and scores received and

anonymised

PI Response to reviewer comments

Commissioning Panel member selection/ proposal allocation

Proposal returned to PI for minor amendment

Application unsuccessful

Commissioning Panel Meeting

Application successful

Detailed checks undertaken by ESRC

on proposal, including costings

Contract issued

Proposal submitted via Je-S – Joint Electronic

Submission system

Grant starts

Funding opportunity

available

Focus on: the proposal writing stage

▶ UK research councils use the Joint Electronic Submission System – Je-S

▶ Some information is entered into Je-S directly, and other parts of proposals are uploaded as PDF attachments

▶ All parts of proposals are assessed – we don’t ask for what we don’t use

▶ Call specific guidance is provided covering core requirements, FAQs etc. as well as Je-S, call spec

▶ The Je-S helpdesk deals with technical queries, and ESRC contact staff respond to other queries

▶ Supplementary briefings may be provided – e.g. webinars, launch events, town halls etc.

▶ Research organisations may also offer support▶ Completed proposals are submitted by the

lead researcher via their organisation

Further info for prospective applicants: www.esrc.ac.uk/funding/guidance-for-applicants/

Focus on: peer review▶ Anonymous academic review of

proposals by (global) peers▶ Some calls also involve non

academic peer review▶ Peer reviewers are selected for their

relevant expertise▶ May be members of ESRC peer

review college, or identified specifically

▶ Reviewer conflicts of interest are actively managed

▶ Score (1-6) and comment on proposals against call-specific criteria

▶ Source of constructive feedback, whatever the outcome

▶ Can be a lengthy process to secure sufficient suitable reviewers

Further info on peer review:www.esrc.ac.uk/funding/guidance-for-peer-reviewers/

Peer review training tool: http://peerreviewtraining.esrc.ac.uk/

Focus on: decision points▶ Commissioning panel made up of

both academics and non academics/ potential research users, with independent chair

▶ Members selected for high level expertise in relevant fields to the call

▶ Some standing panels, some call specific

▶ Provide assessments of proposals, including score (1-10) and comments: based on access to full proposal, previous reviews and PI response

▶ Meet to discuss proposals and make funding recommendations – can add conditions

▶ Detailed checks follow including costings and eligibility to hold funds

Part 2: Key elements for success: Case for Support and Pathways to Impact

What are these?▶ Two key ‘documents’ that form part of your proposal▶ Case for support: where you set out the main body of

your research proposal, covering its significant features, including:

▪ the research aims/ objectives, set in context▪ research questions, analytical framework and methods ▪ partnerships, collaborations, linkages, capacity building

▶ Pathways to impact: where you explain what you will do to maximise the opportunities for non-academic research users to benefit from your research, including:– Mapping of beneficiaries/ targets, and analysis of demand– Strategy for engaging audiences, and methods of communication/

engagement▶ Different length restrictions for each, depending on call -

check the call specific guidance!

Why do they matter?▶ They are the space where you show your/team

research idea and how you will make it work▶ They are key to answering key assessment

questions: – What are your objectives for the research: what

scientific contribution and socio-economic impact will it have?

– How well are you ‘matched’ against the specification?– How well thought out is your project?– Have you thought of the value of your research

beyond academia (and how to make this happen)?

One view from multiple perspectivesProfessor Frank Hardman, University of York:

Former chair of a commissioning panel, current grantholder, and ESRC peer reviewer

Over to you…What are the key elements that you think would be important to include in:

a) any Case for support b) Pathways to impact attachment

Why do these matter and what is critical to include?

Other perspectives: What the evidence shows▶ Clearly respond to the specific callRead the project call carefully. Ensure you really spell out how you are

addressing this call, what is novel and important about your proposal in terms of answering the call - and why you are the right team to develop this work.

Adopt the language of the call for proposals, and explicitly make the case that your project addresses this particular call […] you need to explicitly justify the relevance of your approach to the call at hand. Don't just send a generic project description.

Make sure your application is directly and explicitly related to the theme. Too many applications looked like applicants interests rebadged for the [call] by adding [call] key words to their prior interests.

Case for support – demonstrate fit to call

▶ Show how your project responds and adds to existing knowledgeThe award is for excellent new research[…] and not for the best roll out in

practice of an old idea that might have lots of positive impact […] Situate your proposal in the literature and make clear where it will add value

Specify the rationale for the investigation very clearly and succinctly drawing out what is to be found out through this study that could not be found out any other way.

Pay good attention to local contextualisation. This needs to comprise what has been written about the issues you aim to research in the country where your work will take place, very importantly taking account of local scholarship and debate

▶ Demonstrate rigor and robustness in methodsFully thinking through your proposed methodology (and being able to justify the

approach you intend to take) is absolutely crucial. Many proposals from very qualified researchers spent a lot of time on motivation

and the broad ambitions of the project, without explaining the nuts and bolts of the research activities to be funded. Basic information on sample sizes, how key concepts will be measured, etc., can lend a lot of credibility to a proposal.

Case for support – demonstrate excellence

▶ Assemble/plan for a team with the right combination of skillsWhat can your team realistically manage from your current skills set? Are there

skills gaps that you will need to fill to make the project work? If so, do you have a realistic plan to get them in place pre-project or at an early stage?

▶ Plan and cost realisticallyBe realistic in choosing the number of case studies you will examine. Choosing too

many in your proposal will be spreading yourself too thin and not result in high quality work.

[…] consider how the conditions in that country during the proposed period of investigation will colour strategies of data collection, analysis, and pathways to impact.

Give ample time to costing your research plan [realistically], including careful calculation of how much time you will need from individual proposal collaborators to successfully complete all components of the project.

A detailed focus on expenditures is always beneficial. Readers like to see that the project will deliver value for money, which means that some winning proposals may not be asking for anywhere close to the full amount of money available to them.

Other key advice

Pathways to impact – your chance to show that you have thought about this

▶ Coherence, evidence users have been identified (actual and potential) and how to access them

Early involvement of [named] partner organisations and co-researchers is key…

The applicants have therefore already established contact with gatekeepers, or facilitators… they are keen to be involved….

▶ Evidence of secured support/involvement; method of this; and how it meets their needs [why them?] e.g. partnership agreement; existing relationships; involved in writing case for support; consultation model; etc

A provisional intellectual property agreement has been set up with the [business/NGO] collaborators

[organisations] have agreed to form the project steering group

Pathways to impact - pragmatic▶ Additional partnerships that will be sought if

successfulpartnerships with other [eg service industries] will be pursued, initially

focussing on [names] through [existing relationships; new contacts; seek advice from colleagues/university]

▶ Tools to engage or communicate To be able to reach those outside of academia who might benefit from

our work we will need to do more than publish in academic journals and present at academic conferences. We will employ a number of strategies to raise the probability that our work will impact directly outside the academic community. These include….

▶ Evidence of costs thought out (at least 10%)However, £xxx just over X% of the budget, has been allocated for specific

impact activities. These include….

Pathways to impact - flexibility▶ These will not be fixed – shows your

thinking/planning▶ This forms a basis – good practice to keep going

back and reviewing it▶ Impact is not linear▶ Knowledge exchange is messy and complex▶ Will always be unforeseen opportunities – but

thinking early one will help you recognised and respond

▶ If successful – then this forms the basis of your impact strategy

Final thoughts and discussion▶ Similarities or differences to your

discussions? ▶ What makes it difficult to do these two

documents?▶ What can individuals and institutions do to

overcome these challenges?

Thank you!

Sources of follow-on information: -Key ESRC resources list in conference pack -ESRC website: www.esrc.ac.uk and www.esrc.ac.uk/international-development -Email: IDR@esrc.ac.uk