Experimental medicine: invited stage two application

What the assessor looks for

• describe how this application differs from the stage one application, or the stage two application if this is an invited resubmission
• explain how the feedback provided on earlier versions has been considered and acted on

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• new investigator award: eligibility
• new investigator award: career development
• new investigator award: research organisation support

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• is of excellent quality and importance within or beyond the field(s) or area(s)
• has the potential to advance current understanding, or generate new knowledge, thinking or discovery within or beyond the field or area
• is timely given current trends, context, and needs
• impacts world-leading research, society, the economy, or the environment
• provide details of the current clinical challenge, healthcare burden or knowledge gap
• summarise the current state of understanding about the relevant mechanisms of disease
• identify the current gap in mechanistic understanding
• state the mechanistic hypothesis to be tested
• identify the potential direct or indirect benefits and who the beneficiaries might be
• identify potential improvements in human or population health, whether through contributing to relieving disease or disability burden, improving quality of life or providing benefit to the health service or health-related industry
• if applicable, describe the route to patient benefit
• explain if the results will be valuable for discovery science through ‘reverse translation’

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• the type of intervention, which may include compound, biologic, psychological, physiological, vaccine or immune challenge
• relevant background information, including its established safety profile and use in other mechanistic studies
• a summary of the development history of the intervention (if applicable)
• details of any existing intellectual property associated with this intervention (if applicable)

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• project plan: 1,650 words
• methodology and experimental design: 850 words
• risk management: 400 words
• environment, infrastructure and equipment: 400 words
• engagement, communication and dissemination: 200 words

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• delineate the proposed work into costed project phases with clear ‘go or no-go’ decision points
• provide the success criteria that will be used for each milestone, with target and acceptable thresholds
• detail robust ‘go or no-go’ criteria (failure to meet these will result in early termination of the project)
• be structured so that critical questions are addressed as early as possible in the plan
• a quantified target value you aim to achieve
• a quantified acceptable value, which, if achieved, would still support project progression
• study design
• study participants
• study endpoints
• dose (if applicable)
• analysis plans
• duration (in months) from project start and from the previous milestone (not applicable for the first milestone, Milestone one)

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• population cohorts; longitudinal studies; genetic, omics and imaging data; biobanks, and other collections that are potentially a rich resource for the wider research community: maximum of 1,500 words
• all other research, less complex, the plan may be as short as 500 words

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• long-term career goals and chosen career route
• plans to develop your own research profile
• independence, as the sole intellectual leader of the proposed work
• plans to secure further grant support during or after this award
• plans to establish and lead a research team
• equality diversity and inclusion
• advocacy or advisory roles
• stakeholder engagement
• participation in peer review
• influencing policy
• public engagement or outreach

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• the relevant experience ( appropriate to career stage ) to deliver the proposed work
• the right balance of skills and expertise to cover the proposed work
• the appropriate leadership and management skills to deliver the work and your approach to develop others
• contributed to developing a positive research environment and wider community
• 1,500 words to be used for Résumé for Research and Innovation (R4RI) modules (including references)
• 200 words to summarise the career stage of the core team (an example table will be provided within the Funding Service to assist you with your summary)
• 500 words for Additions if necessary
• contributions to the generation of new ideas, tools, methodologies, or knowledge, this may include your previous funding and key outputs such as publications
• the development of others and maintenance of effective working relationships
• contributions to the wider research and innovation community
• contributions to broader research or innovation users and audiences and towards wider societal benefit, including public partnerships
• if you are applying as a new investigator, you need to make your leadership role clear and justify the team around you

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• how your expertise fits within the wider interest and strategies of the research organisation and department
• development and training opportunities to be provided and how they form a cohesive career development package tailored to you
• mentoring and support arrangements proposed and how they are appropriate to you, include the name of any current or future mentors
• financial support to be provided, including the contribution to your salary, and how this improves the application
• the name and role of the person providing the statement, who should be the Head of Department or other senior manager
• how they will support you following the end of the award
• how they recognise and value you as part of their team and will integrate you into the research organisation, enabling you to develop your independence and the focus of your research
• guidance and training on setting up a research group, building partnerships and collaborations, or with public engagement
• rapid access to resources at the research organisation through knowledge of appropriate processes and systems
• access to career development support and advice to enable future career transitions
• support for any proposed leadership activities
• access to laboratory space or investment in equipment to establish your laboratory, and access to communal departmental resources

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• collaboration agreements
• definitions of basic or applied research
• internationally based companies
• subsidy control
• intellectual property (IP) arrangements
• fully flexible and gated contributions
• the ICF assessment criteria
• Name the industry or company project partner considered under the ICF.
• Indicate whether your application is basic research or applied research.
• Explain why, in the absence of the requested UKRI funding, the collaboration and the planned research could not be undertaken.
• State whether your application is under the category of fully flexible contribution or gated contribution (based on the IP sharing arrangements with the industry or company partner).
• Outline the pre-existing IP (‘background IP’) that each partner, including the academic partner, will bring to the collaborative research project and the terms under which partners may access these assets.

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• the relevant ethical and RRI considerations, including both the research or topic area itself and the design and delivery of the project
• the wider implications of the proposed work, and how you will maximise the positive societal, environmental, and economic benefits arising from the project, while minimising unintended negative impacts, such as research misuse or accidental harm
• how you will manage these considerations throughout the lifecycle of the project

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.

What the assessor looks for

• project staff
• significant travel for field work or collaboration (but not regular travel between collaborating organisations or to conferences)
• any equipment that will cost more than £25,000
• any consumables beyond typical requirements, or that are required in exceptional quantities
• all facilities and infrastructure costs
• all resources that have been costed as ‘Exceptions’
• costs for preserving, long-term storage, or sharing of data
• support for international co-leads, demonstrating this is within the 30% costs cap for co-leads from high income countries, India and China. There is no cap on costs requested for international applicants from DAC list countries
• NHS research costs , when they are associated with clinical studies using NHS resources (please refer to detail in the ‘What we are looking for’ section for guidance on completing the SoECAT)
• animal costs, such as numbers that need to be bred or maintained and to maintain high welfare standards
• any work to be outsourced, including the reason for outsourcing, scope, provider and cost
• costs for public and patient involvement and engagement. Costs for public partnership including payments to public partners

A filled dot only means your answer mentions that ground. It is not a judgement of how well.