MRC: research grant: applicant-led

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
• 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
• explain the ambition of your vision and how it will improve understanding of causes and mechanisms of human disease

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

What the assessor looks for

• is effective and appropriate to achieve your objectives
• is feasible, and comprehensively identifies any risks to delivery and how they will be managed
• uses a clearly written and transparent methodology (if applicable)
• summarises the previous work and describes how this will be built upon and progressed (if applicable)
• will maximise translation of outputs into outcomes and impacts
• describes how your, and if applicable your team’s, research environment (in terms of the place and relevance to the project) will contribute to the success of the work
• demonstrate access to the appropriate services, facilities, infrastructure, or equipment to deliver the project
• provide a project plan including milestones and timelines, in the form of an embedded Gantt chart or similar
• explain and justify how you will approach diversity and inclusion in the study population and follow the MRC embedding diversity in research design policy (if applicable)
• show how you will use male and female animals or tissues and cells from female and male donors (if applicable) in your research. If you are not proposing to do this justify why
• describe how you will obtain ethical and regulatory approvals, including the current status of any approvals. Consider the MRC guidance on ethics and approvals
• explain and justify any involvement of human participants, including participant numbers, characteristics, recruitment methods, the procedures to be undertaken, and their severity

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
• 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

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’
• support for public and patient involvement and engagement. See Payments to public partners
• support 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 NHS studies
• animal costs, such as numbers that need to be bred or maintained and to maintain high welfare standards
• are comprehensive, appropriate, and justified

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, whilst 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

• 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

• name of facility, copied and pasted from the facility information list (DOCX, 43KB)
• proposed usage or costs, or costs per unit where indicated on the facility information list
• confirmation you have their agreement where required

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 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

• activities that will be delivered during the remaining unit-funded period and during this grant
• important changes or new directions proposed from your unit-funded research (if applicable)
• feedback from the last unit review that is important for the assessment of these plans (if applicable)
• the transition approach to staff costs across the unit-funded and grant-funded parts of the proposed work

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