UKRI Translation: MRC Impact Acceleration Awards

What the assessor looks for

• background overview
• previous funding and funders
• resubmission
• correspondence with MRC

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

What the assessor looks for

• quote the MRC award reference (detailed within the offer letter sent to your RO)
• confirm the name of the RO awarded the IAA award
• describe why your proposed work is more suitable for a ‘Impact Acceleration Award’ rather than IAA support

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

What the assessor looks for

• training a model based on existing data
• clinical validation of a model
• repurposing existing models into new interventions
• collecting new data and building a new model
• other (please define)
• justify why the available data or your plans for data collection are sufficient (maximum 100 words)
• justify why the proposed methodology is a sufficiently suitable approach (maximum 100 words)
• justify the AI and clinical (if applicable) expertise of the individuals involved in this application (maximum 100 words)
• outline the proposed success criteria and explain how these will demonstrate that your project has been successfully de-risked and is ready for the next stage of funding, once the current funding has been completed (maximum 100 words)

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

What the assessor looks for

• a significant person’s name, their position and office or their department
• office address or web link
• describe the strong support your RO will provide you when you undertake your proposed work

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)
• 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
• the previous work and current status of the innovation or technology and how the proposed work will build upon and progress its development
• the critical data to be generated as the project endpoint that will maximise translation of outcomes and transform the chance of attracting onward investment
• the expertise or any consultancy required to deliver the proposed work
• project specific deliverables, including proposed success criteria
• the resourcing necessary to deliver the proposed work
• the overall timeframe of the project
• the use of animals or patients, including justification for why specific animal models or clinical populations have been chosen, following the MRC embedding diversity in research design policy

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

What the assessor looks for

• the health or clinical need you are seeking to address
• how your work could lead to the development of a new or improved prototype, product, service or technology
• how meeting this need could significantly reduce disease burden or alleviate an important bottleneck
• the competing solutions and their status, including whether similar or complementary research is being taken elsewhere
• the key competitive advantages of your proposed solution
• the potential market for your proposed solution

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

• 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

• 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

• manage the outputs of the project, including any intellectual assets and intellectual property
• have freedom to operate
• protect the foreground IP or market position
• disseminate and communicate the outputs of your project

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
• 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 ‘Exceptions’ costs
• 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 associated with NHS studies
• animal costs, such as numbers that need to be bred or maintained and to maintain high welfare standards
• outsourcing work

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