UKRI Translation: MRC Proof of Concept: stage one

What the assessor looks for

• how this application differs from the previous application
• how previous feedback has been considered and addressed

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 lead to significant health or patient benefit, or alleviate an important translational bottleneck
• the competing solutions and their status, including whether similar or complementary work is being undertaken elsewhere
• the key competitive advantages of your proposed solution
• the potential market for your proposed solution, in terms of the target product profile, patient numbers and financial parameters

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

What the assessor looks for

• a brief description of the current stage of development
• an overview of the rationale and scientific background of your application
• information about your previous or current funding (if applicable) that has enabled and informed the proposed work, include any previous UKRI grant references. If you have any funding concurrent to this project, explain any overlap and how that funding will support the proposed work
• in the case of applications involving institutes, units or centres with existing core funding, including those funded by UKRI and National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), such as Biomedical Research Centres, describe how the proposed work and resources requested builds on, but is distinct from, core funded programmes of research

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

What the assessor looks for

• good laboratory practice (GLP), governing non-clinical laboratory studies such as stability testing
• good manufacturing practice (GMP), as the primary, mandatory standard for production for use in clinical studies
• provide details of the manufacturer(s), if known, and summarise their expertise and experience in manufacturing the product at the relevant scale and quality. You should also provide information on capacity and anticipated timelines for manufacture
• confirm whether appropriate assays have already been developed. If assays are not yet developed, you should describe when these assays will be developed and by whom
• confirm where validation will be carried out
• include, if relevant, any recommendations from regulatory agencies

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

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

What the assessor looks for

• describe any new IP or knowledge that the project is expected to generate
• outline how any intellectual assets generated will be managed throughout the project to enable further development and maximise the opportunity for patient benefit
• confirm the organisations or individuals who will own any arising IP and any live, pending or envisioned agreements governing ownership or exploitation of that IP
• outline if the applicants have freedom to operate for this project, for future development work, or for clinical use
• if access to background IP is required, explain this including the organisations or individuals that hold the relevant background IP rights. If this background IP is held by a third party (or a non-academic applicant), has access been agreed? If not, why do you believe you will be able to access the required IP on reasonable terms?

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.