UKRI translation: MRC proof of concept: stage two

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 significantly reduce disease burden or alleviate an important clinical or translational bottleneck
• the competing solutions and their status, including whether similar or complementary research and development is being undertaken elsewhere
• the key competitive advantages of your proposed solution
• the potential market for your proposed solution. Quantify this in terms of the target product profile, patient numbers and financial parameters
• the timeliness of your approach
• the end users of your proposed solution, such as clinicians, primary care staff, technical specialists
• any engagement with end users, patients, carers or the wider public in the development of the project
• any further needs that could be addressed by your proposed solution or components of it, such as use as a platform technology

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

What the assessor looks for

• a detailed description of the current stage of development
• an overview of the rationale and scientific background of your application
• updated 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 will 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 (BRCs), 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

• project plan: 1,500 words
• methodology and experimental design: 750 words
• risk management: 450 words
• environment, infrastructure and equipment: 450 words
• references: 350 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
• provides 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 the critical questions are addressed as early as possible in the plan
• a quantified target value that you aim to achieve
• a quantified acceptable value, which, if achieved, would support project progression
• study design
• study participants
• study endpoints
• dose (when 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

• 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 information on the target quantity and quality of product to be manufactured including, if relevant: titre and fill volume(s), empty to full ratio, number and viability of cells, phenotype and potency
• detail your planned or predicted dose requirements and describe how this informs the proposed scale of manufacture
• 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
• provide an assessment of the potential manufacturing risks and propose mitigation strategies
• 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. You may upload up to five pages of correspondence with regulators to this section

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

• 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 public and patient involvement and engagement. Costs for public partnerships including payments to public partners
• costs for preserving, long-term storage, or sharing of data
• cost 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

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