National Health and Medical Research Council NHMRC Project Grants

1
National Health and Medical Research Council
(NHMRC) Project Grants

• Elouise OToole Research Development Group
  (CMHS)
• Bryony Wakefield Office of Sponsored Research
• 14th February 2008

2
Outline

• Overview
• 2008 Outcomes
• Preparing Your Application
• Major Policy Changes
• Assessment Criteria

3
NHMRC Project Grants - Overview

• Project Grants support individuals and small
  teams of researchers undertaking biomedical,
  clinical, public and preventative health
  research.
• Cornerstone of support for health and medical
  research in Australia.
• Judged by peers according to internationally
  benchmarked criteria.
• Research outcomes in nominated priority areas,
  including Indigenous Health.

4
NHMRC Project Grants - Overview (cont.)

• Biomedical, clinical, public health or health
  services research focus
• 1 to 5 years support (most commonly 3 years)

5
Project Grants Outcome 2008

• ANU success rate up 13 compared to 2007
• Total Amount Awarded up by 1,952,588
• 1st year Budget for a Project- 158,500 (average)
• Total Funded Amount for Project - 493,002
  (average)
• ANU 08 stats 57 appls 19 funded 9,367,038

6
Project Grants Outcome 2008

• CMHS success rate up 19 compared to 2007
• Total Amount Awarded up by 2,106,713
• 1st year Budget for a Project- 160,000 (average)
• Total Funded Amount for Project - 499,036
  (average)
• CMHS 08 stats 43 apps 18 funded 8,747,633

7
Preparing Your Project Grant Application
8
Research Development Group Website
http//intranet.cmhs.anu.edu.au/services/researchd
ev/index.php

• OSR information on
• Office of Sponsored Research (OSR) Website
  http//www.anu.edu.au/ro/OSR/OSR_index.php
• NHMRC Research Funding http//www.anu.edu.au/ro/gr
  ants/NHMRC.php
• NHMRC Application Information for Funding
  Commencing in 2009 http//www.anu.edu.au/ro/grants
  /NHMRC09_grants_main_page.php
• NHMRC Project Grants http//www.anu.edu.au/ro/gran
  ts/Project09_application_info.php

9
ANU Processes

• All Applications from CMHS must go through
  Research Development Group (RDG)
• RDG are responsible for technical checking
• First contact for academics is the RDG
  researchdev_at_cmhs.anu.edu.au
• First contact for administrators in your local
  area is the RDG

10
For Academics

• College Admin
• who are the administrative contacts in the
  College of Medicine and Health Sciences?
• Research Development Group Staff
• Elouise OToole x51030
• Samantha Fardell x56255
• Mandy Law x59974
• Ina Jalil x58063
• Documentation
• funding policy
• advice and instructions to applicants
• Deadlines
• make sure you are aware of all deadlines
• CMHS deadlines are
• Draft application 8th February
• Final Application 12 noon 7th March

11
NHMRC Application Identification Number

• The Application Identification Number
  (Application ID) is allocated to the academic by
  the College Research Development Group (RDG) and
  must be entered in the Application ID field on
  the application form.
• To request an Application ID from the RDG, you
  need to provide the following information via
  email to researchdev_at_cmhs.anu.edu.au
• Title
• Surname
• Given Name
• Dept 
• Local Area
• Application Type
• Project Title

12
Project Grant Application

• NHMRC Project Grants are submitted electronically
  by the RDG to the NHMRC in 2 parts
• Informed Filler number (IFN), which contains
  Sections 1 - 9 of the Application as part of the
  electronic form
• ONE-PAGE Synopsis saved in rich text format (rtf)
  and attached at Section 10 of the IFN electronic
  form.
• A separate PDF containing information as detailed
  in Attachment D of the NHMRC Advice and
  Instructions to Applicants

13
NHMRC Project Grants Funding Policy for funding
commencing in 2009 Major Policy Changes
14
Major Policy Changes

• Applicants for NHMRC Project Grants are
  encouraged to apply for grants of up to 5 years
  duration.
• NHMRC Project Grants are available to support
  work from 1 to 5 years duration

15
Major Policy Changes

• NHMRC reserves the right to offer separately
  allocated funding, over and above the NHMRCs
  standard Project Grant funding, to support
  competitive applications in areas of strategic
  importance to the NHMRC.
• For 2008 applications these include, but are not
  limited to
• i. Indigenous Health
• ii. Effective Health Care
• iii. Complementary and Alternative Medicines
• iv. Drinking Water Quality and
• v. Asbestos Related Diseases

16
Major Policy Changes

• Applications that address the 2006 WHO Research
  Agenda for Radio Frequency Fields are invited
  through the NHMRC Project Grants process.
• Proposals that include international
  collaborations are particularly encouraged. These
  applications will be assessed in the same way as
  other NHMRC Project Grants, and successful
  applications funded through the Australian
  Governments levy on radiocommunication licence
  fees.
• The WHO Research Agenda for Radio Frequency
  Fields can be found at http//www.who.int/pehemf/
  research/rf_research_agenda_2006.pdf

17
Major Policy Changes

• Applicants can nominate the preferred Grant
  Advisory Group (GAG) to which their application
  will be allocated
• Two independent external reviews will be sought
  for all applications, and the Grant Review Panel
  (GRP) Spokespersons will also provide a written
  assessment
• Applicants may include graphics and tables in
  their applicant response

18
Major Policy Changes

• The Administering Institutions Research
  Administration Office will retain the consent
  form however it is individual researchers
  responsibility to obtain the signatures of all
  named Investigators (including Associate
  Investigators) to verify that their consent has
  been given to be named on the application
• Consent Form http//www.nhmrc.gov.au/funding/appl
  y/granttype/projects/_files/Chief20Investigator2
  0and20Associate20Investigator20Consent20form.d
  oc
• FAQs NHMRC Project Grants Consent Form
  http//www.anu.edu.au/ro/OSR/OSR_Project_Grants_FA
  Qs.php

19
Major Policy Changes

• Organisations offering funding through the
  NHMRCs Project Grants assessment process in 2008
  include
• Cancer Council/National Breast Cancer Foundation
• Cancer Australia
• Heart Foundation
• Commonwealth Government Department of Health and
  Ageing (DoHA), Primary and Ambulatory Care
  Division and the
• Commonwealth Government Department of Veterans
  Affairs (DVA).

20
Major Policy Changes

• The assessment criteria used to rank applications
  are
• Scientific Quality (50)
• Significance and/or Innovation (25) and
• Track record (relative to opportunity) (25)

21
Assessment - Scientific Quality (50)

• This includes
• the clarity of hypotheses and objectives
• the strengths and weaknesses of the experimental
  design
• feasibility of the proposal

22
Assessment - Significance and/or Innovation (25)

• This includes the potential to increase
• knowledge about human health
• disease diagnoses
• or biology of agents that affect human health
• or the application of new ideas
• procedures or technologies to important topics
  that will impact human health

23
Assessment - Track Record in Relation to
Opportunity (25)

• National and international standing of the
  applicant(s) based upon research output
• publication record
• invitations to speak at international meetings
• altered clinical or research practice
• grant success

24
Assessment - Track Record in Relation to
Opportunity (25)

• Contribution to discipline
• society involvement
• editorial appointments
• specialist committee appointments
• student supervision

25
Assessment - Track Record in Relation to
Opportunity (25)

• Considered in relation to opportunity, with
  regard to factors such as
• career interruptions
• administrative and clinical / teaching load
• typical performance (including publications) for
  the field in question

26
Assessors and Grant Review Panel (GRP)

• Applications will undergo rigorous peer review,
  whereby they are subject to scrutiny and
  evaluation by others who are expert in the
  field(s) of the application.
• Assessors and panels may draw as appropriate from
  the research literature and from the breadth of
  knowledge in the disciplines and fields involved.

27
Assessment - GRP

• Funding Categories are
• Non-competitive
• 1 Unsuccessful
• 2 Marginal
• 3 Satisfactory
• 4 Good
• 5 Excellent (top 40 were successful)
• 6 Highly Competitive
• 7 Highest International Quality and Research
  
  
  Performance

28
Project Grants CMHS Results for 2008
18 Funded
7
29
Scientific Quality GRP Feedback

• Preliminary Data
• No preliminary data to support hypothesis
• No preliminary data to support feasibility of
  experiments
• No preliminary data to connect aims to hypothesis
• No preliminary data to support claims
• Many aims - lacked sufficient detail

30
Scientific Quality GRP Feedback

• Budget Requests
• Most budget requests were accurate
• Some budget requests lacked explanation or were
  excessive
• Some requested infrastructure

31
Scientific Quality - Suggestions

• Exciting and impressive preliminary data
• Approach clearly described
• Approach logical and appropriate to the aims
• Logical experimental approach
• Cutting edge techniques
• Expertise relevant to proposal
• Focus on a major health issue in Australia
• Note comment that rejoinder clarified concerns
  of scientific merit
• Number of methods used to get results
• Demonstrated strong team

32
Significance and/or Innovation GRP Feedback

• Most applications were good
• Some failed to directly link the results of the
  experiment to human health applications
• The hypotheses of some applications were unclear
  or vague

33
Significance and/or Innovation - Suggestions

• Essentially, why is it important from a scholarly
  position
• Significance scholarly importance/value of a
  project
• Innovation what you are doing that is original
• Innovation this has to leap out to the reader

34
Track Record GRP Feedback

• Most Applicants had very good track records
• Some CIs were only giving 3 time
• Some had a good number of records but in low
  impact journals
• Others had limited publishing record
• Publications outside the 6 year limit
• Some CIs needed more first author or senior
  author status on their publications

35
Track Record - Suggestions

• Include
• changes of career direction
• significant interruptions to career progress
• information of invited presentations, awards and
  prizes
• representation on major scientific bodies
• published books or reports
• refer to any supervision of students any
  involvement in supporting the Research Community
  e.g. reviewing papers for journals - sitting on
  Panels etc. Highlight collaborations

36
Track Record - Suggestions

• Exclude information provided in other sections
  about
• publications
• patents
• grants held

37
Recommendations for Improvement

• Spelling and grammatical errors
• Lack of clarity and readability
• Too many aims no focus
• less aims, more detail for each aim
• More preliminary data
• Use preliminary data to support claims,
  hypotheses and aims

38

• Thank you for your time today