1 / 12

Working with Research Offices

ENGINEERING AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES RESEARCH COUNCIL. Working with Research Offices. Mock Panels May 2014. About the session. An open dialogue with Research Office staff Cover common issues with the grants application process, return for amendment, documents needed…

geoffrey-mcclain
Download Presentation

Working with Research Offices

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ENGINEERING AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES RESEARCH COUNCIL Working with Research Offices Mock Panels May 2014

  2. About the session • An open dialogue with Research Office staff • Cover common issues with the grants application process, return for amendment, documents needed… • Start discussion on how we can help Research Offices convey messages to researchers and spread learning from he day

  3. Proposal Processing and Peer Review • The peer review system relies on a fair treatment of proposals and a standard process through which all proposals must go through • Reviewers/Panel members need to be in a position in which they can compare proposals in a similar manner • In order to achieve this fair and balanced process we have set standard criteria which proposals must meet; if not these will be returned for amendment

  4. Receiving an Application Je-S • EPSRC works with a different software to the rest of the process meaning we are unable to manipulate documents as much as we would like • We therefore require the other steps of the process to get it right • We have to return a large number of proposals back for amendment – this lengthens timeframes and work loads both for you and us Siebel

  5. Return for amendment • The checking process will involve both Research Office and EPSRC • The process is time and resource consuming for staff from both organisations -we should aim to only have to do it once • How can we work towards to reducing amount of returned proposals?

  6. Reasons for return • The most common reasons are • Incorrect documents or incorrectly labelled • Extra documents included (e.g. CVs, technical assessment) • Problems with Justification of resources • Issues with Equipment/Facilities • Project Partners / Letter of support There are over 50 reasons we have had to return proposals

  7. Reasons for return • The most common reasons are • Incorrect documents or incorrectly labelled • Extra documents included (e.g. CVs, technical assessment) • Problems with Justification of resources • Issues with Equipment/Facilities • Project Partners / Letter of support • What are the most common? • Is there any particular problems with specific schemes?

  8. Known Reasons • EPSRC has a number of schemes and calls all with different criteria – makes process confusing? • e.g. Fellowships allow an extra page for case for support • Researchers working towards tight deadlines will reduce time Research office has to check proposals • Need to convey to the researcher this will lengthen RC timeframes so the grant processing will be delayed – potentially missing funding opportunities • Issues around Project partners and contributions to projects • Letters of support

  9. How can we help? • Are any of these reasons there any that need to be explained better on the website • Is there sometimes an inconsistent approach? • Is guidance on website clear? • Are call documents clear enough • Are there general problems with our current guidance? • What points require clarification?

  10. What can Research Offices do? • Would having more frequent contact with Research office staff help? • What sort of information would be useful? • What does each university do? What is different? What works? Hypothetically, EPSRC might move to rejecting incorrect proposals; what would the work Research Office do avoid incorrect proposals?

  11. Sharing learning of the day • What role can Research Offices have in sharing the knowledge learnt from Mock panels? • What support can we give? • There is more chance to talk about this in the next session

More Related