Career development awards

1. Career development awards Leon Bach

2. Why listen to me? Member and then Chair of NHMRC Clinical CDA panels Assessment of similar awards for other bodies e.g. Endocrine Society of Australia, Heart Foundation

3. The process • Applications allocated to a panel • Panel members may not have specific expertise in your area • Primary screen: • Applications classified as 1. Fundable; 2. Some reservations; 3. Not competitive • Categories 1,2 considered in detail • Applications independently ranked by assessors, then considered together for final ranking

4. Read the funding policy • Are you eligible? • Is this the appropriate programme for you? • Career development is the focus • Are you ready?

5. Eligibility • Level 1 • 2-7 years post-doc on the date of application deadline • Level 2 • 7-12 years post-doc • Career interruptions • Document ‘research-active years’ clearly and quantitatively • If the grounds are clinical or industry involvement, show that you are on a career development trajectory, not established

6. Selection criteria • Demonstrated research success relative to opportunity in terms of both seniority and field of research • Refer to levels of activity outlined in the classification statements • Potential for further career development in health and medical research

7. Selection criteria A clear career development strategy Research plans that are consistent with the aims of the award scheme A supportive research environment with the facilities and infrastructure needed to support the proposed research and career development plans

8. Ranking • The ranking will take into account: • the quality of your past achievements (especially academic record and any awards and prizes) • the quality and impact of your research work • the level of past research funding • the quality of your research proposal • the quality of your proposed research environment. • The research performance descriptors are generic, so don’t be disheartened by them

9. The application • Address the selection criteria and the research performance descriptors • Create a coherent narrative that describes • what you’ve already achieved • where you are now positioned • where you plan to go • how you are going to get there

10. The application • Assessors are looking for an upward trajectory, for an applicant that will be ready for the next step (level 2, Fellowship, academic appointment) by the end of the CDA • Recent achievements (papers, grants) may carry more weight than older ones

11. The application • Play to your strengths • In particular, section 5.2 (Executive Summary) gives you an opportunity to enthusiastically make your case for selection • Be positive • Sell yourself – BUT don’t overdo it • If appropriate, acknowledge weaknesses and describe a plan to overcome them

12. Background and research plan You have only 10,000 characters (2-3 pages) to describe 4 years of research There’s no room for excessive detail Make the significance and originality of the work obvious to non-experts Emphasise the relationship of the work to your career trajectory Briefly outline where you expect to be at the end and what might follow

13. What is needed to succeed? Committees are looking to identify future research leaders Research achievement is necessary but unlikely to be sufficient Evidence of contribution to the academic and professional community is also required

14. The old scoring grid Applicant’s track record allowing for different research paths (in relation to opportunity), quality and number of publications, quality of journals, position of authorship  30 points Applicant’s potential for future high level research career 5 points Career development opportunity 5 points Quality of the research proposal, taking into account interface with the goals of the scheme 5 points Quality of the research environment 5 points TOTAL 50 points

15. Being realistic-what is needed (1) • Publications • Quality more important than quantity • First, last authorships • Relative to opportunity (seniority, field of study) • Grant funding • Competitive, national funding (esp level 2) • Institutional, industry funding • Prizes

16. Being realistic-what is needed (2) • Peer recognition • Meeting invitations, session chairs • Editorial boards, policy groups • Contributions to discipline • Involvement in specialist societies • Teaching • Supervision (esp level 2) • Administration(esp level 2)

17. Choice of institution • Don’t assume that your choice of institution/department is obvious • Specifically explain the reasons for your choice • What does it offer that other places can’t? • What unique facilities/opportunities does it provide? • Ensure that your prospective HOD supports this view in his/her report

18. Avoid at all costs! Lying

19. Avoid at all costs! • Unsubstantiable exaggeration • A paper in a low impact journal that has never been cited is not a seminal contribution to knowledge • If you are CID or AI on a grant, it is unlikely that you are the prime driver of the work

20. Avoid at all costs! • Making the assessors do your work • Sort your publications in the indicated categories, list impact factors, citations • Clearly explain exceptional circumstances • Spelling errors, other typos • speling errurs stand-out like a soar fumb

21. Avoid at all costs! • Padding with irrelevancies, too much repetition • Assessors have finely-honed spin detection skills

22. Referees • Choose referees carefully to have the expertise and standing to support your application. • Provide them, together with the heads of your current and proposed labs (and industry partner), with a report form and your application early. • Ensure that they submit their reports to NHMRC by March 31. • No report = no support!

23. When you’ve finished Proof-read your application Ensure that your tone is positive but not self-serving Show it to a number of senior colleagues, including some not in your direct area, well before the closing date Listen to their advice!

24. When you’ve finished Make any corrections/additions Check it again Submit it on time! Apply for co-funded awards if you can Are there other awards for which you can apply?

25. If you miss out • Did I make the impact of my application clear? • Develop a strategic plan to rectify weaknesses • DON’T WAIT: Start as soon as you’ve sent the application • Finish off papers, prepare small grant applications • Involvement with specialist societies, manuscript reviews, teaching, departmental committees • Have you chosen the best institution for your studies? • Missing out has NO effect on future applications

26. Otherwise, try this… Good luck!

27. I’m happy to look at applications if you give me enough time. leon.bach@med.monash.edu.au