HOW TO IMPROVE ARC GRANT SUCCESS Mike Bull LINKAGE GRANTS Sept 7 2012 ARC DEADLINE 16 NOV 2012 Funding announced June 2013

ARC COLLEGE OF EXPERTS 5 PANELS Biological Sciences and Biotechnology (BSB) Engineering, Mathematics and Informatics (EMI) Humanities and Creative Arts (HCA) Physics, Chemistry and Earth Sciences (PCE) Social, Behavioural and Economic Sciences (SBE)

2012 BSB Panel

2011 August meeting of ARC College of Experts LP applications: BSB 95 EMI 104 HCA 31 PCE 64 SBE 125 Total 419 BSB $10.458 mill over 5 years recommendations: ~ 37% success rate Average ~$94K pa from ARC

THE REVIEW PROCESS You are writing for two audiences expert reviewers/ general CoE reviewers

THE REVIEW PROCESS Use FoR codes, abstracts, titles to avoid wrong reviewers

Expert reviewers assign grades of A –E to each component of your proposal “In theory” A = top 10% B = next 15% C = next 20% D = next 30% E = next 25%

Your application also gets read by two College of Experts members who 1) moderate the scores (e.g. adjust for over generous reviewers) 2) rank within bands (e.g. only top ranked in band C get funding) These people are unlikely to be experts in your field You do not see CoE scores or comments They have a large input towards your final ARC ranking

ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT SCORES: INVESTIGATORS (ROPE) 20% PROJECT 40% PARTNER CONTRIBUTION 30% RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT 10% NB National Significance is now included within “Significance” of Project

HOW TO IMPRESS REVIEWERS. TRACK RECORD 20% I read this first. Am I considering an application by someone who can produce the goods.

FROM 2012 YOU MUST INCLUDE AS PI’s RESEARCH PERSON FROM EACH PARTNER ORGANISATION Assessors may calculate an “average” ROPE score for all named Investigators: CIs + PIs OR THEY MAY JUST USE CI SCORES

HOW TO IMPRESS REVIEWERS 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AIMS AND BACKGROUND SIGNIFICANCE AND INNOVATION APPROACH AND TRAINING RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT PARTNER ORGANISATION COMMITMENT AND COLLABORATION ROLE OF PERSONNEL REFERENCES (all in 10 pages!)

HOW TO IMPRESS REVIEWERS 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AIMS AND BACKGROUND SIGNIFICANCE AND INNOVATION APPROACH AND TRAINING THESE COUNT 40%

HOW TO IMPRESS REVIEWERS 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION I read OVER 200 ARC applications in 3 months So many good applications I am looking for reasons to quickly discard You need to impress me in the first page USE AIMS & BACKGROUND TO LAY THE FOUNDATION LINKAGE GRANTS HAVE TO BE INNOVATIVE RESEARCH NOT JUST APPLYING EXISTING KNOWLEDGE OR METHODS TO A LOCAL ISSUE

SIGNIFICANCE AND INNOVATION Quick review of recent developments in the field Indication that you have been part of those developments What are major unanswered conceptual questions What system do you have that allows you to explore those questions Why can you take this beyond where others have been Have focussed, achievable aims EXCITEMENT & INNOVATION You need to Excite non-expert CoE members You need to Impress your expert peers Why will this research hit “Nature” or “Science”

SIGNIFICANCE AND INNOVATION Repeat of work elsewhere, in an Australian context = not impressive Tidying up experiments from a previous grant = not impressive Vague “broad-brush” aims = not impressive Maintaining long-term data base = not impressive BUT it is legitimate to build on previous grants with new questions, or with a new set of questions that lead on from the previous grant.

APPROACH AND TRAINING Detail and breadth Clearly indicate logical structure of project How do methods relate to project aims DO NOT ADD NEW IDEAS HERE! How will hypotheses be tested Divide with subheadings THAT REFLECT YOUR ORIGINAL AIMS Cover contingencies: try to predict and address reviewers comments This is where the expert reviewer will make or break you!

APPROACH AND TRAINING SIMPLICITY IS FINE BE REALISTIC ABOUT WHAT CAN BE ACHIEVED IN THE TIME FRAME

APPROACH AND TRAINING Note the emphasis on TRAINING POST-DOCS AND PhD STIPENDS ROUTINELY FUNDED IN BSB PANEL

APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY Avoid: “Cutting Edge Research” = “only 20 other Australian Universities doing it” “State of the Art Facilities” = “installed sometime in the last 15 years” “We are unaware of any study where this procedure has been attempted before” = “We haven’t really checked but probably no-one else has done it on a south facing laboratory bench” BE SPECIFIC IN YOUR CLAIMS OF RESEARCH LEADERSHIP

HOW TO IMPRESS REVIEWERS 3 THE RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT 10% 0.5 – 1.0 pages New in 2011 (for 2012 funding) Standard university statement about research philosophy at Flinders Flinders ERA highlights in your research area Facilities available that are directly relevant to your project (at Flinders or access to other institutes) Intellectual environment (name names of prominent researchers Collaborations?

PARTNER ORGANISATION COMMITMENT AND COLLABORATION 30% Often reiterates (summarises) what is said in partner letter but reminds reviewer .. Absolute amount of money is less relevant than proportional commitment $5k from The Field Naturalists Society >> $5K from BHP In-kind contributions can be just as important Demonstrate link between partner organisation aims and research outputs

MYTHS ABOUT PARTNER ORGANISATION CONTRIBUTIONS For standard Linkage grants The proportion requested from the ARC is not considered in assessment IF YOU HAVE $20k pa FROM PARTNERS, ASK FOR $100K FROM ARC YOU DO NOT GAIN CREDIT BY ASKING FOR LESSER AMOUNTS (ALTHOUGH YOU MAY LOSE CREDIT IF THE PARTNER COMES ACROSS AS UNDER-CONTRIBUTING)

GRANT ACCOUNTING: Negotiate with Partners about items they were going to purchase or build anyway, or project related salaried positions. Can this be a cash contribution. In-kind contributions (partner cash + in kind must match ARC cash) salaries access to facilities and equipment volunteer time PhD stipends “minimum of $27,651 pa” But no extensions once grant awarded. Ask for 3.5 years worth

ARC LINKAGE GRANT WINNING HAS TO BE BASED ON LONG-TERM STRATEGIES DEVELOPING TRACK RECORD DEVELOPING PARTNERSHIPS

MAJOR STRATEGY SUGGESTION Collaborations and Linkage Partners need to be developed and nurtured for 12 months or more. Previously successful collaborations need even more nurturing.

MAJOR STRATEGY SUGGESTION (IF PARTNERS IN PLACE) Start preparing application early: August for November Get feedback (peers .... co-investigators) they need time!

DO NOT RELY ON OTHER PEOPLE PICKING UP ERRORS IN YOUR APPLICATION Some general hints about the minutia of applications READ THE RULES YOURSELF .... IN DETAIL IF YOU ARE UNSURE ABOUT ANYTHING ASK RESEARCH SERVICES MAKE SURE YOU FOLLOW ALL OF THE APPLICATION RULES EXACTLY ARC IS UNFORGIVING DO NOT RELY ON OTHER PEOPLE PICKING UP ERRORS IN YOUR APPLICATION

Some general hints about the minutia of applications WRITING THE BUDGET ARC will not fund standard computers ARC will remove all salary increments (your grant is indexed) No-one gets everything they ask for (but smaller cuts on higher ranked grants) Normally you will get a one-line budget If it is not too ridiculous, a high budget that is cut allows you: Flexibility on how you spend what you get Good excuses for slower than expected progress in annual reports

WHAT TO DO WHEN THE REVIEWS COME BACK Do not develop positive or negative expectations Do not respond with anger Do not respond to positive comments Briefly address WITH HEADINGS major criticisms; if you think reviewer has misinterpreted your application clearly explain why. CoE is looking for reasons to discount a particular reviewer. Be as brief as possible

OTHER LONGER-TERM ARC STRATEGIES Persist sensibly DESPITE FAILURE: If you were close to funding: Recycle applications a) use new data b) build track record c) incorporate reviewer comments d) use components of your application in papers

OTHER LONGER-TERM ARC STRATEGIES 2) Persist sensibly DESPITE FAILURE: If you were far from funding: Build other funding opportunites Build links with more successful groups Focus on track record Aim to be back in the future

LONGER-TERM ARC STRATEGIES 3) Continue to submit after success Remember success is a stochastic process DO NOT wait until your funding is about to run out You can be involved in up to 4 LINKAGE grants BUILD ON YOUR SUCCESS