Linkage - Projects Fundamentals for applicants Coombs Extension September 2013

2 Linkage – Projects: Speakers Sean Downes, Research Services, College of Asia and the Pacific Dr Nicholas Biddle, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, College of Arts and Social Sciences Dr Ann Nevile, Crawford School of Public Policy, College of Asia and the Pacific

3 Linkage – Projects: College contacts CAP – Sean CASS – Louise CBE – Dora Gava CoL – Katy

4 Linkage – Projects: The program What are Linkage-Projects? Lived experience Approaching the application Resources and support

5 Linkage – Projects: What they are Put simply, Linkages are partnerships between University researchers and outside bodies (Partner Organisations) built around a significant research project of both fundamental and applied merit.

6 Linkage – Projects: Key points Supports the initiation and/or development of long-term strategic research alliances between higher education organisations and other organisations (including industry) and end-users, in order to apply advanced knowledge to problems and/or to provide opportunities to obtain national economic, social or cultural benefits The proposed research will be assessed by academic reviewers and therefore should be of a quality comparable to Discovery Projects, innovative and significant with clear benefits to the field, the Partner(s) and Australia.

7 Linkage – Projects: What they’re not Highly-leveraged consultancies Token relationships between Researchers and Partner Organisations Pure, basic research with little or no application beyond the academy

8 Linkage – Projects: What you need A well articulated, credible research project addressing significant research problems in innovative and applied ways Demonstrated commitment and collaboration from the Partner Organisation(s) A research team with the appropriate track record and skills, including member(s) from the Partner Organisation Demonstrated ability to enhance links to non-academic organisations and deliver real-world outcomes

9 Linkage – Projects: Partner Organisations Are genuine partners from outside the Australian University sector Must nominate at least one researcher to be their representative, called a PI (Partner Investigator) Must provide a Letter of Support meeting the ARC’s requirements, included as part of the application Must at least match the funding requested from the ARC, with at no less than 25% of that amount in cash. The rest must be a real, in-kind contribution If successful, will enter into a contract with the ANU

10 Linkage – Projects: Partner Investigators A Partner Investigator (PI) is a researcher not based at an Australian University They take significant intellectual responsibility for the project, along with Chief Investigators (CIs) from the University. A Partner Investigator’s record will be part of the assessment. While each Partner Organisation must provide at least one PI, additional PIs can come from non-Partners.

11 Linkage – Projects: Lived experience 1 Dr Nick Biddle, Fellow, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, College of Arts and Social Sciences

12 Linkage – Projects: Lived experience 2 Dr Ann Nevile, Senior Lecturer, Crawford School of Public Policy, College of Asia and the Pacific

13 Linkage – Projects: The project Must be of 2 or 3 years’ duration Request a minimum of $50k and maximum of $300k p.a. from the ARC Must address the selection criteria set out in the ARC’s Funding Rules Submitted through the Research Management System ARC funds can be used for fieldwork, travel, non-CI/PI personnel (incl. HDR students), teaching relief, specialised equipment, web hosting/development and publication costs

14 Linkage – Projects: Selection criteria Investigator(s)20% Proposed Project50% –Significance and Innovation25% –Approach and Training15% –Research Environment10% Commitment from Partner Orgs30% See LP14 Funding Rules, section 4.3 for more information

15 Linkage – Projects: New sub-criteria Does the Project significantly enhance links with organisations outside the Australian publicly-funded research and higher education sectors? (S&I) Does the Project represent value for money? (A&T) Are there adequate strategies to encourage dissemination, commercialisation, if appropriate; and promotion of research outcomes? (RE)

16 Linkage – Projects: Important changes There is no longer a postdoctoral fellowship (APDI) There does not need to be an Australian partner Organisation Projects must comply with the ARC Open Access Policy Publication/dissemination and web costs are now allowable Funding for hosting of seminars, conferences, etc. is no longer allowed Consult your RO about other changes

17 Linkage – Projects: Application structure Part A: Administrative Summary Part B: Classification and Other Statistical Information Part C: Project Description Part D: Project Cost Part E: Budget Justifications Part F: Personnel Part G: Partner Organisation Details Part H: Research Support Part I: Statements on Progress of ARC Funded Projects Part J: Additional Details

18 Linkage – Projects: Key components Some key sections: Title and 100 word summary Keywords and FoR codes Project Description Letters of Support Budget and justifications Personnel summaries

19 Linkage – Projects: Fundamentals Grant Writing Tips Clear, direct writing - What, why and how? A sales document for a skeptical audience Interrelationships within the form: The idea is to construct one story

20 Linkage – Projects: Good applications Present exciting or ambitious goals. Describe hypotheses and/or controversies and explain how the proposed work will address or resolve them. Explain why funding is needed now Give context - how the proposed work fits into international work in the field. Balance technical detail and general explanations. Include clear and convincing material regarding National Benefit and practical application. Demonstrate clear partnerships, benefits to and lasting strategic links with Partner Organisations

21 Linkage – Projects: Poor applications Lack evidence of genuine collaboration and/or show weak Partner Organisation commitment Are full of jargon, impenetrable and are difficult to read. Demonstrate poor knowledge of the field. Make implausible claims about outcomes or experience. Have flawed or incomplete methodologies. Relate to areas which are widely seen to be well worked over, or without momentum. Convey a negative tone or feeling Show weak track records

22 Linkage – Projects: Assessment Selection of assessors ARC College Assessments and rejoinder process Feedback

23 Linkage – Projects: Resources Funding Rules and Instructions to Applicants ARC website, eg ‘Information for Applicants’ Other documents and templates Local Research Office (check timelines) Heads of School, mentors, fellow applicants

24 Linkage – Projects: Dates Sept 18: proposals open in RMS _______: draft application/budget/peer review deadlines _______:internal deadlines for requests not to assess _______: compliance deadlines Mid-Nov : ARC deadline

25 Linkage – Projects: Wrap-up Questions?