An introduction to the NIHR RDSYH and the RfPB Programme The NIHR RDS for Yorkshire and the Humber 22 nd Sept 2010 Dr Maureen Twiddy

 To introduce and describe the role of the NIHR RDSYH  Briefly introduce the RfPB programme  To share hints and tips about the research application process for NIHR applications. Aims of workshop

Infrastructure Clinical Research Facilities & Centres Clinical Research Networks RDS Research Research Projects & Programmes Research Governance Systems Research Information Systems Systems Patients & Public Universities Investigators & Senior Investigators Associates Faculty Trainees Research Units & Schools NHS Trusts

NIHR Research Design Services Successful research proposals Focus is translational research RfPB has been a key driver

Portfolio or Non-Portfolio? Portfolio – study adopted onto the NIHR Research Portfolio Advantages: –‘Kitemark’ of quality –Study attracts supports costs –Benefits of CSP for R&D approvals

What gets adopted? Studies that are funded by NIHR, other areas of Government, and NIHR non-commercial Partners NIHR Partners are those organisations that: –award research funds as a result of open competition across England with high quality peer review –fund research that is of clear value to the NHS –take account of DH and NHS priorities and needs in their research funding strategies. Applications for evaluation are made through IRAS (project adoption form) Non-commercial investigator (NHS or HEI) led studies that are funded by commercial sources Commercially sponsored studies come under further scrutiny See for further detailhttp://

The vision for NIHR RDSYH

RDS Staff Statistics Health Economics Randomised control trials Complex interventions Qualitative Methods PPI Information Specialists

Consultations 09_10 MonthNumber of new projects with a first RDS consultation date in the month April May June July August September October November December January February March Total225

How can the RDS help researchers? Focusing ideas and refining the research question Building an appropriate research team Involving patients and the public in all stages Overall research design Choice and application of research methodologies How to undertake a literature search Identifying the most appropriate funding stream Signposting to other services

RDSYH Support: Learning events Making successful applications to RfPB Patient and public involvement in research design Developing a proposal for a systematic review Searching the literature Writing research proposals for quantitative service evaluation Qualitative research methods

PHR Annual Budget £10m HSR Annual Budget £5m HTA National Budget £88m EME Annual Budget £15m SDO Annual Budget £11m RISC Annual Budget £5m I4I Annual Budget £13m RfPB National Budget £25m PGfAR Annual Budget £75m NIHR CCF NIHR Funding Opportunities

PHR Annual Budget £10m HSR Annual Budget £5m HTA National Budget £88m EME Annual Budget £15m SDO Annual Budget £11m RISC Annual Budget £5m I4I Annual Budget £13m RfPB National Budget £25m PGfAR Annual Budget £75m NIHR CCF NIHR Funding Opportunities

Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) Programme Aims The main aim of the RfPB programme is to support projects in Health Services Research and Public Health. Projects can be either quantitative or qualitative, and should aim to –study the way that NHS services are provided and used –evaluate whether interventions are effective and provide value for money –examine whether alternative means for providing healthcare would be more beneficial in terms of cost and effectiveness –formally assess innovations and developments in healthcare which will benefit of patients.

Process  Awards up to £250,000 over a 3 year period  Response mode – no restriction on topic or clinical area  Rolling programme: three decision dates per year (November, February/March, June)  Accept submissions at any time, for consideration at next available committee  One staged on-line submission via the CCF website  Submissions will be peer reviewed which will be presented to the committee

Register with the CCF website

Full application  23 page application form – lot of work  Authorised costings (9 pages) –Do’s; include direct costs including essential equipment, externally provided tests, reasonable overheads –Don’ts; do not include estates costs –Needs to be signed-off by Business manager/finance officer  Details of any assistance (e.g. RDS)

NIHR RfPB Projects in Y&H Competition Research for Patient Benefit Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme Development Grants RISC i4i** Stream 1 i4i Stream 2 i4i Streams 3& (3) Jul 06-Feb Jun 06-Mar 07 6 Nov 08-Jul 09 7 (2007) 6 (2008) 4 (2009) 6 (2009) 2 27 (3) Sept 06-Jun Apr 07-Mar 08 4 Jul 09-Mar 10 6 (2008) 10 (2009) 3 27 (2) Jan 07-Sept Jul 07-Jul 08 Numbers to be announced shortly 7 (2009) 4 36 (3) Apr 07-Feb Jan 08-Mar (2010) 5 24 (1) Aug 07-Jun 08 Numbers to be announced shortly 6 35 (6) Dec 07-Dec 08 Numbers to be announced shortly 7 32 (7) Apr 08-Mar (2) Aug 08-Jul (4) Dec 08-Nov (3) Jun 09-Mar 10 TOTAL 305 March March March March March March March 2010

Things to consider before submitting applications

Assessment criteria What assessment criteria do the panel use to make a judgement on applications? Key things that you would consider when assessing an application?

Who sees applications? Funding stream secretariat Methodologists NHS Clinicians, commissioners and managers (50% fail “relevance” screen) Peers Other disciplines Service users Conclusion: a lot of different people have to be pleased

Assessment criteria Ensure you’re in the scope of the programme Clear/plain English Clear structure Internal peer review will help

Best places to spot weakness / inexperience? CTU and network involvement (missing, or token) Inclusion/exclusion criteria (too narrow) Identification and numbers of eligible people (too optimistic) Consent and numbers consenting (vague; too optimistic) Follow up rate (unrealistically high or unacceptably low) Effect size (much too large) Number and type of sites (too narrow; willingness asserted)

The research team KEY ISSUE Must be capable of delivery –Evidence of track record –Diversity of skills –Reflective of study Sadly, when NIHR get submissions from twelve clinicians we know that… …a lot of hardworking people JUST WASTED THEIR TIME

Be clear of the benefits of your research What is the impact of the study; –Locally –Nationally –On practice –Policy. Clearly and explicitly identify benefits for: –Patients –NHS

Patient and Public Involvement Increasingly vital Absence of PPI needs explanation Tokenism spotted and not acceptable ‘Active’ involvement required –At one or more stages of the process –Having a ‘decision making impact on a key aspect of the research’ Funding for PPI available from RDS

Other Costings –Inaccurate/unrealisitc –Rushed (leading to above!) Research already being done Experience of team/chief investigator Commercial development in disguise ‘no credible chance of patient benefit’

Conclusion Right Team Right Funding Stream Careful adherence to criteria Peer review PPI Leave sufficient time Demonstrate that YOU CAN DELIVER –ON TIME –TO BUDGET

Summary Growing number of sources funding for a range of research projects Targeting your research at the most appropriate scheme is the best way to increase your chance of success Examples of types of projects funded NIHR RDS for Y&H is here to support researchers Expertise in a range of methodologies Help with more specialised searches for funding via RDS Another source of funding information is RD Info (information from 1381 Funding Bodies offering 5518 different awards at time of writing)

Sheffield Tel: (general enquiries) Leeds Tel: (general enquiries) York Tel: (general enquiries)

Questions?