SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 NERC panel-beating tactics Peter Clarke Civil Engineering and Geosciences

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 Agenda How NERC panels are made and operate Helping readers to like your proposal Responding to reviewers’ comments Panel games Discussion

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 Panel formation Large Grants / strategic research / other schemes – panel drawn from Peer Review College as appropriate – chaired by one of ‘Pool of Chairs’ – supported by NERC secretariat Standard Grants / fellowships – five panel areas (A-E) – each panel is ~50% ‘core’ (standing) members (inc. chair), ~50% drawn ad hoc from PRC – applicants select the relevant panel for their proposal

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 Panel areas

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 Proposal assessment procedure Submit proposal Expert reviews Filter (panel) PI response >80%15-20% Panel ranking ~60% ~20% Introducers / readers

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 How a panel operates Two ‘Introducers’ are assigned to each proposal – each returns a pre-score (0-10) to the secretariat Proposals with both scores <7 are discarded – for successful proposals two ‘Readers’ are assigned – pre-scores are not announced At the panel meeting: – Introducers, then Readers, comment on each proposal – following this qualitative discussion, a grade is assigned once assigned, it may not be changed (but high/mid/low might) Pathways to Impact is also graded as acceptable/unacceptable – at the end, proposals within each grade are ranked

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 How to win friends Be clear and simple – reviewers will have high/medium expertise, but Readers/Introducers (and the rest) may not Be consistent – tie up loose ends between hypotheses, work packages, resources, and partners’ letters of support Be realistic – a few judicious superlatives is excusable, but a proposal full of them is unrealistic

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 Responding to reviewers Be positive, don’t be stroppy – if the reviewers didn’t understand your proposal, you need to explain it better: the panel might not get it either – if the reviewers don’t see why it’s important, you need to present a better justification – if the reviewers are wrong, correct them gently (and provide references prove your argument) Answer every point – don’t just play one reviewer off against another – don’t ignore ‘minor’ points – they might not be

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 Panel psychology Panel members don’t have time to read everything – summary, response to reviews, reviews if you’re lucky The more members ‘get’ your proposal, the better – remember, few/none of them are experts in your topic A good response to reviewers convinces non-experts – sometimes better even than a ‘good’ review Panels should not bring up substantive new issues – but there’s not much you can do if it happens

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 Dealing with rejection Ask for the feedback Go back to the reviews Share the pain Keep your Co-Is / partners / collaborators informed Try again somehow

SAgE RC Funding Panel Info Day, June 2014 Dealing with success Ask for the feedback anyway Keep your Co-Is / partners / collaborators informed Start spending Share the love Sadly, track record doesn’t count much next time