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

2. 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)

3. 2012 BSB Panel

4. 2011 August meeting of ARC College of Experts
LP applications:
BSB 95
EMI 104
HCA 31
PCE 64
SBE 125
Total 419
BSB $ mill over 5 years
recommendations: ~ 37% success rate
Average ~$94K pa from ARC

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

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

7. 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%

8. 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

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

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

11. 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

12. 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!)

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

14. HOW TO IMPRESS REVIEWERS 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
I read OVER 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

15. 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”

16. 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.

17. 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!

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

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

20. 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

21. HOW TO IMPRESS REVIEWERS 3
THE RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT 10% – 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?

22. 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

23. 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)

24. 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

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

26. 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.

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

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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