1. Making Successful Grant Applications
Chris Veal (Research Development Manager)
How to sell yourself

2. Agenda Basic philosophical approach - selling Warwick contacts
Focus on Research Council proposals and procedures

3. Philosophy of Approach - Buying and Selling
The manufacturer is applying to have its beans accepted by you. It is saying “Pick Me”
Assessment Criteria: Quality, Track Record, Value for Money, Impact, Appearance, Fit to Need

4. Warwick Research Support Contacts
Biological Sciences – Elizabeth Cromwell
WMS – Bekki Gibbs
WMG – Barry Turner / Chris Veal
Engineering (not WMG) – Rachel Corke
Chemistry/Psychology – Katherine Branch
Physics – James Smith
Maths/Stats/Comp Sci/Sys Bio – Chris Veal

5. Types of RC Project Responsive mode research grant (1st Grant)
Fellowship
Travel / Conference
Network
Equipment
Symposia / Workshops
Plan well ahead. Ensure excellent science. Proposal should be: well packaged, have impact, suitable price, fit for purpose

6. Research Council Proposals
Detailed layout varies across RCs but much basic content is the same
Common elements
Form
Track record and /or CV
Research environment
Background / Importance
Aims / Objectives
Programme and Methodology
Relevance to beneficiaries
Impact Plan (Dissemination and Exploitation) (2 pages)
Justification of resources (1 page)
Work plan (1 page)
8 pages
Read the instructions. Follow closely the suggested layout

7. Never forget the customer
Observations (1)
Never forget the customer
Lay Out
One column or two
Never use font size below minimum specified
Make sure proposal is easy to read, split into sections of manageable size,
Avoid large blocks of continuous text which can look unappealing
Can mix font styles, font sizes on headings for emphasis or to increase readability
Tables / Diagrams – reasonable size, check numbers, can be very useful

8. Do what works for you and your project
Observations (2)
Lay Out (continued)
Attention grabbing opening section – summarise background, aims, impact in ca 3 sentences
Preliminary results useful
Risk analysis/risk management
Boxes with “take home” messages
MRC has an Abstract which is very important
Do what works for you and your project

9. Observations (3) Impact Increasing emphasis from RCs
Increased involvement of users (Industry, Government, other researchers), focus on public engagement
Who will benefit, how will they benefit, what will be done to ensure they do benefit
Need a credible plan, build on existing initiatives
Letters of support
Must show commitment, added value for collaborator or company, value of contribution etc. Must be real. Very important for referees
Avoid a standard letter – write it yourself? Leave enough time

10. You can’t go back for more if the money runs out
Observations (4)
Methodology
Ensure well structured and clear
In multi participant proposals say who will do what and when?
In collaborative proposals how will this be managed?
Resources
Consider carefully what you need – don’t be greedy or cheap, think what the sponsor can afford
JoR - ensure each cost line item included and justified
BBSRC cuts requested budgets, EPSRC doesn’t
You can’t go back for more if the money runs out

11. Observations (5) Refereeing Referee form – read it
Choosing your referees
someone who will give a fair and well-informed assessment
Not your mates
Conflict of interest.
Refereeing process
Expert referees selected by EPSRC/BBSRC/MRC
Receipt of referees’ comments
Response to comments (seek help)
Panels (EPSRC) or Committees (BBSRC)

12. Summary
Seeking research funding is very competitive and likely to get more so
Writing proposals is all about selling yourself – your track record and ideas. Always consider the customer
There are a wide range of schemes and funding agencies. Seek advice to ensure you are applying to the right one in the right way
Always bear in mind Allen’s Axiom “When all else fails read the instructions