Applying for a Research Grant

Research grant application process

Colleagues are kindly requested to follow the grant application process explained below when submitting applications for external funding.

Flowchart summarising grant application process from 1 August 2024

Grant application submission process

1. Mandatory notification period:
   • Standard Applications: PIs must provide at least 4 weeks’ notice ahead of the funder's deadline via a Worktribe record.
   • High-Value and Complex Applications: 8 weeks’ notice period is required for applications over £1M, involving multiple partners, or complex for other reasons.
     
   • Applications with short deadlines: please contact R&I as soon as you become aware of the call deadline to discuss the application process.
2. Internal submission deadlines:
   • Final application components must be submitted in Worktribe at least 5 working days before the funder’s deadline for R&I pre-submission checking and collection of all required internal approvals ahead of submission. 
   • Late submissions will require specific Head of School approval to be submitted.
3. R&I support:
   • R&I RDE resource will be balanced towards higher value, fEC, early career researchers, and commercial applications. Lower value applications will receive a ‘lighter touch’ review.
     
4. School grant support processes:
   • Schools are encouraged to align their grant support processes with the new procedures to maximize efficiency and strategic focus.

Frequently Asked Questions

This process aims to enhance the competitiveness of higher value grants and early career grant applications while ensuring efficient resource allocation. Should you have any questions or require future clarification please do not hesitate to contact your Head of School or Director of Research.

Background to changes made to application process from 1 Aug 24: senior approvers and R&I often receive applications for review very close to funder deadlines. This lateness can result in a) limited opportunity for strategic planning and costing, b) reduced impact of internal peer review in helping to enhance proposal quality, c) restricted ability for financial planning at managerial levels, and d) inefficient use of academic and professional services time.

To address these points, changes to the grant application process were implemented aimed at optimising efforts to secure high value grants and support our early career researchers.  These changes were developed by the School Directors of Research, Dean for Knowledge and Understanding and R&I and approved by the University Research Committee. 

Assistance is available to researchers planning funding applications including:

• Confirmation of eligibility
• Compliance with funder application requirements
• Bid development support
• Developing a budget
• Preparing a Narrative CV
• Planning for impact
• Pre-application due diligence (Trusted Research, partner due diligence etc);
• Pre-application legal and contractual queries
• Bid submission

Research and Innovation Research Development or the Impact and Knowledge Exchange (IKE) teams should be first point of contact when planning a research funding application. The Research Finance team can assist with costing queries.

Applications should follow the School Intention to Submit (ITS) / Supporting Grant Application (SGA) and Peer Review process (see below), where these apply.

Summary:  In 2023 the UKRI research councils transitioned from the Joint Electronic Submissions (Je-S) system to the UKRI Funding Service for the submission of research applications and management of awards.  The Funding Service has a number of differences to Je-S and colleagues who are planning UKRI applications should familiarise themselves with the new requirements.

Key changes from Je-S:

• New question set to describe aims, methods and outputs of the research;
• New role definitions for all researchers involved in the project;
• Résumé for Researcher and Innovation- R4RI (narrative CV) – some calls will require a team Résumé;
• No longer an option to nominate reviewers;
• No longer any ability to amend and resubmit applications which are returned for non-compliance reasons;
• No ability for applications that are created, but not submitted to a particular call, to be saved and submitted to a subsequent call.

Researchers planning UKRI applications: researchers should register on the UKRI Funding Service by following the ‘Start Application’ button located on the page where the opportunity is listed. However we recommend only starting an application when you are certain of the deadline you plan to apply to as you will not be able to save your application and submit to a later call.

The usual requirements to follow the applicable School’s Intention to Submit (ITS) / Supporting Grant Application (SGA) process still apply and applications must be costed and collect internal approvals in Worktribe before submission.

More information:  Further UKRI information on the Funding Service can be found here and a webinar here. Researchers can also Subscribe to the Simpler and Better Funding newsletter to receive information on updates to the Funding Service as these arise. Researchers can also contact their Research Development Executive contact at any point with queries.

Intention to Submit (ITS)  / Supporting Grant Application (SGA) process

All grant applications led by University of Aberdeen investigators to UKRI or the Wellcome Trust should follow the relevant School/Institute ITS/SGA process. Some Schools may also require proposals to other funders to follow this process.

UKRI and Wellcome Trust calls are highly competitive. The aim of the ITS/SGA is to help maximise the quality and competitiveness of your grant application by providing an early opportunity to receive constructive feedback and discussion with senior colleagues who have a track record with major funders.

What do I need to do?

1. Complete proforma: lead investigators should complete the applicable ITS/SGA proforma:

• ITS/SGA Proforma (all Schools excluding NCS and SMMSN )
• NCS ITS Proforma
• SMMSN SGA Proformas

2. Submit proforma: completed ITS/SGA proformas should be submitted to the relevant R&I  Research Development Executive (RDE), Programme Lead or other contact as directed by your School/Institute.

Where possible this should happen at least 2 months, but ideally 4-6 months, ahead of the application deadline. For calls with short deadlines please contact your RDE to discuss the submission process. Please note there is a separate process for the NERC Discovery science responsive mode. 

3. Feedback: lead investigators will receive feedback from senior colleagues on the proposal.

All Schools (excluding SMMSN): lead Investigators will be contacted by their RDE or a senior colleague e.g. Research Director or Programme Lead who will provide feedback and an opportunity to discuss this.

SMMSN: a meeting will be arranged with senior colleagues where investigators will have the opportunity to present their proposal and receive and discuss feedback directly.

Please contact your Research Development Executive if you require assistance with any aspect of this process.

In anticipation of the next round of the Pushing the Frontiers scheme, potential applicants are invited to join the internal “pipeline” to receive support and guidance from experienced academic colleagues. You can join the pipeline at any time but for the next call, the following timetable has been agreed.

TIMETABLE 

1. Applicants wishing to submit to the July 2024 call should complete the Pipeline Form by close of business on 1 March 2024 and return it to grantsacademy@abdn.ac.uk.
2. The first meeting of the internal NERC panel is on 20 March 2024. This will be an in-person meeting where candidates will present their proposals and participate in the Q&A session
3. The second meeting of the internal NERC panel is on 5 June 2024. This will be an in-person meeting for candidates to give a brief update on the status of the proposal.

More information on the last call can be found here (based on this guidance, you could only be involved in two applications and only one as project lead). Applications will be submitted by the lead organisation via the UKRI Funding Service.

Please complete the NERC Pipeline Form below and send it to grantsacademy@abdn.ac.uk to be part of the pipeline.

Peer review procedure

Internal peer review is intended to be supportive and constructive, with the aim of increasing the competitiveness of research grant applications.  It is not designed to take the place of any informal review that may be arranged between colleagues.

All schools: peer review is mandatory when leading an application to:

• UKRI
• Wellcome Trust
• any funder where the value is >£150K
• or where the Principal Investigator has not previously secured a research grant >£20k or has not been awarded a research grant within the last 18 months

In addition:

LLMVC, Social Science, Law, Education, Institute of Applied Health Sciences:

Applications from the these Schools/Institutes require proportionate peer review, regardless of value

The Business School has the following peer review requirements: 

• • < £5K - no review required
  • £5K - £15K- 1 review required
  • > £15K - 2 reviews required

School of Geosciences has the following peer review requirements:

For grants <£250k:

• Peer review is at the discretion of the applicant, provided the scheme is not subject to Demand Management
• It is advised that the PI solicits peer review if they are: the sole applicant, a small applicant team (relevant across all career stages); an ECR. Solicited peer review should be commensurate with the value and type of the grant
• If you have been unsuccessful with three applications in a row, can you please flag this to the School DoR. This is simply as a sense check with a discussion to assess the utility of more rigorous peer review going forward. We will also try to keep track on this centrally.
• If you alone are mentoring someone for an independent research fellowship application, engaging an additional peer reviewer is recommended 
• You are still required to follow the other R&I application requirements e.g. set up Worktribe record 8 (>£1 million)/4 (<£1M) weeks in advance of the deadline and the full application should be completed on Worktribe at least 5 working days before the funder deadline.

For grants >£250k peer review is REQUIRED.

What is required

At least two reviews should be arranged from reviewers who are independent to the research.  These are usually internal however, external reviewers can be used where appropriate. Senior staff in your School or your Research Development Executive may be able to help identify peer reviewers.

Please ensure you approach peer reviewers early and agree a reasonable timescale for them to receive, review and return their comments.

Expectations of peer reviewers

• In making your review, please consult the funder's evaluation criteria for the call and the Grants Academy guide for peer reviewers.
• Consider yourself as a ‘critical friend’ by offering constructive, impartial and honest advice to help to increase the quality of the proposal;
• Review all parts of the application: e.g. application form, budget, Data Management Plan etc – not just the plan of work;
• Provide written comments in any preferred format e.g. email, tracked comments, via a proforma (example template here). If you only have a few remarks, these can be provided directly in Worktribe and if convenient, also consider providing verbal feedback.

When will a proposal be signed off?

The Head of School/Institute will only approve proposals requiring peer review when they are satisfied appropriate review has been undertaken and any comments addressed. Please note R&I is not permitted to authorise submission of applications without Head of School/Institute Approval.

Recording peer review in Worktribe

Principal Investigators

• Please nominate the 2 peer reviewers under the peer review tab;
• Researchers are encouraged to provide copies of their peer reviews under the Document tab;
• Please submit the proposal for internal approval in Worktribe once the peer reviewer has confirmed they recommend the proposal for submission.

Peer reviewers

• Please respond to the Worktribe notification by confirming you have reviewed the proposal and whether you support submission;
• If your comments are minimal these can be inputted directly in the Worktribe approval box. Otherwise please return your comments, in any convenient format, to the principal investigator (see above).
• Peer reviewers are not able to upload their comments to the Worktribe record directly.

Fellowship Support Process

Fellowship schemes are highly competitive and require applicants to plan well in advance in order to target their applications correctly. Chances of success are strongly increased by:

• A strong C.V.;
• Awareness of and alignment with the funding programme;
• Well-designed project plan;
• Highly polished application.

In order to provide our candidates with the best chance for success, it is recommended that the following steps are undertaken as part of our internal fellowship applications support process.

1. Initial discussion: Find out more about the types of fellowship schemes that are available and receive information on the benchmarks of competitiveness that should be achieved through one to one discussion with your School Research Development Executive (RDE), induction workshops and grant writing courses. The Fellowship Applications Support Process varies between Schools and your School RDE will be able to advise on the support available to you.

2. Complete required fellowship proforma: At this stage, you are required to provide information regarding the funders/schemes you wish to target, along with summary details of the proposed project and CV. You will also need to identify a Supervisor/sponsor.

3. Discussion with senior staff: Potential applicants will have the opportunity to discuss their research idea with a group of senior staff (in person/virtual meeting) to critically assess the strength of your proposal. It is recommended the discussion is arranged 3-6 months prior to the funder’s deadline. The discussion outcome will be classified as follows:

• Proceed with the application;
• Further development is required e.g. securing additional publications, supporting data or collaborator links;
• The proposal is unlikely to be competitive with the named funder/call. Senior staff will be on hand to discuss other options to support your career development such as alternative projects, training or career development pathways. 

4. Personal timetable: Candidates will be assigned an Application Mentor, peer reviewers, fellowship buddy (if applicable to the scheme) and a timetable towards submission.

External fellowship candidates should also follow this process.

Please find a listing of current Fellowship opportunities here.

Grant application requirements: researchers are strongly advised to read all available call guidance before starting an application. Funders’ guidance may be updated between calls and can vary between calls of the same funder.

Terms and conditions of funding: different funders, and in some cases different calls from the same funder, have varying terms and conditions of funding. Researchers should familiarise themselves with these before submitting a grant in case there are restrictions that could impact their plans for delivery of the work, publishing or taking forward outputs. 

Tenders: for some types of application, such as tenders, the University must accept the terms of funding when submitting an application.

The Research Development Executive or Impact and Knowledge Exchange contact supporting your proposal will also be able to advise you on application requirements and any terms and conditions of funding you should be aware of.

The University requires costs for externally funded research applications to be prepared in our Research Award Management System Worktribe. Researchers should set up a new Worktribe Project for every application. Once a Worktribe Project has been created a R&I Research Finance pre-award costing accountant will be allocated to the Project and be available to assist researchers in developing and checking their budget in line with the funder’s requirements. Further information on using Worktribe is available here.  

Researchers should seek costs for the following activities as described below:

Letters of support including an institutional commitment: In the first instance researchers should approach their Head(s) of School to discuss and agree any in-kind or kind institutional commitment for their project. This approach should be made as early as possible and not less than 4-6 weeks before the call deadline. For some applications e.g. PhD CDTs, R&I will coordinate discussions across Schools and this will be confirmed to the researcher. 

Following agreement of the commitment with the Head of School(s), researchers should contact their Research Development Executives (RDE) to confirm any funder requirements for the content of the letter.  In most instances researchers will be asked to suggest a draft letter or provide draft sections as part of this process. The RDE will liaise with the senior staff signatory and researcher in finalising and seeking senior staff approval and signature of the letter.

Letters of support not including an institutional commitment: In the first instance researchers should contact their RDE for support with confirming the funder requirements for the letter. In most instances researchers will be asked to prepare a draft letter or specific sections as part of this process. The RDE will liaise with the senior staff signatory and researcher in finalising and seeking signature of the letter. RDEs should be approached as early as possible and not less than 2 weeks before the call deadline.

Narrative CVs are a new format of CV requiring written descriptions of contributions and achievements across a broad range of skills and experiences. Narrative CVs are being adopted by many funders as part of wider efforts to improve research culture and research assessment. Narrative CVs move beyond traditional metrics-based CVs of publication lists, employment and education history.

Explore the Grants Academy Narrative CV guidance here - including key steps for writing a UKRI Narrative CV.

Impact is the demonstrable benefit of academic research to society and the economy and can include effects on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy, health environment or quality of life, beyond academia. Contact the R&I Impact and Knowledge Exchange team to discuss ways to embed routes to impact into your application. We strongly encourage you to get in touch as early as possible.

You can also find useful guidance via the University’s Impact Toolkit, including tips on planning engagement or knowledge exchange activities relevant to your target audience, incorporating steps for evaluation or reflection into activities or events to help you focus your efforts and advice on costing activities to maximise your project’s potential for impact.

Applications will often require researchers to consider whether the work will need access to existing intellectual property or is likely to create new intellectual property.

The R&I Impact and Knowledge Exchange or Research Development Executive teams will be able to advise on answers to these questions.

Further information on intellectual property is available here. 

The Digital Research Team can help researchers plan and manage their research, with an emphasis on digital technologies and delivery. The team support research applications by providing technical advice, assist with IT-related costings, advise on Data Management Plans, data security planning and other related services. Once a grant has been funded, support remains available at each stage of the project. Find out more on our Digital Research pages.

The University also provides guidance on best practice and compliance in data management to be taken in to account when developing a research proposal. 

An annotated Grants Academy UoA MRC Data Management Plan template with pre-populated text for some fields has been developed by Digital Research and Research & Innovation. This can be used as a starting point for developing a project specific DMP for a MRC application. The template will need to be adapted to meet the requirements of individual projects.

DMP Online: The University has a subscription to the Digital Curation Centre's DMPonline tool where University researchers can use their instituional credentials to develop Data Management Plans speific to different funders requirements.

Research Governance: Research governance implications must be considered when developing a funding application. Researchers should be aware of the requirements of the University’s policies covering research practice and the Research Governance Handbook. In addition, the University subscribes to the UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) and recommends researchers follow the UKRIO Recommended Checklist for Researchers when planning their research proposal.

Ethics: Most funders ask for ethical approval requirements to be detailed in the research application and the timescale to apply for, and receive, ethical approval should be considered when planning a project.  Further information on applying for ethical approval from University ethics committees is here. Information and resources for researchers undertaking clinical research is available from the University of Aberdeen-NHS Grampian Grampian Research Office.

Conflicts of Interest: A conflict of interest exists where the decision making or judgement of an employee may be influenced by actual or potential benefit or advantage that could be obtained from it. When planning your research application please consider whether any potential conflicts of interest may arise which should be discussed in advance with the University or declared on your application.

The University's Code of Practice on Research Governance Handbook provides examples of potential conflicts that could arise in a research project and the institutional process for declaring any interests.

The R&I Research Development Executive (RDE) team may be able to assist with developing non-academic sections of some research proposals. For example: Equality, Diversity and Inclusivity statements and Sustainability sections, please contact your RDE for guidance.

The RDE team can also assist with completion of assurance documents required for certain calls, for example: Tender compliance questionnaires, Conflict of Interest policy compliance statements.