Transcript Dias nummer 1

Presentation of FIK
We are:
Lise Walsted Kristiansen - Head of Division
Research consultants:
Annette Hjort Knudsen
Astrid Holm Olsen
Jan Andersen
Mette Christiansen
Theresa Larriba Harboe
TLHA 2010
1
We have divided the departments and
funding options between us:
Annette Hjort Knudsen
FØI, IMHS, IPH & LMC
EIT, EFSA, FVM-pools & PhD-financing
Astrid Holm Olsen
IFV, UNIKs & BEST
Research infrastructure & DGF
Jan Andersen
S&L & IPB
EU, FP7 programmes & Lobby
Mette Christiansen
IGM, IJØ & ViVa
DFF, DSF, RTI, EliteForsk travel stipends & large foundations
Theresa Larriba Harboe
IVS, IHE & IBHV
EU FP7 Health-related projects, DFF-FSS, DSF, HTF & smaller
foundations
TLHA 2010
2
Who am I
Bachelor in Biochemistry, KU-NAT
Cand. scient, molecular genetics (KU-NAT & KU-SUND)
PhD, molecular genetics (KU-SUND)
Postdoc, Harvard Medical School
Postdoc, RUC & KU-SUND
Research advisor, KU-LIFE
All afterwards mentioned advice is based on:
•
•
•
TLHA 2010
Personal experience with both FSS and smaller foundations
Conversations with council members and staff members at the
national research councils and private foundations
Advice and talks from colleagues
3
Research & Innovation
FIK
Our goal is to:
• Ensure that the researchers at LIFE have the
best possible help to write applications of the
highest possible quality
• Ensure information and communication on the
calls, guidelines and rules for external funds
• Be sparring partners and consultants for specific
ideas and projects
TLHA 2010
4
Which type of help and sparring
do we offer?
Technical support
Writing support
TLHA 2010
5
Which type of help and sparring
do we offer?
Technical support:
Discussion of appropriate calls for your application
Application guidelines
Evaluation criteria
Announcement of calls through newsletter
TLHA 2010
6
Which type of help and sparring
do we offer?
Writing support:
Questions about your application
•Read-throughs
•Schedules
•Appearance
Help you to sell not tell your project
Make sure your application addresses all items
mentioned in the call such as
•Context
•Impact
•Implementation
TLHA 2010
7
Why do rejections happen?
A large numbers, approx. 75-90% of all fund applications are refused
The reasons include:
The project does not fall within the purpose of the fund
The application is ill-prepared - the guidelines are not read and followed carefully too many errors of formalities
The application may not reflect the researcher's competence and the organisations
capacity to implement the project
Application budget is poorly worked out
The quality of the project is not high enough
... .. Unfortunately, funds do not have unlimited resources, therefore your application
may also fall outside their priorities.
TLHA 2010
8
Planning an application
Preparation before writing a fund application
Please be ahead of time
Plan your budget - how much and why?
Shotgun or rifle method
Investigate funds within your professional area
Which funds to apply for what?
TLHA 2010
9
Our favourite tool: the 1-page proposal
Why bother? (Which problem is being solved and why is it important?)
For whom is it important? At which level? (Regional, National, European Union
or Global?)
What is new? (clearly indicate the current state of the art, and the essence of
what is new in the proposed project – before and after scenario)
Why now? (not 5 years ago, or 5 years in the future)? (What would happen if
we did not do this work now?)
Describe what will be made possible when the project has delivered its results
and achieved its objectives and these can be taken into use
Why not buy a product or service on the market (why do R&D)? Why not
transfer the technology? Why develop?
TLHA 2010
10
Considerations during the preparation
of fund applications
- Private and family foundations
/ company funds
- Lawyers
- Councils
More accessible, more generally understandable
language, appeal to emotions, include illustrations,
without of course compromising your integrity,
professionalism and quality of the project. You should
also beware of talking "down ‘to the target audience.
They are often used to reading difficult material of
different academic disciplines.
- Public/Organizations/company Funds
- Technical Committees
- Research Councils
High academic content, much facts related,
include illustrations, tables, but beware that it
does not become too esoteric! Many funds
emphasise on the quality of the research, why
your project should appear professional and
ambitious.
Many funds have professionally competent
research officers/committee members or outside
experts who make a recommendation to the
Board.
Remember to clarify whether the fund
potentially send your application to expert
evaluation – then a very professional, high
scientific application is of course relevant
For both:
Get a colleague or someone else
to review your application
TLHA 2010
11
Considerations during the preparation
of fund applications
Content and structure of an application:
Whether an application form has to be used or not it is
relevant to the below mentioned. The list provides an
overview of what a good application may contain:
Cover letter
Brief introduction
Requirements Specification
Purpose and summary
Presentation of research and university
Popular description for publication
Budget and financial plan
CV – some times CV for primary partners as well
Other Annexes
TLHA 2010
12
Considerations during the preparation
of fund applications
Content and structure of an application:
Project description
Project title
History and background of the problem
Purpose and objectives
Target group and needs
Method
Collaboration
Practical feasibility
Ethical aspects
Expected results - including dissemination
New Value
Time and activity level, Gantt chart
TLHA 2010
13
Considerations during the preparation
of fund applications
Popular description for publication
Some funds want a short, popular summary of the project for possible
publication. Here you may choose to cut down on the cover letter and
do something more with this description.
In preparing this, you must consider your language carefully and
eliminate very difficult technical terms.
Published descriptions is for a very broad audience. It should be a
catchy description of the project, but the emphasis must be on project
news and usefulness.
Get an outsider to read and correct the popular description. May be
approx. ½ -1 page or according to the Fund's limitations.
Pay close attention to target audience - lay persons, scientists outside
the field or researchers within the field
TLHA 2010
14
Considerations during the preparation
of fund applications
Send the application
Get an outsider – possibly a friend - to review and correct the application in
relation to the purpose of the fund. Make a check sheet for requirements –
does the application meet the funds requirements for innovation, quality,
clinical research, etc.
Check that all formalities have been complied with. Investigate how many
copies of the application the fund wishes. Some funds also have rules on
whether the material must be stapled or not (for subsequent copying) or
similar.
Be aware that many funds want application by ordinary mail because they
have difficulty in handling electronically transmitted applications.
TLHA 2010
15
Reflections after the application has
been reviewed
Follow-up
Follow up on your application - both the accepted and rejected.
Rejection - If you do not feel you got a proper justification for your
refusal call them - unless the fund generally does not provide
rejection reasons. It can give you advice for the next time you need
to apply for funds. Questions of appropriate character could be:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
TLHA 2010
Why was the project rejected?
What suggestions and improvements are recommended?
What doubts were raised about this project?
Was the budget realistic? Was the amount requested realistic?
Were the benefits for the fund clearly answered? Sufficiently?
Is it possible and realistic to reapply? When?
Can the fund propose other funding sources for this project?
16
Reflections after the application has
been reviewed
Follow-up
The goal of follow-up after an appropriation is to build a good relationship to the
fund. Follow-up could consist of one or more of the following initiatives:
1. Send a personal letter of thanks to the fund
2. Send press clippings about the project where the fund is listed
3. Send reports on project status and progress
4. Send any publications where the support of the fund is recognised
5. Recognition of the fund on a project website
6. Be prepared to attend fund events and tell about your project and results
TLHA 2010
17
Reflections after the application has
been reviewed
Follow-up
By project milestones or project completion you can:
7. Invite the board to a laboratory tour and presentation of results
8. Reporting - in the form of records (remember it must be comparable to your
previous budget)
In particular no. 8, the fund will probably even make it obligatory.
So please remember that you can do a number of initiatives to preserve the good
relationship to the fund and that this is "preparing the ground" for future
appropriations.
TLHA 2010
18
Reflections after the application has
been reviewed
Personal follow-up
For your own experience, it is advisable to make an overview of:
which funds you are applying to
which funds you have received rejections from
which funds you receive appropriation from and how much
This way, you have an inventory of your own success and perhaps a
better feel for whether you should change your application
practices.
TLHA 2010
19
Concluding remarks
Personal follow-up
It is not an exact science to write fund applications, therefore take the
present advice as a guide and not as an answer book for fund
application. Funds are a non-homogeneous group with very
different requirements and objectives. Here it is preparatory work
and the experience that counts.
If you get the opportunity, become an evaluator/committee member in
a fund/organization/research councils or similar.
The best experience you can get is to read other people's
applications and build a sense of what works and what is certainly
not working in an application.
TLHA 2010
20
Remember
•Make sure your CV matches the call
– do not reuse the same CV every time. Make it specific
•Make sure your research actually fit the call text
•Read the call text thoroughly and make sure you address all
points to be answered
•Read the evaluation criteria closely so you know on which
grounds you will be judged
TLHA 2010
21
Call or write us when you:
Plan an application to the research councils or foundations. You are
welcome to keep regular contact until the application has been
submitted
Would like to apply for scholarships or Marie Curie
Have questions about formalities, tables, forms, rules etc.
Want a critical eye on your draft application
- Why fail when you can have success – give us a call
TLHA 2010
22
Useful information
Lise Walsted Kristiansen
Annette Hjort Knudsen
Astrid Holm Olsen
Jan Andersen
Theresa Larriba Harboe
Mette Christiansen
353-32036
353-32244
353-32643
353-32378
353-32044
353-32106
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Mette writes and sends out the newsletter so contact her if you would
like to be on the mailing list.
TLHA 2010
23
Chekliste - ansøgning
Formål
Hvad prøver jeg at opnå med mit projekt?
Hvorfor er mit projekt vigtigt?
Metode
Hvordan vil jeg opnå ovenstående?
Tidsramme
Hvor langt er jeg nu? Medmindre det er et helt nyt projekt.
Hvor lang tid tager projektet?
Ressourcer
Hvor mange penge skal jeg bruge?
Hvor stort anslår jeg mit materiale/driftsforbrug til?
Hvilke ressourcer er allerede til min disposition?
Hvilke typer af udgifter vil jeg få?
Hvor mange medarbejdere skal jeg bruge?
Samarbejdspartnere
Hvem samarbejder/bør jeg samarbejde med?
Resultater
Hvilke resultater forventer jeg af projektet
Interessenter
Hvem er mit projekt vigtigt for? Samfund, dyr, mennesker etc.
Betingelser
Hvilke krav/betingelser kan jeg acceptere i forbindelse med tildeling af midler?
TLHA 2010
24
Chekliste – undersøgelse af fonde I
 Har du komplette og korrekte kontaktinformationer om fonden?
 Støtter fonden det specifikke faglige område, du søger ressourcer til?
 Indikerer fonden interesse i dit land, geografiske område (eks. EU), institution eller lign.
 Kan fonden søges?
Vær opmærksom på at nogle fonde ikke modtager ansøgninger.
 Støtter fonden den type midler, du ønsker at ansøge om?
Eksempelvis støtter nogle fonde ikke konferencer og seminarer.
 Har fonden tidligere støttet et projekt af samme karakter som dit?
Dette kan både være en fordel og en ulempe afhængigt af fondens holdning hertil. Nogle fonde
støtter en type projekt én gang for at gå foran med et godt eksempel. Andre fonde støtter et
område generelt.
Få afklaret hvilken type den pågældende fond er.
TLHA 2010
25
Chekliste – undersøgelse af fonde II
 Støtter fonden større projekter som involverer et antal af organisationer, evt. inkl.
offentlige partnere?
Vurder hvorvidt dit eget projekt falder i denne kategori, og hvorvidt fonden bør søges på basis
heraf.
 Uddeler fonden midler i det omfang du vil ansøge om?
Søg ikke en fond om kr. 500.000, hvis de aldrig har givet mere end kr. 100.000 til en ansøger. Og
modsat søg ikke en fond om kr. 10.000, hvis de har en minimumsgrænse på kr. 50.000 i bevilling.
 Stiller fonden krav om ”matching funding” eller enedonator?
Undersøg hvorvidt fonden ønsker ”matching funding”, dvs. at andre fonde skal give lige så meget
til projektet. Hvis ja, skal du naturligvis ikke ansøge netop denne fond om det totale budget for dit
projekt. Modsat kan nogle fonde have præferencer for at være ”ene-donator”.
 Accepterer fonden hele projektbeskrivelser eller foretrækker de korte brevforslag?
Bør du sende en forespørgsel før en hel ansøgning? Måske har fonden præferencer på dette
område.
 Hvem sidder i bestyrelsen/fagligt udvalg?
Er der habilitetsproblemer? Eller hvis der sidder et medlem, som har godt kendskab til dit fag- og
projektområde, vil det nok være positivt.
TLHA 2010
26
Steder at søge ekstern finansiering
Kraks Fonde & Legater 2004-2005, Bog: ca. Kr. 960,00, kan lånes på alle
folkebiblioteker og på KU-LIFEs bibliotek
http://kraksbutik.krak.dk
Vejviser til legater og fonde, 10. udgave, Billesø og Baltzer, Bog: ca. Kr.
845,00, udgives også på CD-Rom, kan lånes på folkebiblioteker
http://www.e-boghandel.dk/shop/item.asp?id=549877
I Statstidende offentliggøres alle offentlige støtteordninger.
Forskerstøtte Enheden RegionH, FIE har også en database. Som KU ansatte
har I alle adgang til denne
TLHA 2010
27
Databaseguide til FIEs forskningsdatabase
Om Forsknings- og Innovationsstøtteenhedens finansieringsdatabase
Som ansat på KU har du nu muligheden for at få adgang til finansieringsdatabasen, som er oprettet af
Region Hovedstadens Forsknings- og Innovationsstøtteenhed (FIE). Databasen indeholder opslag om
finansieringskilder, danske såvel som udenlandske, der støtter sundhedsvidenskabelige
forskningsprojekter.
Under hvert opslag kan du få viden om opslagets formål, støtteområder, typisk bevillingsstørrelse,
krav til ansøgningen, kontaktoplysninger samt ansøgningsfrist.
I et specielt felt kaldet FIEs note er der tilføjet en ekstra information, der kan være med til at
kvalificere din ansøgning yderligere. Det kan f.eks. være information om specielle krav og særlige
forhold, som du bør være opmærksom på. Det kan også være oplysninger om bedømmelsesudvalget
og erfaringer med tidligere bevillinger.
Ny bruger
Gå til www.finansieringsdatabasen.dk
Klik på ”Ny bruger?”
Indtast dit navn, din arbejdsmail og vælg et kodeord på mindst seks tegn
Klik på ”Opret bruger”
Klik på linket i den aktiveringsmail du får tilsendt umiddelbart herefter
Fremover kan du logge ind via www.finansieringsdatabasen.dk med din arbejdsmail og det valgte
kodeord
Ved spørgsmål eller tekniske problemer
Kontaktperson for KU LIFE
Theresa Larriba Harboe
Tlf.: 353 32044
Mail: [email protected]
TLHA 2010
28
More information
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfgzdLe92c0
- A video showing the review process at NIH. Shows how the
evaluators discuss
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAOGtr0pM6Q
- NIH tips for applicants
TLHA 2010
29
Eksempel på bedømmelsesskema
Qualifications of the members of the research group
Please assess the scientific qualifications of the participating
scientists in relation to this project.
Composition of the research group
Please evaluate if the composition of the participating
institutions and research groups is appropriate as regards the
implementation of the project and utilisation of the potential
results.
Objective
Please assess the scientific objective of the project.
Originality
Please assess the originality of the project in relation to
International research in the relevant area
Fundamental research and research value/impact
It is the aim of the Research Council to promote fundamental
Research within the agricultural and veterinary research area.
Scientific method
Please assess if the proposed methods are the best available
and if the research group has access to the necessary facilities.
TLHA 2010
Scientific disciplines of importance to the project
Please assess if all relevant aspects of scientific disciplines
important to the project are adequately addressed.
Project / work plan
Please assess if the work plan is realistic and coherent.
Collaboration
Please assess if the proposed collaboration incl. the
management, organisation and co-operative commitment
provides the necessary interaction and synergy between the
participants.
Innovative value
Please assess the innovative value of the project
Opportunities for young scientists
Please assess whether the project provides opportunities and
Scientific challenges for young scientists and if the project is
suitable for the proposed educational aspects.
Overall grade of the project
Please give the project an overall grade between 1 (inadequate)
and 5 (excellent).
Overall scientific assessment
Please fill in any detailed comments on the subjects you have
ticked off in the assessment form and please indicate if you find
that any important aspects are missing from the proposed
project.
30