Overview
To improve quality of grant submissions, budgeting, and feedback, CDB grants can be submitted to the internal peer review process. The CDB Internal Review process is strongly recommended for junior faculty, but all faculty are encouraged to use the panel and internal review process.
CDB Grant Peer Review will be conducted in two phases: 1) an initial pre-application review phase and 2) an internal peer review phase conducted by local (or external) experts chosen by the grantee. The first phase will consist of a short proposal and draft budget followed by a brief presentation to the Grants Panel, who will evaluate the scope and overall theme of the application. The second Internal Peer Review stage will be focused on evaluation of the science and grantsmanship of the full draft proposal.
Key Dates
Round | Grant Panel Review Date | Major Grants Covered |
---|---|---|
1. | Last week in Feb (TBD) | April/May Deadlines: BBSRC/MRC/NERC |
2. | Mid-July (TBD) | Sept/Oct Deadlines: BBSRC/MRC/Leverhulme |
3. | Oct 4, 2022, 2:00pm | Nov/Dec Deadlines: Wellcome Schemes/Leverhulme |
4. | Nov 15, 2022, 2:00pm | Jan/Feb/March Deadlines: BBSRC/MRC/NERC/Leverhulme |
- Timeline of Submission
Step 1. ~2+ month before deadline: Submit 2-page Pre-application to Panel for assessment
Step 2. ~2+ month before deadline: Pre-Application Assessment Meeting (4 times a year)
Step 3. Within two days of Grants Panel: Written feedback returned to applicant
Step 4. 1 month before: Create Project in Worktribe and submit draft to Internal Reviewers
Step 5. 2 weeks before: Complete budget in UCL Worktribe
Step 6. 2 weeks before: Internal review complete
Step 7. 1 week MAXIMUM Research Services and Divisional Approvals (and Faculty approval if necessary)
- Pre-application Procedure
a) Initial Assessment Form. At least one week in advance of the Grants Panel meeting, a 1-2 page pre-proposal and an initial draft budget will be submitted to the CDB Grants Panel. The proposal should contain the broad concept (e.g. a “Lay Summary” and “Objectives”), some background, specific research objectives, a description of the techniques, pilot data, and analysis. The budget should contain costs for personnel, consumables and other costs, especially the need for Faculty matching funds. There is no need for a statement of track record unless non-departmental groups are also involved. The 2 page proposal can cover the typical grant format of a Lay Summary and Objectives (or similar, depending on the grant)—it is not the intention to add or duplicate work.
b) Panel Meeting. On the day of the Grants Panel meeting, at least 2 months before grant submission, applicants will give a short presentation (up to 10 minutes, with or without slides), focusing on the overall aim and justification of the project. This will be followed by up to 20 minutes of discussion.
c) Panel Makeup. The panel will consist of 3-4 senior and junior members of CDB serving on a rotating basis (see 6. Grants Panel Terms of Working). The panel will represent the broad scope of CDB as best as possible and may bring on ad hoc members to help with specific cases. They will assess whether the proposal is compelling science, with well-thought out and realistic goals, and likely to be fundable. The Panel will also consider secondary criteria, such as early career status and track-record.
d) Feedback and Recommendation. The panel’s remit is to provide helpful advice to all applicants. They are not serving in an adversarial role.The panel will make an immediate recommendation and provide feedback within 1-2 days. The panel will recommend if the proposal is suitable to go forward to a full application or whether the proposal needs more work and should be deferred to a future round. The Panel may recommend alternative funding options if they believe another grant would be more likely to fund the work. The Panel may also assign a Grants Mentor to assist in drafting the proposal or the budget and recommend Internal Reviewers.
- Full Application and Internal Peer Review
a) The first full draft of the application will be prepared 4 weeks before the submission date. This draft will then be internally peer reviewed by two experts from within CDB or the Division of Biosciences. Candidates will be responsible for identifying and approaching potential peer reviewers directly, with the Grants Panel offering suggestions for reviewers. The reviewers will provide feedback directly to the candidate. Details of the Internal Peer Review should be uploaded to Worktribe before the final signoff by the HoRD.
b) The applicant should finalize the proposal in light of the reviewers’ comments.
c) Two weeks before the submission deadline, the Budget should be finalized on Worktribe for approval.
d) One week before the submission deadline, the application must be submitted for approval by Research Services and the Division (or Faculty if necessary).
- Grant Panel Terms of Working
a) Makeup. The panel will consist of 3-4 members of CDB senior faculty (Readers and Professors). More Junior members of the faculty will also be asked to participate. One member will be named the Chair.
The current panel comprises: Jason Rihel (Chair), Arantza Barrios, Roberto Mayor, and Yoshiyuki Yamamoto.
b) Rota. The panel will meet 4 times a year. Every member will serve up to and no more than three or four consecutive rounds before being rotated off the panel. The chair will also rotate among members. In the first instance, to maintain initial continuity of the panel, some members may stay on the panel an extra round or two.
c) Decision Making: After the proposal presentation, the panel will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal. They are to come to a consensus agreement on the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal. They will also develop concrete suggestions on how to improve the proposal and make a written recommendation whether to continue with submission or to wait for a subsequent round of development.
d) Feedback report. The Chair of the panel will be responsible for ensuring that written feedback is provided to the proposer (sending a copy also to HoRD) within two days of the Grants Panel meeting. This can be delegated to another panel member. The recommendation should provide plenty of detail to allow for improvement to the proposal.
e) Advice. The role of the panel is to improve the quality of grant applications. The panel should make recommendations to the science, the budget, alternative funders, or any other aspect, with the aim of improving the proposal to maximize chances of success.