Development Framework for Major and Strategic Research Proposals

Introduction

Major and strategic proposalshave become an increasingly important component of the research landscape. The development of each proposal has individual requirements relating to the nature of the call, the requirements of the sponsor and the nature of the research. However, proposal development can benefit from a more systematic approach which ensures that the proposal development team gets the best possible support and University requirements are addressed in a timely fashion.

This framework has drawn on those who have prepared or supported major and strategic research proposals,and sets outprocedures and guidance for theirdevelopment.

The key features of the framework are:

  • Flexibility of approach to address the requirements of different sponsors and the need to meet different time scales for proposal development;
  • Selecting proposals to go forward particularly when sponsors restrict numbers that can be submitted by an institution.
  • Supporting the development through various stages (EOI, Full proposal and interview).
  • Where required, determining and justifying the institutional commitment from a combination of School, Faculty and University sources. Sufficient time must be built in for approvals.
  • All major and strategic research proposals must be submitted through RGS, who will advise on approvals. Sufficient time must be built in for this step.

Research Graduate Services (RGS) will continue to develop and refine this framework and associated guidance and is putting in place new systems and processes for the management of major and strategic research proposal development, to improve success rates and link effectively to research and knowledge transfer activities.

Context

The Funding Councils, Charities, government departments and other major research sponsors have increased the number and proportion of thematic programmes and calls for high value grant proposals. Such proposals could be large in terms of their financial value or strategically important for the University irrespective of theirvalue.Such calls are highly competitive and often have a greater level of complexity which means that they require considerable energy and effort to develop if they are to be successful.

Alongside this, institutions are being forced by research sponsors to be more proactive in the selection and assessment of bids for submission, with restrictions on the number of institutional submissions for many calls, the introduction of demand management processes and the increasing importance of success rates as an indicator of institutional performance.

University and partner support is an important factor for the success of major and strategic proposals. In some cases sponsors can specify that support of up to 50% of the total value of an award is required. This support can take the form of studentships, fellowships, capital investment or in-kind support.

Such proposals are often collaborative and interdisciplinary, and involve external users in research and knowledge transfer and so need advice on collaboration and IP arrangements alongside the full application.

Given the strategic nature of these bids it is crucial that the University’s approach to the development of major and strategic bids and the institutional commitments and contractual requirements involved are reviewed and prioritised at the appropriate University level.

It was also noted that it is absolutely crucial that the Principal investigator (PI), should fully engage in and communicate effectively with other relevant members of University Senior management and central services at all stages of the proposal development and submission process.

Definitions

Major bids can be defined by their financial value, which will be variable across different disciplines. In the Arts and Social Sciences disciplines, the guide value for a major bid could be considered as any proposal at or above £500k. For STEM disciplines, the guide value fora major bid could be considered as any proposal at or above £1M.

Strategic bids are defined byinstitutionalresearch priorities and external drivers, as determined by the Research and Knowledge Transfer Board or the University’s Management Board, and informed by the Research and Knowledge Transfer Strategy.

1: Identification of Opportunities

1.1.Major and/or strategic research opportunities may first come to light from announcements from funding bodies, throughproactive horizon scanning, informal intelligence or advance information or from research development and lobbying activities. Opportunities may be identified by academics, RBDEs, any member of a research team in Schools or RGS.

1.2.Information on such opportunities should be communicated to RGS (Director of Research and Graduate Services or Head of Research Policy and Development). So that a decision can be made on whether this constitutes a major and/or strategic opportunity and if an appropriate managed process should be put in place. This could include targeted promotion, development workshop, an internal review processesor research development support.

2: Opportunity Confirmation and Selection

2.1.Given the time and energy involved in the development of a large scale proposal the University needs to make a number of decisions prior to proceeding to the development of a full proposal.

-Can Nottingham submit a credible bid? (This will be based on for example the strategic alignment and the credibility of the team)

-Can Nottingham afford to bid in this area? (This may be influenced by the level of institutional support required by the funding body and the strategic fit with the University).

2.2.Such a decision clearly needs input from researchers across the institution and is often arrived at through a promotional meeting with key research staff.

2.3.Dependant on the nature of the opportunity it may be necessary to set up a short listing panelto select the particular proposal and research team or teams the institution wishes to support. The short-listing panel should be formed at the University level, and be chaired by the Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research (or their nominee). Other members of the panel would include Deans, senior academic staff with knowledge of the research sponsor and representatives of RGS.

2.4.The shortlisted research team(s) will be advised to establish a Proposal Development Team. This team will be led by the Principal Investigatorand membership should include the co-investigators, a bid coordinator (usually the relevant RBDE) and when appropriate representatives from RGS. It may also include when timely Finance, the school manager, Estates, IS, Marketing, or other central services.The bid coordinator will have responsibility to report on progress to RGS.

3: Proposal Development

3.1.Funding bodies often require a phased application process for larger awards. This could involve an Expression of Interest (EOI) as the first stage, and a more detailed full application and which may include an interview at the second or third stage. If applicable the PI will develop an Expression of Interest, with support from the bid coordinator over budgets and other information required.

3.2.If the EOI stage requires supporting statements from the institution the PI should initially discuss with theHead of School and Dean of Faculty then if necessary provide an outline request to the PVC for Research via RGS.

3.3.The PI will submit the EOI to the funding body when complete and advise RGS of the outcome of this stage.

3.4.If the EOI is successful, the PI will be responsible for developing the full application to the funding body, and a strategic business case if necessary to the University.The PI will also be responsible for identifying internal and external stakeholders and contributors. (See annex A, Guidance on Developing the Research Case for the Investigator.)

3.5.The bid coordinator will communicate with RGS and other relevant internal and external stakeholders to obtain the necessary documentation, such as letters of support or CVs, and to keep them informed of progress on the bid application.

3.6.The PI will identify any School, Faculty or University commitments that may strengthen the bid. These commitments are likely to be for staff, studentships, equipment and buildings, space or facility or in kind contributions. Such commitments will need to be justified and approved.

3.7.Agreements on the type and scale of institutional commitments are dependent on different levels of institutional approvals.

3.7.1.For most bids commitments will be agreed at the School leveland will require approval from the Head of School and appropriate Finance Adviser. It is the PI’s responsibility to negotiate this commitment.

3.7.2.For interdisciplinary bids this may require commitments from a number of schools. In this case co-investigators will be asked to negotiate details with their Head of School and Finance Adviser.

3.7.3.When institutional commitments for additional studentships are requested, these need to be approved by the PVC Research.

3.7.4.For additional space and buildings the involvement of the Faculty Dean and PVC may also be required. With a strategic business case prepared with the relevant Finance Adviser.

3.8.For these more complex scenarios the PI should make an initial request for support to the PVC for Research, via an outline Statement of Intent that may also have to be submitted to MB.(See annex B, Guidance on Developing the Strategic Business Case for the Investigator.) This 2-3 page document should include:

  1. the nature of the call and the associated timescales,
  2. the alignment with University strategies,
  3. evidence of the credibility of the team to respond to the call,
  4. the scope of support anticipated by the funding body, and
  5. the identified size and form of support to be requested.
  6. In some cases, MB will then require a strategic and business case to be submitted. The PI will write the strategic case in partnership with RGS and the bid-coordinator and a business case that the investigator will complete in partnership with Finance. The strategic case should be 2-3 pages and make clear

-The strategic importance of the case.

-The need for university commitment to support the case.

-The commitments made by the Heads of Schools, Deans and Directors of Institutes involved.

-Any space and resource implications and comments from estates on these.

3.10.The associated business case will be developed by finance based on figures within pFact, the projected income to accrue directly from the research grant and other associated income streams.

3.11.The PIshould present the strategic business case for final institutional support approval via the PVC Research to Management Board (MB). Only when the package of support has been approved by MB can a formal letter of support from the University be signed by the appropriate senior manager (either the VC or the PVC for Research).

3.12.The receipt of approval from MB should be communicated from MB to the PI and RGS.

4: Sign Off

4.1.The investigator will need to develop a completed case for support, ensure the project costings are agreed with RGS and that the figures from pFACT are transferred to Je-S (for Research Councils). However, the size of these awards often stresses the limits of the application software systems involved. It is worth starting the process of completing the JeS forms as soon as the investigator possibly can as they can be time consuming.

4.2.The investigator should develop the costing with the presumption of support from the institution as the business case cannot be completed without the final proposal and costing.

4.3.However, the final project and costing may need to be amended dependent on MB’s decision on the level of support.

4.4.It is suggested that the investigator should seek to allow their business case to be presented in sufficient time to allow it to be presented to more than one management group meeting. This will allow them to refine the case if requested by the management group.

4.5.Once agreement from MB about the level of institutional support is received, it is recommended that the investigator drafts a letter from the University outlining the nature of the support and the strategic alignment of the particular project with the University of Nottingham strategy in partnership with RGS.

4.6.RGS will ensure that the letter is signed by either the appropriate Pro-Vice Chancellor or if needed the Vice Chancellor.

4.7.The bid co-ordinator should keep RGS informed of any results of the bid proposal, whether successful or unsuccessful.

5: Interview Stage

5.1For bids which require an interview stage, the lead academic is strongly advised to arrange a mock interview within the University.

5.2Mock interview panel members should be selected from academic staff with knowledge of the research sponsor and research field and reflect the size and scale of the formal panel. A panel member should be selected to chair the panel and questions prepared in advance.

5.3The interview and any presentations should be carried out in the same time planned for the formal interview, with sufficient time for critical feedback to the interview team.

6: Follow-up and Communications

6.1If the bid is successful, the lead academic or bid coordinator should advise RGS and Finance Adviser so that any School or University commitments that have been made can be incorporated in school and university financial plans.

6.2A Project Management Board, with a compositionagreed in the proposal and depending on the type of project, should be set up by the academic lead in collaboration with RGS toproject manage the initial implementation of the bid.

6.3Should the bid be unsuccessful at any stage, the PI should hold a review meeting to evaluate alternate funding options, or any lessons that can be learned from the process. In addition the proposal should also be entered into a knowledge bank to be established by RGS that can be reviewed for future funding opportunities.

Annex A: Guidance on Developing the Research Case for the Investigator

In order to submit a high quality proposal an investigator usually needs to address some or all of the following challenges:

  • The assembly of a research case that sometimes brings together disparate disciplines with quite different research traditions and cultures.
  • The development of the research proposal is time-consuming, requiring a significant programme of proposal development meetings and liaison with different parts of the university’s administration.
  • For the recruitment and integration of external research partners, it is crucial to demonstrate their role in the research and to develop a strategy for working with them to exploit results. This requires significant liaison meetings and visits to external partners.
  • The demonstration within the research case of substantial university commitment to the proposal and alignment with university strategy. This also requires the investigator to work with a number of bodies within the university to develop a solid strategic and business case for the university commitment.

Developing the research case at the core of any proposal is highly individual given the nature of the disciplines involved, the predicted needs of reviewers and the criteria of the call. The development of a case for a large grant requires the elaboration of a research case to be coordinated with other endeavours within the institution. This can be aided through a number of simple practical measures.

Establish a series of regular meetings to develop a research case

Large grants require the involvement of a large number of people nearly all of whom have very busy diaries. Although ultimately the writing of the proposal will be done by you or with only one or two others you really need to establish a timetable of meetings to gather input for the proposal as early as possible. Ideally, you should extend a broad set of invitations at the outset prior to focusing these meeting as the proposal takes shape. It often makes sense to have large open meeting at a regular time slot supplemented by more focused meetings with particular sub groupings.

Involve RGS & Finance early in proposal development

When establishing the meetings to elaborate a research case you should extend invitations to members of RGS, Finance, IS, Estates or other central services who may need to be involved in the costing of the proposal and the later development of any strategic business case. Early exposure to the research case will allow everyone to understand the rationale for the various resources involved. RGS will usually assign a RBDE to provide support for major proposal development. It is imperative that you start costing a proposal as soon as possible through pFACT as this allows RGS and Finance to aid in the development of a strategic business case.

Ask team members to inform Heads of Schools as soon as possible

You should ensure that all Heads of School and Deans are informed as soon as possible about the involvement of researchers in proposal development. It is important that researchers involved in proposal development inform Heads of School as soon as possible of their involvement and highlight that the proposal may require institutional support. At this stage the aim is to inform Heads of School that this request will be made to allow them to manage internal school process, rather than provide the detail of the request.

Annex B – Guidance on Developing the Strategic Business Case for the Investigator

Dependent on the size and scale of requested institutional support, as you develop the research case you may need to also construct the strategic business case required to allow the university to support the proposal. The challenge here is the number of people you need to liaise with in order to develop this case. The development of certain large grants will require you to:

-Discuss the space implications of a successful bid with estates - this will require you to know how many researchers will be involved and what sort of research space you require. This is often required before you have agreed the detailed research programme within the proposal team or the distribution of staff between schools but remember this is about operational issues rather than part of the strategic decision.

-Develop a strategic business case in partnership with Finance and RGS - this will require you to know what you are requesting from funders and the level of support from each of the Schools involved.