Department of Oncology Internal Grant Review Process

Submitting Grants

The following are guidelines to help in the preparation and submission of grant applications to the Department of Oncology Internal Grant Review Process. The individuals that are responsible for the Department’s Internal Grant Review process are Dr Karen Sisley (co-ordinates the review of laboratory-based studies) and Dr Sarah Danson (coordinates the review of clinically-based studies). Administrative support is provided by Ms Deborah Kirk and Mrs Laura Haslam. Please note that it is a Medical School requirement for all research proposals to undergo an internal review and evidence of this MUST be provided before any proposals can be signed off by the authorised signatory.

General Points

Remember to allow for sufficient time for the review process, a minimum of 3 weeks for project, PhD and equipment grants whilst programme multi-centre commercial grants and fellowships require longer, minimum 6 weeks.

Special consideration should be made for clinical trials and projects involving field lab costs and also consider whether ethical approval is required.

Please bear in mind many funding bodies now require online submission so it is important to familiarise yourself with their process as it can be time consuming.

  1. Applicants are requested to the intention to submit a grant application. Applicants are advised to discuss the application with colleagues and/or Karen Sisley and Sarah Danson in order to identify appropriate grant reviewers in advance. This process is a particularly important process for junior academics. Please be awarethat the coordinating team mightnotbe too familiarwith yourareaof expertise andit greatly assists the internal review process if applicants provide thenames ofsuitable individuals. Please do not propose other members of your Group or close colleagues, as the intention of the Scheme is to obtain objective assessments of the application. It is assumed that close colleagues have already been involved in the development of the proposal.
  1. Applicants are REQUIRED to complete an URMS form. Consideration needs to be given to staffing, running costs and any items of equipment that are required in order to complete the project and the suitability of these requests to the funding stream being approached. Thought also needs to be given when multiple applicants and/or partner institutions are involved. Particular consideration needs to be given to specialist facilities, access to core facilities and full economic costings. For academics with less experience in preparing applications it is strongly recommended that advice on the appropriate level of support be sought from a senior academic, for example, their Head of Academic Unit, or Professor Reed as Head of Department. Alternatively Mr Chris Day, Department of Oncology Manager, will be able to assist. The URMS form can be completed by an academic secretary. Once complete, the details of this should be emailed to the Department of Oncology Manager (Mr Chris Day, ) so that this can be authorised and submitted to the Research Office. Mr Day will only authorise the URMS if there is evidence of the review on the grant review database. Further practical advice on completing the URMS form can be sought from the URMS helpdesk (0114 222 1450).
  1. Anearfinaldraftoftheapplicationshould be emailedto . It is anticipated that this would include a completed copy of the project and either a draft URMS form or details of the support requested. It is appreciated that is not always practical to provide all components of a grant for example, CVs and supporting letters. However, it is expected that a full copy of the project and details of the funding requested will be provided. Another important feature of a grant application is the section justifying the resources that are requested, and a copy of this section should be provided for consideration by the reviewer. It is strongly recommended that the application is submitted for review at least three weeks before the deadline set by the funding body. This will allow reviewers appropriate time to undertake a review and for any suggested revisions to be made. Please indicate whether your proposal should be considered as being laboratory-based research or clinically-based research in your covering email so that your application can be directed to the appropriate coordinator without delay.
  1. The application will be sent out for internal review by an appropriate member of the Internal Grant Review team. Although the final decision regarding the selection of reviewer(s) will rest with the Internal Grant Review team, applicants are actively encouraged to suggest appropriate individuals for consideration. Please do not select individuals with whom you work closely as these will not be approached; the intention of the process is to obtain comments from reviewers that are not closely associated with the applicant. More than one review may be requested and reviewers will be drawn from across the School and in some cases beyond. Reviewers will beasked to assess the application, taking into account the guidelines used by external grant awarding bodies. Applicants are encouraged to arrange to meet with reviewers to discuss their comments if at all possible. It might also be helpful for the reviewers if the applicant provides additional details regarding the particular scheme from which funding is being sought should this be somewhat specialised and distinct. Reviewers will be asked to complete a Grant Review Form, a copy of which will be emailed to the applicant and to .
  1. The application should be completed. This should take into account the comments raised by the reviewer and the costing information which has been formally authorised by the Research Office.
  1. Obtain application authorisation. Funders require the School to confirm that it has the necessary resources to support the proposed research project. The completed application must therefore be formally authorized by Professor Malcolm Reed (Head of Department) or Professor Hilary Powers (Deputy Head of Department). Applicants are strongly advised to make contact in advance of the deadline in order to ensure that the appropriate individual is available to sign-off the application. Authorisation can be obtained from academic members of the School Executive in their absence. A copy of the grant review processing form and a completed URMS form is required for this authorisation process. Please remember that the application will not be signed off if there is no evidence provided that you have addressed the reviewers comments satisfactorily (this may require a re-review in some cases).
  1. Completed applications should then be submitted to the Research Office for University authorisation. Further information on electronic submissions can be obtained from via the URMS helpline (0114 222 1450).
  1. A full copy of the submitted grant application (either a hard copy or an electronic copy) should be sent to
  1. Please notify out the outcome of your application once it has been made known to you.
  1. Resubmitted grants do not necessarily need to go through the internal grant review process unless you feel it may benefit from further review. However, ALL resubmissions need to be added to the grant database (although they are often re-URMed, this is not communicated to the grant review committees). Therefore, please fill in a 'Request for Internal Review of Grant Application Form’ as normal but highlight that it does not need a review, just the information to be entered on the database as a resubmission. Please also provide the reference number which was allocated to the previously submitted version of the application.
  1. For a grant that has been unsuccessful following its first submission, a member of the grant review committee should see the comments of the referees in order to ensure that the applicant is not resubmitting a proposal without taking these comments into account.

Review of other types of grant application

  1. Larger applications (e.g. Programme Grants, Infrastructure Grants, Multi-Applicant School orUniversity wide grants including equipment, Senior Fellowships) and certain other schemes, such as New Investigator/Career Development and standard Fellowship applications, will require an earlier submission - ideally 6 weeks in advance of the deadline. These grants are now initially also considered by the Departmental Internal Grant Review process, but will receive a more extensive review by several reviewers including those from outside the Department. As a more extensive review and proactive approach is taken in providing mentoring to all those that are applying for such awards, these will need to be submitted earlier than other grants submitted for departmental internal review (ideally 6 weeks before submission).
  1. Applicants for Fellowships are strongly advised to look at The Think Ahead programmeand to take advice of the mentoring scheme including organising a mock interview. Advice (including one-to-one assistance) can be offered by Kay Guccione ().
  1. For multicentre or cooperative grants in which you are not the lead PI, the review process should be led by the Lead Applicant’s department or institution. In such situations, internal review within the Department of Oncology is not necessary.
  1. Smaller grants (<£10,000) will not usually need internal review, but in certain circumstances (for example, for a new investigator) we may request that they are internally reviewed. Submission ofsmallergrantapplications(internallyreviewedornot)shouldbe communicated to that they can be entered on the system.
  1. PhD projects that are not funded by competitive studentships are also subject to internal review. Projects must be describedon the Graduate Recruitment Form (downloadable at and the names of two suitable reviewers must be included. Assignment of the proposal to a suitable reviewer will be carried out by the Departmental Postgraduate Selector. An offer cannot be made to a student unless the project descriptions are deemed satisfactory.
  1. Commercial grants that are subject to a non-competitive bid do not necessarily require a full review but will need a costing and we would advise contacting grant review 6 weeks prior to submission.
  1. Details on the grant review process and links to relevant forms can be found on the School website -

1 | Page