AHRC Working with Brazilian researchers: Applicant-led mode (Grant)

About this opportunity

Word limit: 550 In plain English, provide a summary we can use to identify the most suitable experts to assess your application. We usually make this summary publicly available on external-facing websites, therefore do not include any confidential or sensitive information. Make it suitable for a variety of readers, for example: opinion-formers policymakers the public the wider research community Guidance for writing a summary Clearly describe your proposed work in terms of: context the challenge the project addresses aims and objectives potential applications and benefits Core team List the key members of your team and assign them roles from the following: project lead (PL) project co-lead (UK) (PcL) project co-lead (international) (PcL (I)) specialist professional enabling staff research and innovation associate technician Only list one individual as project lead. All São Paulo based applicants for whom funds are being requested from FAPESP must be listed as project co-lead international (PcL (I)). Any such individuals must be eligible for funding from FAPESP as their costs will not be covered by AHRC. UKRI has introduced a new addition to the ‘Specialist’ role type. Public contributors such as people with lived experience can now be added to an application. Find out more about UKRI’s core team roles in funding applications . Application questions Vision Word limit: 550 What are you hoping to achieve with your proposed work? What the assessors are looking for in your response Explain how your proposed work: is of excellent quality and importance within or beyond the field(s) or area(s) has the potential to advance current understanding, or generate new knowledge, thinking or discovery within or beyond the field or area is timely given current trends, context, and needs impacts world-leading research, society, the economy, or the environment Within the ‘Vision’ section we also expect you to: identify the potential direct or indirect benefits and who the beneficiaries might be References may be included within this section. You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the Funding Service. Approach Word limit: 2,750 How are you going to deliver your proposed work? What the assessors are looking for in your response Explain how you have designed your approach so that it: is effective and appropriate to achieve your objectives is feasible, and comprehensively identifies any risks to delivery and how they will be managed uses a clearly written and transparent methodology (if applicable) summarises the previous work and describes how this will be built upon and progressed (if applicable) will maximise translation of outputs into outcomes and impacts describes how your, and if applicable your team’s, research environment (in terms of the place and relevance to the project) will contribute to the success of the work References may be included within this section. You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the Funding Service. Applicant and team capability to deliver Word limit: 1,650 Why are you the right individual or team to successfully deliver the proposed work? This should cover all applicants including the São Paulo based team. What the assessors are looking for in your response Evidence of how you, and if relevant your team, have: the relevant experience (appropriate to career stage) to deliver the proposed work the right balance of skills and expertise to cover the proposed work the appropriate leadership and management skills to deliver the work and your approach to develop others contributed to developing a positive research environment and wider community You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the Funding Service. The word limit for this section is 1,650 words: 1,150 words to be used for Résumé for Research and Innovation (R4RI) modules (including references) and, if necessary, a further 500 words for Additions. Use the R4RI format to showcase the range of relevant skills you and, if relevant, your team (project and project co-leads, researchers, technicians, specialists, partners and so on) have and how this will help deliver the proposed work. You can include individuals’ specific achievements but only choose past contributions that best evidence their ability to deliver this work. Complete this section using the R4RI module headings listed. Use each heading once and include a response for the whole team, see the UKRI guidance on R4RI . You should consider how to balance your answer, and emphasise where appropriate the key skills each team member brings: contributions to the generation of new ideas, tools, methodologies, or knowledge the development of others and maintenance of effective working relationships contributions to the wider research and innovation community contributions to broader research or innovation users and audiences and towards wider societal benefit As a minimum, all named members of the leadership team should be discussed within this section of the form. Additions Provide any further details relevant to your application. This section is optional and can be up to 500 words. You should not use it to describe additional skills, experiences, or outputs, but you can use it to describe any factors that provide context for the rest of your R4RI (for example, details of career breaks if you wish to disclose them). Complete this as a narrative. Do not format it like a CV. References may be included within this section. The roles in funding applications policy has descriptions of the different project roles. Resources and cost justification Word limit: 1,000 What will you need to deliver your proposed work and how much will it cost? What the assessors are looking for in your response Use the resources and cost summary table to enter the full UK costs only. The FAPESP application form (submitted through SAGe) should include the FAPESP consolidated budget, therefore, you are not required to include São Paulo based researcher costs within this section. All São Paulo based applicants for whom funds are being requested from FAPESP must be listed as project co-lead international (PcL (I)). Any such individuals must be eligible for funding from FAPESP as their costs will not be covered by AHRC. Justify the application’s more costly resources, in particular: project staff significant travel for field work or collaboration (but not regular travel between collaborating organisations or to conferences) any consumables beyond typical requirements, or that are required in exceptional quantities all facilities and infrastructure costs all resources that have been costed as ‘Exceptions’ You can request costs associated with reasonable adjustments where they increase as a direct result of working on the project. For further information see Disability and accessibility support for UKRI applicants and grant holders . Where a funding limit is imposed on the opportunity, requested costs for reasonable adjustments may exceed the maximum funding amount. Assessors are not looking for detailed costs or a line-by-line breakdown of all project resources. Overall, they want you to demonstrate how the resources you anticipate needing for your proposed work: are comprehensive, appropriate, and justified represent the optimal use of resources to achieve the intended outcomes maximise potential outcomes and impacts Additionally, where relevant you should explain: support for any project partner organisations AHRC do not provide funding for individual items of equipment over £25,000. Please read our research funding guide for further information. Ethics and responsible research and innovation (RRI) What are the ethical and RRI considerations, implications and issues relating to the proposed work? If you do not think that the proposed work raises any ethical or RRI issues, explain why. What the assessors are looking for in your response Demonstrate that you have identified and evaluated: the relevant ethical and RRI considerations, including both the research or topic area itself and the design and delivery of the project the wider implications of the proposed work, and how you will maximise the positive societal, environmental, and economic benefits arising from the project, whilst minimising unintended negative impacts, such as research misuse or accidental harm how you will manage these considerations throughout the lifecycle of the project If you are collecting or using data you should identify: any legal and ethical considerations of collecting, releasing and storing the data (including consent, confidentiality, anonymisation, security and other ethical considerations and, in particular, strategies to not preclude further reuse of data) formal information standards that your proposed work will comply with You may demonstrate elements of your responses in visual form if relevant. Further details are provided in the Funding Service. Please refer to the UKRI position statement on funding ethical research and Responsible innovation for more information around our expectations on ethical and responsible research and innovation. Animal involvement and “3Rs” You must complete this section about how your proposed project will involve or impact animals. If your project does not involve or impact animals, you must confirm this on the next page. You may be asked about: what animals you are involving the severity of the procedures you are using where the procedures will take place welfare standards you aim to meet the relevance of your project to the development, validation or dissemination of the 3Rs You may also need to download, complete, and upload at least one set of additional questions. You will be told how to do this towards the end of this section. To complete this section and check whether your project is in the scope of the questi