NHMRC Day 17 November 2015 Content: 1. Key points 2. A few statistics 3. Medical Research Future Fund 4. Recent Developments 5. Post Award Changes 6. Research Integrity 7. NHMRC Statement on Data Sharing 8. NHMRC Research Schemes: tips and hints 1. Key points Legislation passed August 2015 : $20b perpetual Medical Research Future Fund to generate income over the long term. Australian Medical Research Advisory Board to be announced soon and set, after consultation, 5-year Strategy and 2-year Priorities. A full review of number and nature of schemes available will be undertaken in 2016 in consultation with the sector. Big aspiration (longer term): 2 Development Grant rounds per year. Change in Development Grant from 2015: o New eligibility criteria - industry/commercial partner involvement is now Mandatory o New peer review process, no rebuttal New funding initiatives in 2015/2016 o Partnership Projects Special Initiative in 2016 :Additional funding for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research: o Centres of Research Excellence: The second round of the Centres of Research Excellence for 2015 (for funding in 2016) will include two additional streams: - CRE in Infectious Disease Emergency Response Research - CRE in Indigenous Researcher Capacity Building o $6.8 million Developing Northern Australia Initiative: new collaborative research programme focused on: - tropical diseases with high potential impact in Australia and surrounding region (eg Dengue, Malaria, Hendra, Multi-drug Resistant Tuberculosis) - diagnosis, treatment and prevention Boosting the Commercial Returns from Research: NHMRC to ensure that grant rules appropriately recognise industry-relevant expertise or research 2015-2017: Review of the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research o 1st October 2015: Change in the NHMRC s Misconduct policy : University has to advise NHMRC only after misconduct has already been investigated and established (not just on suspicion). o NHMRC s Administering Institutions policy currently under review. o NHMRC Complaints Policy is currently under review. Project Grants: rebuttal will now be 3 pages long (as opposed to 2). RMGS CV: Change in Career Disruption and introduction of a new section CV-RO to include information pertaining to Relative to Opportunity. Elodie Janvier Page 1 of 9
2. A few statistics NHMRC Project Grants, 1980 2015 Mean age of Chief Investigators on Project Grants NHMRC Project Grants: trends Number of Project Grants awarded per year is now falling. Average total grant size and average grant size per annum are growing. Average age of chief investigators is rising. Number of chief investigators per grant is growing. Number of applications per chief investigator is growing. Plateau funding of the Medical Research Endowment Account (MREA) After a period of strong funding growth, we now have: Declining effective value of MREA in face of rising costs of research Downward pressure on research grant and fellowship numbers Competition driving counter-productive response: o high application numbers o rising age of Chief Investigators on Project Grants o risk of conservatism in proposals and assessment o risk of research misconduct Significant gender inequity Loss of morale and talent Elodie Janvier Page 2 of 9
3. Medical Research Future Fund Legislation passed August 2015 Support for medical research and medical innovation A $20b perpetual fund to generate income over the long term Australian Medical Research Advisory Board to be announced soon Australian Medical Research Advisory Board consults then sets 5-year Strategy and 2-year Priorities. Board includes NHMRC CEO and takes NHMRC strategy into account. Health Minister takes Priorities into account and may seek expert advice in making decisions about financial assistance from the Fund. Grants can be made to support medical research and innovation at a medical research institute, university, corporate Commonwealth entity or corporation. Impact of MRFF on medical research funding The funding issue: Strategic review of NHMRC s grants programme Examine whether our major funding schemes be improved and streamlined to: Provide more stable support for research and researchers Support a sustainable and self-renewing research workforce Reduce drivers to multiple applications, more senior chief investigators, conservative research Reduce the load on peer reviewers while maintaining rigour Reduce running costs. 4. Recent Developments Introduction of a new section in RGMS CV: CV-RO: Relative to Opportunity Introducing Snapshot report Start and End Dates Circumstance Eg. I moved my laboratory from King s College London to University of Sydney. Impact Eg. Relocation and laboratory set up took six months and during this time I was unable to conduct any experiments. Project Grants - Next round: New Investigator applications o Simplified process o Eligibility form is in RGMS and viewable at any time Conformance o Some changes see NHMRC Funding Rules Additional assessor comments 2 o spokesperson o Up to four assessor comments 1o and 2o spokesperson and two external assessors o Rebuttal page limit increased from two to three pages Elodie Janvier Page 3 of 9
Development Grants - Next round: New eligibility criteria - industry/commercial partner involvement is now Mandatory New peer review process o To reduce the burden on assessors, while still delivering high quality outcomes - Phase 1 - Expert Peer Reviewers (multiple Scientific and Commercialisation Assessors per application) assess eligible applications. These scores will inform the NFFC list (~ bottom third) - Phase 2 - Peer Review Panel members score applications; applications are ranked, panel meeting via videoconference will only discuss applications by exception o NB: No rebuttal Partnership Projects Next rounds: Additional funding for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research: Special Initiative in 2016 Centres of Research Excellence - Next round: The second round of the Centres of Research Excellence for 2015 (for funding in 2016) will include two additional streams: o CRE in Infectious Disease Emergency Response Research o CRE in Indigenous Researcher Capacity Building Developing Northern Australia Initiative $6.8 million for a new collaborative research programme Focus on: o tropical diseases with high potential impact in Australia and surrounding region (eg Dengue, Malaria, Hendra, Multi-drug Resistant Tuberculosis) o diagnosis, treatment and prevention Workshop with key stakeholders late Nov 2015 Open for applications early 2016 National Institute for Dementia Research Objectives: o prioritise and coordinate dementia research in Australia o ensure integration with international research o drive translation of evidence into policy and practice Activities: o Grants Priority Round 1 o Symposia in 2016 and 2017 o Strategic roadmap of research priorities and targets Boosting the Commercial Returns from Research Government objective: o maximise value, including health and economic benefits, from research funding by improving collaboration between research and industry in Australia. NHMRC s contribution: o continued investment in the foundations for innovation, including funding for basic research and training o working to ensure that grant rules appropriately recognise industry-relevant expertise or research o input to a number of related reviews Elodie Janvier Page 4 of 9
5. Post Award Changes Changes made in 2015 Acceptances now online in RGMS Institutional Approvals in RGMS Variations Policy: New online diagram for decision making on necessity to request a variation. Available at: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/grants/admin/grantee_variations_policy_acceptability_matrix_ 150327.pdf Online Reporting o Reduction in duplication of effort o Placed responsibility of reporting on researchers / CIA o Institutional tools to fulfil obligations New Funding Agreement 1 October 2015 o Clause 4.12 requires the University to enter into a legally enforceable agreement (i.e. subcontract) with any Investigator (CI, AI or Fellow) who participates in a research activity awarded funding if they are not employees of the Administering Institution o NHMRC recommends that Multi Institution Agreements (MIA) should be entered into for all AIs named on an awarded project. Focus for 2016 Administering Institutions Policy Ad hoc progress reports Acceptance date Defer in progress variations 6. Research Integrity Research Integrity Framework: Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research National Statement on Ethics Conduct in Human Research Australia s code for the care an use of animals for scientific purposes Review of the Code Both Part A and Part B are being reviewed Part A principles and practices for the responsible conduct of research. It includes guidelines for data management, supervision, publication, authorship, peer review, conflicts of interest and collaboration. Part B sets out requirements for responding to allegations of research misconduct and the framework for resolving allegations. Being conducted jointly by NHMRC, ARC and Universities Australia. Code review committee has been established and is chaired by Professor Mike Calford. Areas of focus include: o management of conflicts of interest o management of dual use research of concern o handling of allegations of research misconduct Review Process (Mid 2016) Approval ( Elodie Janvier Page 5 of 9
Current review of misconduct policy Targeted consultations were undertaken in August 2015 In order to fully address the comments received, we have delayed making major changes to the policy Made minor changes to the existing policy to align it with the requirements of the Funding Agreement that came into effect on 1 October 2015 Notification responsibilities: Institutions must notify NHMRC of any finding of research misconduct, or a breach of the Code within 10 business days of the inquiry previously the 10 days was from internal notification. Now the institution has to investigate first, and only notify the NHMRC if there is proven research misconduct. o Exceptions are: - where an institution has suspended funding, and/or - The allegations suggest an immediate high risk to human, animal or environmental safety. In both these cases, immediate notification is required. 7. NHMRC Statement on Data Sharing www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants-funding/policy/nhmrc-statement-data-sharing Encourages data sharing and provision of access to data, metadata and other research outputs (including analysis codes, study protocols and study materials) arising from NHMRC-supported research Aims to maximise the health and economic benefits to the community from publicly funded research Aligns with statements on data sharing developed by key medical research funding agencies internationally, e.g. NIH (US), MRC (UK) A general guide for researchers about how data and metadata are managed including: How to share research data, and address limitations A life-cycle approach to sharing research data, emphasising opportunities during the early stages of the lifecycle, for improved data quality and accessibility. Highlights a range of resources available to researchers to ensure shared data is of high-quality. (including the future NHMRC Principles for accessing and using publicly funded data for health research) Australian National Data Service (ANDS) also has numerous guides and publications on this topic and how to address the overarching challenges (legal, ethical, infrastructure, technology, data and metadata quality) NHMRC Principles for accessing and using publicly funded data for health research: Targeted Consultation on the Draft Principles for Accessing and Using Publicly Funded Data for Health Research (now closed). 8. NHMRC Schemes: tips and hints Debunking the myths NHMRC does not cut budgets to save $ PhD stipends are not funded through the Project Grant scheme Role of the CIA o Less experienced CIAs should be encouraged o Women CIAs should be encouraged o Grandfather CIs o Team quality and capability is based on the team and not weighted towards the CIA NHMRC does not provide eligibility rulings EA reports and the rebuttals are taken very seriously by GRPs Project Grants key issues for 2016 Importance of the synopsis o Used to determine allocation to Assigners Academy and Grant Review Panels o Minimal movement of applications in 2016 Conformance o Must comply o GRPs closely review application eligibility Elodie Janvier Page 6 of 9
Rebuttals o Two periods of rebuttals Applicants cannot switch between periods o Release of assessor comments dependent on their submission to NHMRC o ALWAYS submit a rebuttal it is the last opportunity to make a case o Concerns about the quality of the assessor report/s raise with NHMRC as soon as possible o Remove negative tone in rebuttals get someone else to read it before submission Budget construction and justification o Justify budgets including duration, PSPs, DRCs and equipment o Honest budgets o Do not include general salary requests in DRCs o Do not include publication or conference attendance costs Project Grants Grantspersonship Construct a team that leaves no expertise gaps Research Proposal o Readability - simplify multiple assessors will be reviewing the application - it is not the assessors job to guess what you are saying - proof-read - clearly state if proposal is follow-on from earlier project, and demonstrate success or otherwise of the earlier project o Aims - number of aims is unimportant, focus on strength of aim - avoid contingent aims where not possible, explain strategies if one aim fails - don t add-on aims just to include a translation component - tends to weaken otherwise strong applications - don t add-on aims just to extend number of funding years - each year should be fully justified o Preliminary data - important re feasibility and to establish likelihood of success Significance and/or innovation o Relationship to prior/existing work o o Where is the research field heading (long term goals) Potential for translation - inclusion of human element in basic science applications is not essential - no need to have an immediate clinical translation Reproducibility of research o details for appropriate blinding o strategies for randomisation and/or stratification; o justification of sample-size, including power calculation; o justification of statistical methods; o strategies to compensate for the effects of sex-differences, different animal strains and/or different end-points; Career Disruptions and relative to opportunity o Make the claim o Do not provide too much detail o Include additional publications etc for consideration Research Fellowships (RF) Selecting the wrong level or application type can affect eligibility and assessment. Application Levels o SPRF - Senior Principal Research Fellow - highest level - Professorial level researchers Elodie Janvier Page 7 of 9
o PRF - Principal Research Fellow - expect Professorial level researchers to apply o SRFB - Senior Research Fellow level B - expect A/Professorial and doctor level applicants o SRFA - Senior Research Fellow level A - expect A/Professorial and doctor level applicants o SRFgeneral - SRFA and SRFB combined - assessed at SRFA and SRFB Application Types o Initial - applicants who have never held an RF - select any level including SRF general o Reapplication - current or previous RF - current sixth year RF - current level or higher - assessed only at level chosen o Reapplication with Promotion - current RF - sixth year RF cannot apply for this type - select level of promotion - assessed at current and promotion level o Promotion out of Synchrony - current RF in years two or three of their Fellowship - sixth year RF cannot apply for this type - select level of promotion - only assessed at promotion level Sixth year extensions o From 2015 for funding in 2016, RFs will be a five year fellowship only o RFs awarded prior to 2015 and who reapply to the scheme will be considered for a sixth year extension unless: - the application receives an overall score of less than five at any stage of the peer review o Only current funding rules apply to the awarding of sixth year extensions H-index o Will not be an eligibility issue o Peer reviewers will be educated on the limitations of H-index and the principles of Declarations of Research Assessment CV-CP: Conference Participation o Only list each conference participation once eg. invited to give a plenary presentation at the Lorne Cancer Conference - List as a plenary presentation and not as a plenary, a keynote and an invited presentation - Keynote and plenary are interchangeable and indicate stand alone presentations - Invited presentations can be selected from an abstract, part of a session Early Career Fellowships (ECF) Eligibility o At 30 June in year of application, must have held their PhD for no more than two years (date of advice) unless career disruptions exist o Four year limit applies to: - Medical graduates (MBBS) who complete a PhD then undertake compulsory further clinical training - Applicants to the Health Professional Research Fellowship o Must submit their thesis by 31 December of year of application - unable to accept the offer Elodie Janvier Page 8 of 9
- offer may be withdrawn Career Disruption (CD) Initially developed for peer review purposes o Pregnancy, carers leave and major illness Eligibility component for Early Career (ECF) and Career Development Fellowships (CDF) o ECF: two years post-phd notification except where CD exists o CDF: seven or 12 years post-phd notification except where CD exists Require evidence of CD o Must be 28 calendar days or more o Letter from employer (HR) or physician specifying: - start and end date of leave or part-time employment - type of leave eg. personal, parental, carers - part-time employment (%FTE) - do not include specific details of illness o Statutory Declarations will not be accepted Example of a suitable letter Elodie Janvier Page 9 of 9