Research grants programme overview

ABC of Community Fund research grants

The overall Aim of the programme is to promote social inclusion. To achieve this, we make grants to medical and social research projects in the field of health and social well being. We have identified four priority groups who should benefit from research carried out in this programme. These are:

· Young people.
· Older people.
· People with learning difficulties.
· People from black and ethnic minority groups.

The Budget for the programme is about three per cent of Community Fund's grant-making budget, which is currently eight million pounds a year. The average grant is between £150,000 and £200,000. The minimum grant is £500. We are unlikely to fund projects for more than £500,000.

We make awards to Charities and voluntary organisations. Although universities have charitable status, we cannot give grants directly to them. However, universities can be research partners with a charity or a voluntary organisation in a project. This is the case with most projects that we have supported so far.

Why 'voluntary sector led' research?

There are many reasons that make it difficult for the voluntary sector and its beneficiaries to use research results or to become actively involved in research. For example:

· There is a lack of communication between the voluntary sector and the research community.

· The voluntary sector doesn't always understand the topics and methodology of research. Research priorities and themes are rarely developed in consultation with the voluntary sector. As a result, much research does not take the sector's needs and interests fully into consideration.

· The commercial exploitation of research can make it inaccessible to the wider public.

· Traditional methods of disseminating research knowledge are often limited to academic or expert audiences.

Our Research grants programme seeks to 'bridge the gap' between the voluntary sector and the research community to ensure a smooth flow of information and expertise that can benefit both sides.

Because we have adopted a 'voluntary sector or beneficiary led' approach we are, in many ways, different from other funders. However, both want to fund top quality research and to direct resources as effectively as possible.

So where do we differ?

· Most importantly, we put voluntary organisations 'in the driving seat', and make grants directly to charities and voluntary organisations. Many voluntary organisations are not able to carry out research by themselves or to come up with fully developed research proposals. Our grants allow them to form partnerships with universities and research centres. For both partners, such a relationship is often new territory, and is both exciting and challenging.

· As well as high quality 'voluntary sector or beneficiary led research', we are looking for well-thought out dissemination plans. One way to make research meaningful to the voluntary sector and its beneficiaries is to fund dissemination that can be understood by all key stakeholders as well as the academic community. This can be expensive and time consuming.

· For applications to be successful, it is not enough to score highly in the research related assessment criteria. We also take a number of other criteria (such as financial health, research partnership, beneficiary involvement, capacity to manage research) into account.

Our assessment criteria

Criterion 1: The applicant organisation is well managed and financially sound.
We look at your financial accounts and the management structure of your organisation (including financial controls). Please note our free reserves policy. We are unlikely to award amounts that are clearly out of proportion to the income of your organisation.

Criterion 2: The applicant organisation is taking the lead in the overall management of the research project, and has the capacity to do so.
We also review the nature of the partnership between the voluntary sector organisation and its research partner. We do not wish to award grants to projects where this relationship is mainly that between a funder and the fundee. The voluntary sector organisation needs to have a clear role in the project rather than just being at the receiving end of invoices and annual progress reports. Both researchers and voluntary organisation(s) must own and be involved in the project.

Criterion 3: The applicant organisation is representative of its beneficiaries.
We assess the involvement of beneficiaries in the running and activities of your organisation. We will also look at ways in which beneficiaries are involved in proposed projects.

Criterion 4: The applicant organisation has identified and shown a substantial need for the research.
We are interested in two crucial things: First, will the research make a significant contribution to existing knowledge and information? Secondly, why is this research important to the applicant organisation and its beneficiaries?

Criterion 5: The main focus of the research project meets our priority of 'promoting social inclusion'.
Also, does it target one of the programme's priorities? Please note: Your project does not need to focus on one of these groups to get a grant.

Criterion 6: Does the research application include appropriate and achievable plans for disseminating the results of the project?
The dissemination plans need to mirror the aims and objectives of your research. Results need to be disseminated as appropriately and widely as possible. For example, if you want to gain more insights into the needs of blind parents, have you considered producing publications in Braille?

Criterion 7: Is the proposed budget accurate and reasonable and does the project represent good value for money (without being under-costed)?
You should take all extra costs relating to the project into consideration and give a realistic estimate. If you are awarded a grant, we will not be able to increase this award during the lifetime of the project.

Criterion 8: The research is worthwhile and of high quality.
Here we assess whether the research has a clear rationale and understandable objectives that meet the project aim. We also assess whether the research is timely, innovative and builds on existing literature. Please note: We generally do not fund evaluations of services. For example, if you are researching whether a particular service is working well or not, we are likely to reject your application early on.

Criterion 9: The research is planned thoroughly and logically and its progress can be monitored and evaluated effectively.
Please provide a comprehensive and well argued outline of your research methodology, the stages of the research and the project timetable. Explain who will be responsible for each aspect of the project.

Our scoring system

We score criteria one to four and six to nine on a scale from zero to six. Criterion five has a maximum score of two. The application is awarded one point if it promotes social inclusion and two points if it promotes the social inclusion of one of the previously mentioned priority groups.
We define each of the scores in the following way (with the exception of criterion five):

0 marks: The project has not met the criterion in any way.

1 mark: The project is weak in this area, and only meets the criterion in a limited manner or the applicant has little understanding of the issue or has no realistic plans for improvement.

2 marks: The project has some good in this area, or the applicant has an understanding of the issues, but the application is still weak.

3 marks: The project is of routine standard and partially meets the criterion; the applicant recognises possible shortcomings and has realistic plans to address them.

4 marks: The project is good in this area, and meets the criterion fully. For new projects, the applicant recognises the importance of this criterion and has definite, realistic plans for achieving good performance.

5 marks: The project is extremely good in this area, and exceeds what would be usually expected in this area. It attaches importance to this criterion; policies and procedures keep it under active consideration.

6 marks: The project is a model of excellence in this area, or fully meets the criterion and displays innovative features.

The assessment process

In the initial stage of assessment we will try to establish whether:

· The applicant organisation is eligible to apply.
· The financial health of the applicant organisation is sound.
· The project falls within project policy.
· The applicant organisation's level of free reserves fits into our funding policy.

In the second stage we establish the quality of research applications and we apply a robust peer review process. The Grants Officer will contact the two Independent Reviewers identified by the applicant, and ask them to give their views on the quality of the proposed research. Then the Grants Officer and a selected External Assessor score the application against the various criteria. We have the support of about 200 External Assessors who are senior and leading figures in their areas of research. The register for External Assessors is open and we welcome new applications. External Assessors receive a fee of £130 per assessment.

The criteria considered by the Grants Officer chiefly concern whether the applicant organisation is capable of managing a research project. They also have to look at the nature of the proposed research partnership, how much beneficiary involvement there is, and whether the project meets our funding priorities (criteria one to five).

The criteria considered by the External Assessor chiefly concern the research quality and its design (criteria eight and nine). Both the Grants Officer and the External Assessor provide a written report to explain the awarded scores. The Grants Officers and the External Assessors assess the quality of the project's budget and its dissemination plan together (criteria six and seven).

The final stage in the assessment process is a meeting of three panels of senior experts (Medical, Medical and Social, and Social Research Advisory Panels) who provide a final review of the research project and comment on the portfolio to be presented to our Strategic Grants Committee. The current membership of these panels reflects broadly the subject matter of current applications.

Please note, at all stages of assessments we make recommendations. Decisions on which project to support or to reject are taken by the Strategic Grants Committee.

What happens after assessment?

All unsuccessful applicants receive detailed feedback explaining why their application was unsuccessful and how it could be improved.

Applicants may wish to take all or some of the points on board and send in their application again at any time. In many cases we also offer to meet with unsuccessful applicants and to discuss the reasons for rejection.

If an application is successful, we invite new grant holders to 'successful applicants' briefings where we discuss with them how to manage our grant.

For full details of the programme and information on how to apply please read: The Guide to the Research grants programme.