Tom Addison, Policy Manager, The Physiological Society
To demonstrate impact in grant applications, there are two main considerations: demonstrating your personal history of impact and demonstrating the future impact your application is likely to have. In both cases, “impact” is quite broadly defined so there is a lot of scope to include different types of evidence.
For previous impact, The Wellcome Trust in particular is looking for an evaluated track record commensurate to your career stage: any patents, software packages, policy etc.; a publication list which describes what the main contribution of that output was, and what your contribution was if not clear from author list; or a personal statement outlining your most important contributions. It is also worth noting that Wellcome is looking for outcomes rather than outputs. This means they would like to know what the impact of the outputs was, not just that they occurred.
Wellcome instructs reviewers and panel members not to use impact factor in their evaluation of grant applications. They are signatories to the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and reviewers read the most significant papers that are submitted for each application. DORA was designed to halt the practice of using the impact factor of a journal where research is published as a substitute of “the quality of individual research articles, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions” (Alberts, Bruce, “Impact Factor Distortions”. Science 340 (6134): 787).
A few tips, based on common mistakes, for writing grant applications are:
- Test your ideas – Share grant application ideas with colleagues in advance so they can stress test aspects of your application including evaluation methods and where your research sits within the current literature
- Be realistic – Have you demonstrated that you and your research team are able to conduct the research as you outline it, within the lifetime of the funding?
- Be clear and tell a story – In terms of future impact, potential is key. You do not have to have a clear applicability at the point of application but make a compelling case for why your question is important
- Have a back-up plan – At the same time, it is important not to shy away from recognising caveats and existing literature in the field. We recognise that plans can change but a successful application is likely to have thought about challenges that might crop up and have developed contingency plans accordingly
- Proof read and spell-check – To quote Jacob Kraicer: ‘”Good writing will not save bad ideas, but bad writing can kill good ones.”
I would encourage anyone considering applying for one of Wellcome’s grants to reach out to them and learn about their work. This can be done by visiting their website and following their social media accounts. Researchers can also sign up for Wellcome’s newsletter and read the digital publication Mosaic. Wellcome staff are also happy to review two-page proposal overviews before people submit full grant applications to ensure that they are in scope and in-line with their expectations for different funding opportunities. Remember that quality submissions outstrip the amount of funding available , and engaging with feedback from reviewers and colleagues can increase your chances of securing an award.
A nice example of how physiological research can be translated into sustained impact, highlighted in The Society’s recent report, Sport & Exercise Science Education: Impact on the UK economy, is research done at Abertay University’s Sport and Exercise Science department with some of Scotland’s most deprived communities and work to improve individual health outcomes and reduce the economic cost associated with inactivity and poor diet. Read more about this and other research impact here.