For all schemes except Research Networking and Follow-on Funding for Impact and Engagement (FoF), the AHRC’s definition of research is as follows: research activities should primarily be concerned with research processes, rather than outputs. This definition is built around three key features and your proposal must fully address all of these in order to be considered eligible for support:

1. It must define a series of research questions, issues or problems that will be addressed in the course of the research. It must also define its aims and objectives in terms of seeking to enhance knowledge and understanding relating to the questions, issues or problems to be addressed
2. It must specify a research context for the questions, issues or problems to be addressed. You must specify why it is important that these particular questions, issues or problems should be addressed; what other research is being or has been conducted in this area; and what particular contribution this project will make to the advancement of creativity, insights, knowledge and understanding in this area
3. It must specify the research methods for addressing and answering the research questions, issues or problems. You must state how, in the course of the research project, you will seek to answer the questions, address the issues or solve the problems. You should also explain the rationale for your chosen research methods and why you think they provide the most appropriate means by which to address the research questions, issues or problems.

Our primary concern is to ensure that the research we fund addresses clearly-articulated research questions, issues or problems, set in a clear context of other research in that area, and using appropriate research methods and/or approaches.

The precise nature of the research questions, issues or problems, approaches to the research and outputs of the work may vary considerably, embracing basic, strategic and applied research. The research questions, issues, problems, methods and/or approaches may range from intellectual questions that require critical, historical or theoretical investigation, to practical issues or problems that require other approaches such as testing, prototyping, experimental development and evaluation. The outputs of the research may include, for example, monographs, editions or articles; electronic data, including sound or images; performances, films or broadcasts; or exhibitions. Teaching materials may also be an appropriate outcome from a research project provided that it fulfils the definition above.

The research should be conceived as broadly as possible and so consideration should also be given to the outcomes of, and audiences for, the research. The outcomes of the research may only benefit other researchers and influence future research, but consideration must be given to potential opportunities for the transfer of knowledge into new contexts where the research could have an impact.

Creative output can be produced, or practice undertaken, as an integral part of a research process as defined above. The Council would expect, however, this practice to be accompanied by some form of documentation of the research process, as well as some form of textual analysis or explanation to support its position and as a record of your critical reflection. Equally, creativity or practice may involve no such process at all, in which case it would be ineligible for funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council.

The national Concordat to Support Research Integrity outlines the obligations on researchers, institutions and funders regarding the need to ensure the highest levels of integrity in all aspects of research, including the peer review and the publication or dissemination of research outcomes. The documents which sets out the national framework for good research conduct and its governance is on the RCUK website.

You are strongly recommended to familiarise yourself with this Concordat and its expectations.

The Research Councils aim to develop as organisations that value the diversity of their staff and stakeholders, enabling all to realise their full potential by valuing the contribution of everyone and recognising and harnessing the benefits that differences can bring.

The UK Research Councils are committed to eliminating unlawful discrimination and promoting equality of opportunity and good relations across and between the defined equalities groups in all of their relevant functions.

Accordingly no eligible job applicant, funding applicant, employee or external stakeholder including members of the public should receive less favourable treatment on the grounds of:

• gender
• marital status
• sexual orientation
• gender re-assignment
• race
• colour
• nationality
• ethnicity or national origins
• religion or similar philosophical belief
• spent criminal conviction
• age
• disability

Equally, all proposals must be assessed on equal terms, regardless of the sex, age, and/or ethnicity of the applicant. Proposals must therefore be assessed and graded on their merits, in accordance with the criteria and the aims and objectives set for each scheme or call for funding.

Introduction

The Research Grants Scheme - Standard route is intended to support well-defined research projects enabling individual researchers to collaborate with, and bring benefits to, other individuals and organisations through the development of high-quality research.

Research Grants are not intended to support individual scholarship; however, projects may include elements of individual research if it can be shown that there will be added value from bringing these elements together within a jointly developed research framework.

Aims

The aims of the Research Grants scheme are:

• to assist researchers in all areas of the arts and humanities to improve the breadth and depth of our knowledge of human culture both past and present
• to support well-defined research projects of the highest quality and standards that will lead to significant advances in creativity, insights, knowledge and understanding, of interest and value both in the research community and in wider contexts where they can make a difference
• to enable arts and humanities researchers to pursue, and to bring to completion in due time, collaborative research projects of the highest quality that require leadership from more than a single scholar. You are required to include a principal investigator and at least one co-investigator jointly involved in the development of the research proposal, its leadership and management and leading to significant jointly authored research outputs
• to enable arts and humanities researchers to establish or enhance effective working relationships with fellow researchers - both within and beyond the arts and humanities and within and beyond the UK - practitioners and the wide range of individuals and organisations who may benefit from their research
• to provide opportunities for less experienced researchers to develop their expertise and their careers by working collaboratively with senior researchers on well-defined projects and by leading projects themselves
• to maximise the value of research outcomes by promoting their communication and dissemination with individuals and organisations outside academia; where appropriate, to facilitate the knowledge transfer of those outcomes to both the research community and other contexts where they will make a difference.

The standard route accepts proposals with a total full economic cost of between £50,000 and £1,000,000 and lasting up to a maximum of 60 months. 

The AHRC expects the Principal Investigator and any Co-Investigators to devote an average of at least four hours per week to the project.

If it is considered necessary for a Principal or Co-Investigator to devote an intensive period of time at specific points of the project’s funding lifetime, then this should be included in the application as the total number of hours to be devoted to the project and will therefore be reflected in the average number of hours devoted per week. You are reminded, however, that the time Investigators contribute to the project needs to be justified and will be considered as part of the peer review process.

The AHRC attaches major importance to the position of UK arts and humanities research in the international and global arena and positively encourages active collaboration between UK researchers and those in other countries. To this end, it has forged collaborative funding agreements, enabling joint standard grants with leading overseas partners.

The AHRC does allow international researchers to act as Co-Investigators on Research Grants.

For more information please refer to the International research pages.

Collaboration in proposals may involve a single institution or a combination of institutions and may involve people from the same or from different research areas, including collaboration between disciplines within the arts and humanities, or between an arts and humanities discipline and another subject area. 

In such collaborations, the arts and/or humanities element of the project should lead the research questions, methods etc.  

It may involve researchers collaborating with researchers overseas or with colleagues within other sectors. The collaboration proposed should be appropriate and necessary to the specific needs of the research project.

Please note that as of 1 November 2013 applications for Research Grants are not permitted to include costs for project students. However, project students may still be permitted where a highlight notice or call specifically states that you my apply for capacity building studentships alongside the grant.

If your project requires access to radiocarbon dating facilities, you must apply for access to the NERC Radiocarbon Facility (NRCF), which is funded by the AHRC and NERC. For further details on how to apply please see the NRCF website.

You may only request radiocarbon dating costs from AHRC through your grant application if NRCF confirms that they are not able to provide a suitable service. You must state in your application that you have discussed the needs of your project with NRCF.

If you are requesting funds for radiocarbon dating in your application, these costs must be justified with a clear explanation for the request for funds in the case for support. Please see Attachments - Case for Support for more information regarding what to include in the Case for Support.

If you are requesting more than 100 dates for your project, these must be costed into the budget. Please note if your application is successful you will be required to apply to the NRCF panel for confirmation of the dates. We would recommend that you discuss your proposed application with NRCF before you submit it.

If you have any queries regarding the service provided by NRCF, please contact Dr Tom Higham, Deputy Director - thomas.higham@rlaha.ac.uk

Aims

The Leadership Fellows Scheme is designed to develop and promote research leaders – individuals who set research agendas, lead research communities, provide intellectual leadership in their own disciplines and beyond, have a transformative impact on their subject area, and also act as advocates for the value and benefits of arts and humanities research to publics beyond academia. The Scheme offers opportunities for researchers and their research organisations to work in partnership with the AHRC in strengthening leadership capacity and capabilities in the arts and humanities.

The aims of the Leadership Fellows Scheme are to provide time and support for researchers:

• to develop their capabilities as research leaders
• to carry out excellent individual research which has the potential to generate a transformative impact on their discipline, and which is of exceptional intellectual scope and importance
• to develop and undertake innovative and collaborative leadership activities which are connected to their research and which will result in benefits for their own discipline(s) and beyond; and
• It should be noted that the Leadership Fellows Scheme is intended to support projects of research and leadership which cannot effectively be supported through routine provision of sabbaticals or other forms of research leave commonly funded through QR.

Where a highlight notice is issued, the Leadership Fellows scheme also seeks:

• to sustain and enhance research capacity in areas which may currently be under- supported for a variety of reasons
• to support the AHRC in delivering its strategic priorities and national capability needs.

The proposed leadership activity must be integrated within a research proposal that is world-leading in terms of its scholarship, originality, quality, scope and importance, and demonstrate that it has transformative potential in the subject area and beyond.

The research can be at any point of development, but the proposal must demonstrate that it will lead to substantial research outputs and outline what the planned outputs and outcomes of the Fellowship will be. The nature of these outputs can vary, according to the research, but should be connected with the leadership and transformational aims of the Leadership Fellows scheme. It is your responsibility to justify the value and appropriateness of the output(s) in the Case for Support. See the Case for Support Section for more information regarding what to include in the document.

A proposal submitted to the Fellowships scheme must outline both the activities that will enable you to develop and take forward research leadership and the individual research that will be undertaken. Your proposal will be assessed on both the leadership and research activities which you propose for the Fellowship.

The following are examples of possible ways of formulating a proposal; they are for illustrative purposes only:

• You could request 6-12 months at 100% time with all leadership activities integrated for the duration of the funded time
• You could request funding for 12 months for concentrated research activities at 100% FTE, followed by 6 months at 20% time to conduct leadership activities building on this research
• You could request 6 months at 100% time for concentrated research activities, followed by 12 months at 40% time continuing the research alongside leadership activities.

Developing research leadership in the arts and humanities is a core element of the Leadership Fellows scheme. In framing your proposal you will need to clearly articulate a set of research leadership activities which demonstrate how you will develop or enhance your leadership role, and make clear how these activities enhance the transformational potential of your research and its broader influence and importance.

You are encouraged to think creatively about what leadership means in your field, and consider carefully how best to exercise leadership. The types of activity that individuals may wish to pursue will vary greatly from field to field, but might include aspects of the following:

• provide intellectual leadership
• shape research agendas
• foster wider impact from your research
• develop emerging research areas, methods or approaches
• foster interdisciplinary research in your field
• encourage new research collaborations and partnerships, international collaboration
• be creative and inspire creativity in other researchers

The leadership activities outlined should be commensurate with your current career stage and trajectory, but should also reflect the enhancement and development opportunity provided by Fellowship funding. In addition, the leadership activities proposed should go beyond the kinds of activities that researchers generally undertake in establishing themselves in their disciplines, or in the ordinary course of their duties.

The Fellowship scheme enables you to include the time and costs for the activities you propose. Exercising research leadership or developing your leadership role involves working with other groups, bodies, organisations, etc. The proposal should include a substantial programme of collaborative activities which will enable you to exercise leadership in your field – and you should think creatively about what is needed to support these activities.

The following list is merely illustrative, and you are encouraged to be innovative in your proposal, whilst also providing a clear rationale as for why the proposed activities are appropriate. Examples include:

• research networking or other activities aimed at inspiring or supporting the development of other researchers
• knowledge exchange activities, and engagement with non-academic partners or wider publics / communities
• international collaborations
• public engagement activities
• interdisciplinary engagement
• shadowing, placements or visiting roles
• engagement with policy makers or public policy bodies
• working with others to produce innovative collaborative outputs.

The extended duration of Fellowships and flexibility in time commitment is intended to facilitate such activities in addition to the provision for concentrated time for individual research activities. You and your Research Organisations should ensure that the flexibility afforded by the Leadership Fellows scheme is used innovatively and appropriately in support of your research leadership. It is your responsibility to justify the value and appropriateness of the proposed leadership activities in the Case for Support.

Proposals that are exclusively or largely focused only on a period of research time without planned leadership activities will not be considered to have met the requirements of the scheme.

If you will be dedicating 100 per cent of your normal contracted working time to the Fellowship, you will not be eligible to be a Principal Investigator or Co-Investigator on any other AHRC award or to have commitments to undertake research with other award-making bodies during the Fellowship period.

The AHRC will not provide duplicate funding for activities funded by other bodies. It will, however, provide funding which complements that provided by other sources. The proposal therefore asks you to provide information about any funding for the same work, or for work related to the proposal, that you are receiving or for which you have applied. You must keep the Council informed of the progress of any such proposals. If you fail to do so, this could have an adverse effect on your application. If you are successful in securing funding from any other bodies, you may need to choose which source of funding you wish to pursue.

The provision of strong, active institutional support is an important criterion under the scheme and the Research Organisation should outline as clearly as possible the specific support that it has provided, and will provide, in supporting your individual career and leadership development. This information should be provided in the Head of Department statement attachment , and should distinguish between generic support available for leadership development available in the institution, and specific support that has been, and will be provided.

This statement also needs to include details of how you will be relieved from existing duties in order to fulfil the time commitment of the Fellowship, and how any teaching duties related to sustaining your research area (e.g. specialist subject modules) will be delivered while your time is allocated to the Fellowship.

The Research Organisation will need to demonstrate that it has been highly selective in the proposals submitted and provide evidence of commitment to your career and leadership development before, during and after the proposed Fellowship.

In the event that you move institution, transfer of the award would be subject to provision of an institutional support statement by the new Research Organisation outlining at least equivalent support for the Fellowship and your subsequent career development.

As the amount of time to be dedicated to the Fellowship is a known amount, your salary costs should be recorded as a Directly Incurred cost.

If you are considering applying for the early career route for Research Grants, you will need to read this section in conjunction with the general guidance and the guidance for the Research Grants scheme.

Aims

The Research Grants Scheme - early career route shares the same aims as the standard route but has been introduced to assist new researchers at the start of their careers in gaining experience of managing and leading research projects.

The AHRC will aim to ensure that the success rate for proposals to this route is slightly higher than proposals to the Research Grants standard route.

Scheme limit and duration

Applications may be submitted for proposals with a full economic cost between £50,000 and £250,000 and for a duration of up to 60 months.

Case for Support - Statement of Eligibility

You should briefly explain how you meet the route for early career eligibility criteria in the Case for Support. In addition to the criteria outlined in the section "Eligibility", you must have not already been a Principal Applicant/Investigator on an AHRC-funded research grant, large grant or Follow-on Funding grant.

The Leadership Fellows Scheme is designed to develop and promote research leaders – individuals who set research agendas, lead research communities, provide intellectual leadership in their own disciplines and beyond, have a transformative impact on their subject area, and also act as advocates for the value and benefits of arts and humanities research to publics beyond academia. The Scheme offers opportunities for researchers and their research organisations to work in partnership with the AHRC in strengthening leadership capacity and capabilities in the arts and humanities.

The aims of the Leadership Fellows Scheme are to provide time and support for researchers:

• to develop their capabilities as research leaders
• to carry out excellent individual research which has the potential to generate a transformative impact on their discipline, and which is of exceptional intellectual scope and importance
• to develop and undertake innovative and collaborative leadership activities which are connected to their research and which will result in benefits for their own discipline(s) and beyond; and

The route for early careers also has these additional aims:

• to develop the leadership experience and capabilities of early career researchers in a crucial phase of their careers as they establish themselves and develop beyond doctoral and immediate post-doctoral work
• to enable the production of high quality innovative research that moves significantly beyond doctoral projects; Research Organisation commitment.

It should be noted that the Leadership Fellows Scheme is intended to support projects of research and leadership which cannot effectively be supported through routine provision of sabbaticals or other forms of research leave commonly funded through QR.

Where a highlight notice is issued, the Leadership Fellows scheme also seeks:

• to sustain and enhance research capacity in areas which may currently be under- supported for a variety of reasons
• to support the AHRC in delivering its strategic priorities and national capability needs.

The Follow-on Funding for Impact and Engagement Scheme (FOF) provides funds to support innovative and creative engagements with new audiences and user communities which stimulate pathways to impact. Funds will be awarded for knowledge exchange, public engagement, dissemination, and commercialisation activities that arise unforeseeably during the lifespan of or following an AHRC-funded project.

Please note: The scheme does not support supplementary funding for continuation of research activities.

Proposals must clearly demonstrate both a well-defined non-academic need for the work and engagement with potential users and stakeholders in developing their project. Proposed activities must enhance the value and wider benefit of the original AHRC-funded research project, and clearly demonstrate how they will deliver significant economic, social, cultural and/or policy impacts.

Aims

The aims of the Follow-on Funding Scheme are:

• to explore unforeseen pathways to impact either within the lifespan of an Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) research project or resulting from a completed research project
• to enhance the value and benefits of AHRC-funded research beyond academia
• to encourage and facilitate a range of interactions and creative engagements between arts and humanities research and a variety of user communities to include, business and commercial, third sector and heritage sector, public policy, voluntary and community groups and/or the general public.

Definitions of Knowledge Exchange

The AHRC has specific interpretations for knowledge exchange, dissemination, public engagement and impact. Further information can be found on our Knowledge Exchange and Partnerships page.

The Follow-on Funding Scheme offers awards of up to £100,000 (full economic cost (fEC)) for a maximum of 12 months either full or part-time to support emergent or supplementary knowledge exchange, public engagement, active dissemination, or commercialisation/proof of concept activities.

Smaller awards of up to £30,000 (fEC) are encouraged for shorter, higher risk activities, for example testing the feasibility of an idea, exploring new partnerships for knowledge exchange, testing the market or investigating a new business model. Decision making times are reduced for these smaller awards.

This scheme operates without formal deadlines and you are able to submit proposals at any time of year. There are no restrictions on how long ago the original project was funded, but the case must be made as to how the new proposal is appropriate and relevant if a significant amount of time has elapsed.

Applications over £30,000 fEC:

We aim, where possible to complete the assessment process within 14-16 weeks and the earliest start date for a project should be no earlier than five and no later than nine months after submission. If the start date is not as adhered to as above, if the proposal is successful you may be asked to change the start date.

Applications under £30,000 fEC:

We aim where possible, to complete the assessment process within six weeks and the earliest start date for a project should be no earlier than three and no later than nine months after submission. If the start date is not as adhered to as above, if the proposal is successful you may be asked to change the start date.

The focus of the FOF scheme is on impact generating activities and engagement with new user communities and non-academic audiences.

Types of activity supported by this scheme:

• knowledge exchange, interactive public engagement, or active dissemination activities. These must engage new user communities and audiences
• commercialisation or proof of concept
• activities that build upon knowledge exchange and pathways to impact already undertaken but which take those activities in a new direction and to new audiences
• conferences and seminars for a policy/practice audience
• pursuit and development of new user contacts
• feasibility studies to test the potential application of ideas emerging from the research in different business, policy or practice contexts

Ineligible activities

The Follow-on Funding scheme include:

• Cannot be used to support pathway to impact activities that have already been taken into account in the original proposal.
• Cannot be used to extend an existing grant or award or to continue similar or existing activities or conduct further research.
• Cannot be used to support resource enhancement activities or to develop or extend and existing website or resource.
• Does not cover research leave type activities or primarily fund staff time.
• Cannot be used to support principally academic outputs (such as an academic paper, conference or a publication).

If any of the above appears to be the case the proposal will be deemed ineligible.

Definitions

The AHRC has specific interpretations for knowledge exchange, dissemination, public engagement and impact. Further information can be found in the Knowledge Exchange and Partnerships section of the website.

The AHRC FoF scheme has been developed to support innovative and creative engagements with new non-academic audiences and user communities, which stimulate pathways to impact. This is the primary criterion for funding support. Proposals must:

• be based upon either previous or current research directly funded by the AHRC (with the exception of research conducted under Masters, Doctoral or Collaborative Doctoral (CDA) and Knowledge Transfer Partnerships (KTPs)).
• be based upon research that has been co-funded with another UK Research Council, funded entirely by another UK Research Council, or funded under RCUK supported schemes such as the HERA Joint Research Programme, but only where the FoF proposal genuinely falls within the AHRC’s remit. In such cases strong justification is required for why the FoF project is directed to the AHRC, together with supporting evidence and previous proposal.
• support innovative pathways to impact opportunities that could not have been foreseen at the original proposal stage and/or that have not already been taken account of in the original award. Proposals need to demonstrate clearly how it will add significant value to pathways to impact activities that were already identified within the original award.
• exploit creative and innovative ideas rather than repeating, continuing or extending existing activities or conducting substantively new research projects.
• be focused towards non-academic audiences and relevant user communities. You should demonstrate engagement with potential users and stakeholders throughout the project’s definition and development processes
• be led by the original PI from which the project derives. However, where it is more appropriate to the nature of the proposed activity another member of the original research team may lead the FoF project. In such cases the original PI would be expected to be named as CO-I at least in an advisory capacity. This would need to be justified in the Case for Support. See the Case for Support section regarding more information about this document.

If a research group within an RO wishes to exploit a piece of research in the absence of the original PI then permission should be sought from them (and where possible they should be involved in an advisory role) and the RO must ensure any continuity issues including IP or copyright are addressed.

The AHRC does allow international researchers to act as Co-Investigators on Follow-on Funding for Impact and Engagement proposals. Detailed information about eligibility, costs and application guidance can be found within the relevant sections of this guide.

In addition to the information in the Application Guidance section, the following also applies:

• Universities, colleges, further education institutions, related departments, or spin-out companies may not participate as non-academic partners.
• University museums and galleries, however, may participate as project partners provided that they are working with a Research Organisation (RO) other than or in addition to the RO with which they are formally linked.

Where appropriate, non-academic partners are required to commit to a financial or in-kind contribution (this will not constitute part of the full economic cost of the project). There is no minimum contribution; however, value for money will be considered in the assessment of proposals.

Non-academic partners should submit a Letter of Support as an attachment to the application and this should detail the reasons, motivations and commitment to participating in the project. If there is more than one non-academic partner then each should provide a Letter of Support. If appropriate, the Letter of Support also provides an opportunity for non-academic partners to state their financial and/or in-kind contributions to the project.

Please use the headings below for your Case for Support.

• Aims and Objectives
• Context
• Proposed activities
• Timetable
• Project Management
• Collaboration
• Outcomes and impact

Aims and objectives

You should describe the aims and objectives of your proposal and explain the specific targets to be achieved at milestones as well as by the end of the award.

You should explain how your proposed activities demonstrate impact, innovation, creativity and engagement as this is the principal criterion for support. Proposals that fail to demonstrate this will not be considered for support, no matter how high the quality of the original research.

Context

You should describe the context for your proposed activities, clearly identifying the existing piece or body of research the proposed activities are based on and how the FoF proposal will strengthen the impact of that research.

You should provide evidence that the completed research is of direct relevance to the wider audience(s)/organisation(s) that you intend to work with. Ability to demonstrate that there is a well-defined need and that you have consulted and involved potential users and/or stakeholders in developing the proposal is an important requirement.

Where your proposal is for an emergent activity within the current lifespan of a grant, you should explain how this opportunity has arisen, why it wasn’t foreseeable at the application stage, the timeliness of the activity and how it will enhance the impact of the research.

Proposed activities

Please provide a clear and concise description of the activities to be undertaken. The proposed work should be fully explained, taking into account the scheme criteria. Justification should be provided for the chosen approach/methods. If you are seeking travel, subsistence or event costs then you should describe their purpose and why they are relevant to the programme of work. If you are proposing a feasibility study or shorter, higher risk activity you should identify specific risks and explain how they will be managed.

Timetable

Describe the timetable for the project, including appropriate milestones and dates for when outcomes/outputs of the project will be completed.

Project management

You should describe the respective roles and responsibilities that you, your host RO and the project partners or stakeholders will undertake and the process by which a shared understanding of this has been reached. How will the project be managed on a day to day basis and how will it be monitored to review progress and ensure delivery against the aims and objectives.

Collaboration

Where appropriate, detail the partner organisation(s) that you are working with, their role in the project and how you will work together to develop and deliver the outcomes. It is vital that the project responds to a well-defined non-academic need and that there has been a joint or consultative approach to its development. Where you are not working with a named project partner detail the methods used to consult with relevant stakeholders and user communities to formulate the project.

If you have an existing working relationship with the partner(s) briefly describe the nature of that relationship. How will this project enhance that relationship? If you are seeking to establish a working relationship with a new partner then please describe the steps you will take or have taken to make that happen.

The reviewers will want to know that you and your partner(s) have considered any relevant issues of ownership/intellectual property arising from the project.

Outcomes and impact

Describe how this project meets the FoF scheme aims and eligibility criteria especially in terms of delivering pathways to impact by developing creative and innovative engagements with new audiences and user communities. Who will benefit and how and why does it matter? How will you ensure that outcomes and outputs can be disseminated as widely as possible to maximise the value and reach of any impact generated? How do you intend to capture information about these anticipated benefits and how will you demonstrate success in meeting the specified aims and objectives?

You should also consider the longer-term sustainability of the proposed activities and the likely transformative effects of any outputs on the target audiences and user groups, or within an organisational or policy context. What do you envisage will happen after the end of the funding period?

Overview

Proposals over £30,000 fEC will be subject to two specialist peer-reviews by members of the AHRC’s Peer Review College followed by a PI Response stage. The proposal, reviews and the PI Response will be moderated by a review panel who will make funding recommendations to the AHRC. Applications under £30,000 (fEC) will be reviewed directly by the panel and will not be offered a PI response.

Additional criteria

In addition to the general criteria outlined in Assessment Criteria and Peer Review section, the following will be taken into account for the Follow-on Funding scheme for Impact and Engagement scheme:

Quality and importance

• the extent to which the project responds to a well-defined non-academic audience / user community need.
• the timeliness and duration of the proposal.
• the level of engagement with existing and potential user communities and non-academic audiences in defining that need and the developing the proposal.
• the potential of the activities to enhance the value and impact of the original research.
• the extent of engagement with new target audiences and users.

Management of the project

• the feasibility of the project, given the planned timetable, resources and project management.
• how partners will work together to achieve the aims and objectives.

Value for money

• the potential and appropriateness of the proposed activities to enhance the value and impact of the previous research.

Output, dissemination and impact

• social, economic and/or policy impact potential of the research on which the FoF is based.
• longer-term sustainability of activities, pathways or potential impacts beyond the award period.
• level of creativity and innovation demonstrated in the proposed activity and outcomes.
• suitability and reach of engagement and dissemination activities.

The Principal Investigator response process applies for proposals over £30,000.

Introduction

The Research Networking Scheme is intended to support forums for the discussion and exchange of ideas on a specified thematic area, issue or problem. The intention is to facilitate interactions between researchers and stakeholders through, for example, a short-term series of workshops, seminars, networking activities or other events.

The aim of these activities is to stimulate new debate across boundaries, for example: disciplinary, conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and/or international. Proposals should explore new areas, be multi-institutional and can include creative or innovative approaches or entrepreneurship. Proposals must justify the approach taken and clearly explain the novelty or added value for bringing the network participants together.

Although the Research Networking Scheme is primarily aimed at the development of new networks and interactions, existing networks can also apply where they are addressing a new or novel area.

The AHRC does allow international researchers to act as Co-Investigators on Research Networking proposals. Detailed information about eligibility, costs and application guidance can be found within the relevant sections of this guide.

Aims

The aims of the Research Networking Scheme are:

• to support collaboration and the exchange of ideas across boundaries, primarily between researchers in the arts and humanities, as well as with colleagues in other disciplines and other stakeholders, in order to explore a particular theme, issue or problem
• to enable groups of researchers and other stakeholders to explore ideas which could lead to tangible projects and maximise opportunities for advances in creativity, insights, knowledge and understanding in the area to be explored, with results of value both to the arts and humanities research community and to wider contexts where they can make a difference
• to encourage and enable researchers within the research community to involve new researchers and research students, as well as people or organisations from outside the academic and research community, in the discussion and development of ideas
• to foster (where appropriate) international collaboration and the development of strong academic links with overseas researchers, in order to develop understanding through engagement with different cultures and parts of the world, and to enhance research standards
• to provide a framework for the Arts and Humanities Research Council to learn of emerging areas of intellectual urgency and potential strategic importance, both within the UK and internationally, identifying key research challenges by building new collaborations as well as strengthening existing ones.

Proposals for full economic costs up to £30,000 for a period of up to two years may be submitted.

The exact mechanism for networking and the duration is up to you to decide but must be fully justified in the proposal. Costs within the £30,000 full economic cost (fEC) scheme limit should include all UK based activities. Such costs can include the Principal Investigator (PI), and Co-Investigator’s time on the project, administrative support, estates and indirect costs, costs involved in organising events, and travel and subsistence costs for UK participants.

A further threshold of up to £15,000 in addition to the £30,000 fEC may be sought to cover the costs of any international participants, co-investigator or activities.

Proposals will need to be submitted by an eligible Research Organisation (RO) but must involve collaboration with at least one other international organisation, as well as have significant relevance to beneficiaries in the UK.

Eligible costs above £30,000 limit are only those which can be directly attributable to international collaboration.

This scheme operates without formal deadlines. You are able to submit proposals at any time of the year and we will aim to inform you of the outcome within five months of submission.

The proposed start date of your project must be at least six months from the date of submission. For example, if you submit a proposal on 15 January, the earliest possible start date would be 15 July.  If the start date is not at least six months from the date of submission, if the proposal is successful you may be asked to change the start date.

The Research Networking Scheme will meet the salary costs for you and a Co-Investigator for the time spent overseeing and providing intellectual input to the activities, the cost of setting up and coordinating the activities (for example, the salary costs of a coordinator) along with associated indirect and estates costs, although Indirect and Estates costs will not be eligible for any international co-investigators.

Time spent by you on the co-ordination of the activities is not expected to form the majority of the cost of the proposal. Research Assistants are not eligible under this scheme and the salary costs of participants may not be included.

Proposals for the development of European collaborative networks and/or consortia that might support the development of applications to the Europe Union (EU) under the Framework programme or other EU funding opportunities are also welcome.

The following costs are eligible to be included under the additional £15,000 limit:

• travel and subsistence
• international participants visiting the UK
• UK participants travelling to events/activities outside of the UK
• international phone calls and/or video conferencing
• cost of overseas events/activities
• costs incurred by the international co-investigator, including salary where applicable (see Proposals with an international element for more information on international co-investigator salary eligibility).

Costs over and above those specified for the standard scheme must be directly related to the activities fostering the contribution of colleagues from other countries including events in those countries. The added value and contribution of the international participation to the research networking activities, must be clearly explained and justified in the proposal.

The following costs are not eligible to be included under the additional £15,000 limit:

• Additional Investigator time or administrative support in the UK spent supporting the international collaboration (whether in the UK or abroad)
• Costs of UK based workshops involving international participants (for example, room hire, catering)
• Costs of other UK based activities involving international participants.

The scheme is not intended to fund stand-alone events which are not part of the research process, for example events held to disseminate findings from research already undertaken, or networks based around an existing conference where the networking activities would have taken place without funding.

Fees for consultants or speakers will therefore be considered only on an exceptional basis where it can be demonstrated that their participation is in keeping with the aims of the scheme to facilitate the exploration of new ideas.

All costs must be itemised separately within the budget breakdown section of the application and the costs of any international collaboration clearly indicated. In addition, all costs must be justified in the justification of resources attachment. See the Justification of Resources section for more information regarding what to include in this document.

Case for support

You must outline clearly the rationale for the activities, approach and the research context in which they will operate by answering the following questions:

• What is the central theme of the proposed activity?
• Why is it important that this theme be explored?
• What is new and novel about the network?
• How will the questions be addressed?
• How will the proposed activities generate genuine and novel interaction across boundaries and so lead to advances in understanding?

You should also give details regarding the aims and objectives, the timetable for any activities proposed, proposed participants and key speakers, and plans for management and co-ordination, including the membership of any proposed advisory group or steering committee.

Provided that you meet the eligibility criteria, additional participation from those in other organisations can be as broad as is needed to achieve the aims of the networking (within the budget available), and additional members can be brought in during the course of the award. To meet the scheme's intention of crossing boundaries, activities of participants from beyond the academic community is encouraged. As well as any named participants, an indication of the subject and sector interests to be represented should be provided.

Instead of the headings in the Case For Support Section, you should use the following:

Rationale and research context

You should describe clearly the rationale, approach and research context of the activities:

• Why are the proposed activities necessary to address this theme at this time?
• To what extent do the proposed activities generate fruitful and novel interaction?
• You will need to provide a clear explanation of how your activities cross boundaries and how this adds value to the proposed activities.
• What is the research context in which the activities will operate and how will it advance knowledge and understanding in the fields concerned?
• To which audiences/disciplines will the activities and its outcomes be of interest?

Aims and objectives

You should describe the aims and objectives of the activities. What specific targets or outcomes will you have achieved by the end of the project?

Timetable of activities

You should give a clear timetable of activities for events such as workshops, symposia, conferences, meetings of the advisory group.

Key speakers or participants

You should indicate any specific speakers or participants who would be central to the success of the project, along with their expertise and availability.

Management and co-ordination

How will the activites be managed? Will there be an advisory group or steering committee? If so, who are the proposed members and does the membership reflect the constituencies the proposal intends to reach? What will be the roles of the principal investigator, the co-investigator, and other participants?

Dissemination

Information under this heading should build on the details given in the Academic Beneficiaries and Impact Summary sections of the Je-S form.

Please provide examples of the kinds of outputs you propose to produce druing the award and their proposed focus. Please explain further how the research will benefit other researchers in the field and - where relevant - academic beneficiaries in other disciplines.

How do you propose to maximise the value of the proposed research outputs? You should cross refer here to the separate attachment 'Pathways to Impact. See the Pathways to Impact for more information regarding what to include in this document.

Justification of Resources Attachment

The breakdown of costs should clearly explain any additional costs sought for international participation, where applicable.

Proposals are required to justify the inclusion of any international participants itemised within the budget breakdown and outline why they are necessary for the success of the proposed activities.

Data Management Plan

A Data Management Plan is not required for this scheme.

There is no Principal Investigator response stage for this scheme.

In addition to the information in the Assessment and Peer Review  section the following assessment criteria will be taken into account:

• the quality of the research process outlined, including: research agenda, participants, sustainability and appropriateness of methods to foster interactions
• the level of genuine collaboration proposed across boundaries and the value that this will add to the development of research in that area
• the significance and importance of the thematic area to be explored
• the extent to which the proposed activities will generate genuine and productive interaction across boundaries (e.g. disciplinary, conceptual, theoretical, methodological and/or international), including the potential for them to lead to advances in knowledge and understanding in the fields concerned and/or new high quality cross-disciplinary research projects
• the level of involvement from different organisations and interaction between participants (creative techniques for fostering interactions are welcomed).

Additional criteria

Further the following will also apply to proposals requesting additional funds for international collaboration:

• the extent to which the proposed activities will foster the development of strong academic links between the UK and researchers in other countries and the value that this adds to the research area
• the contribution and added value of the proposed international collaboration to the research networking outlined
• to also note: there is no PI Response stage for Research Networking

Where the peer reviewers’ comments and grades are consistent, the AHRC will allocate theirs as the final grade for the proposal.

Where the grades differ, or the comments are inconsistent with the grade, the proposal and peer reviews will be moderated by a third member of the Peer Review College. S/He will consider the proposal, allocating a final grade. S/He will then rank all batched applications by priority for funding. Final funding decisions will be made by the AHRC.

Highlight notices are applied to existing AHRC Schemes in order to encourage proposals in specified areas of strategic interest to AHRC and to engage the arts and humanities research community in the development of these initiatives. Highlight notices are applied for a set period of time, for example 12 months and the descriptions are usually intended to guide inquiry rather than prescribe individual research topics.

It is hoped, that successful proposals addressing the highlight notice will help to build capacity in the specified area. For example, activities funded under a highlight notice for the AHRC theme ‘Care for the Future’ could inform the future development of the theme by feeding back progress to the relevant subject team at the AHRC and representatives attending events related to the award or through coordinated activities organised by the AHRC.

If your proposal is successfully funded under a highlight notice, you will also be expected to produce a short report at the end of the award summarising the outcomes of the work undertaken and the potential for the future development of the topic of the highlight notice, for example by highlighting potential innovative new multi-disciplinary research, partnership or knowledge exchange opportunities under the AHRC theme(s).

How to apply under highlight notices

There is no separate route for highlight notices, applicants must explicitly address why their proposal is relevant to the highlight notice as part of their standard application. No additional attachments are required and you must adhere to the standard limits for the scheme.

Proposals relevant to the highlight notice can be submitted at any time while the highlight notice is in effect, and will be assessed alongside standard proposals using the same criteria. All proposals will be assessed on their quality and individual merits. Although, proposals addressing the highlight notice will not be given priority in the assessment or ranking of applications, supplementary funding may be made available to support additional highly rated applications addressing the highlight notices that may not have otherwise been funded under the existing scheme budgets. As a result, applications addressing highlight notices may have an increased chance of funding, but only if they fully meet the excellence criteria for the scheme and high international standards of scholarship, originality, quality and significance as judged through peer review.

Applicants wishing to submit a proposal in response to the highlight notice should include a paragraph at the beginning of their Case for Support outlining which theme (or themes) they are addressing and how they envisage their research could contribute towards it. Within the Case for Support, full details should be given of who will be involved in the project, including any collaborative partners, how the theme will be addressed and the fellow envisages playing a leadership role in support of the development of the theme (or themes).

Further information is available in the How to apply - Research Funding Guide section.

A highlight notice is currently in place under the Research Networking scheme for International collaboration with one or more of the following countries:

• Brazil
• China
• India
• Taiwan

Further specific guidance on the international highlight notice is available.

A second highlight notice is in place to support public policy engagement, fostering partnership and collaboration between researchers, policy makers, and policy intermediary bodies.

Further specific guidance on the public policy highlight notice is available.

Details of the Research Networking Scheme, its aims, assessment criteria and application requirements can be found in the Research Funding Guide section.

The Research Networking Scheme remains entirely open to proposals addressing any topic and proposals to the scheme do not need to address any of these themes.

Additional information for proposals applying under the highlight notice are to be read in conjunction with the Research Funding Guide.

Contacts

The AHRC work with the RCUK Shared Services Centre (SSC) to deliver all of our funding activities. All queries regarding eligibility for funding and applications in progress and also queries regarding current awards, should be directed to the SSC team dealing with your subject area. Contact information is published on the contacts page.

The highlight notice in this scheme has been extended until the end of December 2012.  

The purpose of the highlight notice is to stimulate the development of innovative boundary-crossing proposals under the Fellowships Scheme which are relevant to the four Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) themes:  

• Digital Transformations in Arts and Humanities 
• Care for the Future
• Translating Cultures
• Science in Culture
• and the AHRC-led cross Council Programme on Connected Communities.

In line with the emphasis on leadership development in the revised Fellowships scheme, Fellows appointed under the highlight notice will be expected to play a significant role within the relevant theme (or across themes). Applicants should consider how they might work with other researchers under the theme(s) to lead the development of particular areas or sub-tropics, for example, through networking activities, developing international or cross-disciplinary collaborations or leading knowledge exchange or dissemination activities. 

Applications under the Fellowships highlight are expected to take full advantage of the opportunities under the revised Fellowship Scheme for supporting collaborative activities.  For example, to work collaboratively with other research teams or disciplines (including the sciences), internationally or with partners outside Higher Education Institutions (HEI) (for example, with policy, community, cultural or voluntary organisations) and to work in different settings or contexts and/or to immerse themselves in a different cultural, academic or organisational environment or community.

Details of the Fellowships Scheme, its aims, assessment criteria and application requirements can be found in the How to apply - Research Funding Guide.  The Fellowships Scheme remains entirely open to proposals addressing any topic and proposals to the scheme do not need to address any of these themes.

We will make a further announcement about highlight notices in the Fellowships Scheme in the autumn of 2012.  Additional information for proposals applying under the highlight notice are to be read in conjunction with the How to apply - Research Funding Guide. 

Proposals addressing the themes outlined in the highlight call can be submitted to both the standard and early career routes of the Fellowships scheme. Further details of the scheme can be found on the following pages of our website:

• standard route 
• early career route

Applicants wishing to submit a proposal in response to the highlight notice should include a paragraph at the beginning of their Case for Support outlining which theme (or themes) they are addressing and how they envisage their research could contribute towards it. Within the Case for Support, full details should be given of who will be involved in the project, including any collaborative partners, how the theme will be addressed and the fellow envisages playing a leadership role in support of the development of the theme (or themes).

​Contacts

The AHRC work with the RCUK Shared Services Centre (SSC) to deliver all of our funding activities. All queries regarding eligibility for funding and applications in progress and also queries regarding current awards, should be directed to the SSC team dealing with your subject area using the contacts page.

The AHRC adheres to the joint RCUK Terms and Conditions, which are kept updated on the RCUK website (PDF). Any AHRC-specific terms and conditions can be found under Additional Information.

Access to Research Outputs

If one of the proposed outputs is a journal article then the applicant must ensure that he/she complies with RCUK policy on Access to Research Outputs.

Subject remit

For a proposal to be eligible to be submitted to the AHRC, the majority of the research (that is the main focus of its research questions/problems) must lie within the arts and humanities. For proposals that cross Research Council boundaries, the Research Councils have put in place an agreement: Applications across Research Council remits.

Proposal classification

You are required to classify your proposal as part of the Je-S application process. This activity serves partly as a confirmation that the proposal sits within the remit but more importantly as a tool to both help identify the most appropriate peer reviewers to assess the proposal and to determine the panel to which the proposal is directed. It is therefore very important to complete this section accurately.

In submitting the proposal, you are asked to consider all three elements of classification and select the attributes appropriate to their proposal: research areas, qualifiers, and free-text keywords.

Research areas

This provides you the opportunity to identify between one and five Research Areas that reflect the subject focus of the research and research questions of your proposal.

You will be required to identify one of these as the proposal’s 'Primary Research Area'. The Research Areas used will be a combination of Level 1 and Level 2 classifications, with Level 1 being a broader definition of the area and Level 2 adding a more specific level definition.

Qualifiers

This provides the opportunity to provide further specific detail on nature of the proposal, such as time period, approach, or geographical focus.

Free-text keywords

This provides the opportunity for you to provide more specific details of the focus of the research question and should be additional and complementary to the selection of Research Area(s).

The choice of appropriate keywords is a crucial in assisting the AHRC to identify suitable peer reviewers.

The following is a list of some of the main areas of study where the AHRC and the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) share interests and responsibilities.

Area studies

AHRC supports research that is concerned with the culture, history, language and religion of specific regions. ESRC supports research that is concerned with the society, economy, politics and human geography of specific regions.

Communications, cultural and media studies

AHRC supports research that seeks to understand communications, culture and media through the study of phenomena such as the visual arts, film and television, history, language, literature and performance. ESRC supports research that approaches communications, culture and media through the study of sociology, social theory, social anthropology, politics and economics. Note that there is also an important interface between AHRC, ESRC and EPSRC in this area where proposed research projects include a significant engagement with, or advancement of, communication technologies. In the case of relevant research applications, the AHRC and/or ESRC will liaise with EPSRC when consulting reviewers and making funding decisions.

Cultural policy and management

AHRC supports historical, comparative and empirical research that addresses questions of human value in creativity and culture, including both the individual and collective experience of creativity and culture. AHRC also supports research in museum studies. ESRC supports research into the psychological processes involved in creativity and the social and economic influences on and consequent impacts of creativity and culture, and public policy and management in this area.

Education

ESRC is the primary funding body for educational research across all subjects, including the arts and humanities. AHRC supports research where the imperative for the research questions resides in the arts and humanities, but there may be an educational element. Examples include research into the history of education, children's literature, creative art and performance in (but not for) educational environments, religious teaching and scholarship, and the role of education in librarianship and museums practice.

Gender studies

AHRC supports research that is concerned with sex and gender as they relate to the creative and performing arts, language, law, literature, religion and history of all periods. ESRC supports research that is concerned with sex and gender as they relate to society, the economy and politics.

Human geography

ESRC is the primary funding body for human geography; but AHRC also supports research in cultural geography. This includes research into the interpretation of the cultural landscape; cultural constructions of nature and environment; creative and imaginative aspects of geographical thought and practice; and relationships between space, place and cultural identity.

History

AHRC supports historical research covering all periods of history from ancient times to modern, and in all parts of the world. AHRC takes modern history to end in the late twentieth century. Applicants whose research focuses primarily on the last two decades of that century will need to show in their proposal how and why their focus is indeed predominantly historical, for example how the study will focus on change over a defined period of time or will make predominant use of historical modes of analysis. ESRC supports historical research that seeks to understand the development of social and economic arrangements over time and applies social and economic theories. Research focusing on contemporary or near-contemporary social, political, economic or geographical themes should normally be directed to the ESRC.

International Relations

ESRC is the primary funding body for international relations, but AHRC supports research that is concerned with the relationship between international relations and the culture, history, language and religion of specific countries and regions.

Librarianship and Information Science

AHRC supports research into the practice and techniques of information and knowledge management as they relate to librarianship, archives and records management, information science and information systems, storage and retrieval, and professional practice in journalism and the media. AHRC also supports research into information use and users in specific organisational environments. ESRC supports research into the broader socio-economic context of information use and policy, information flows within and between organisations, and the shaping, use and potential of information and communication technologies. The ESRC also supports research on knowledge management and on forms and structures of knowledge, as they relate to the wider socio-economic context. Note that there is also an important interface between AHRC, ESRC and EPSRC in this area where proposed research projects include a significant engagement with, or advancement of, technologies dealing with information management. In the case of relevant research applications, AHRC and/or ESRC will liaise with EPSRC when consulting reviewers and making funding decisions.

Linguistics

AHRC supports research into the structure, history, theory and description of language and languages. This includes the development and exploration of theories of language, the elucidation of the historical development of languages and the production of descriptions of languages or features of languages. ESRC supports research in areas of computational linguistics, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, and interdisciplinary social science research involving linguistics. Both Councils also fund research into phonetics and applied linguistics relating to the areas for which they are responsible.

Law

AHRC supports research into the content, procedures, theory, philosophy and history of the law. This includes studies of legal systems and legislation in all periods of history and in all parts of the world. ESRC supports socio-legal studies, which are concerned with the social, political and economic influences on and impact of the law and the legal system.

Philosophy

AHRC supports research in philosophy, covering all topics, methods and periods. This includes research into ethical theory and applied ethics, for example bio-ethics, professional ethics and environmental ethics. ESRC supports research into the social political and economic influences on and effects of ethical positions of institutions and individuals.

Religious Studies

AHRC supports research into religions and belief systems of all kinds, in all periods of history and in all parts of the world. This includes research into the ethics of religions and belief systems, and their application in socio-economic, scientific and technological contexts. ESRC supports research that is concerned with the social and economic influences on and the impacts of religious beliefs and groups.

Science and Technology Studies

ESRC is the primary funding body for research on innovation and the interdisciplinary study of science, technology and society. AHRC supports research into the history, law and philosophy of science, technology and medicine, as well as their interface with religion. AHRC also supports research into the interpretation and representation of, and engagement with, science, technology and medicine through art, literature, performance, museums, galleries, libraries and archives.

Social Anthropology

ESRC is the primary funding body for social anthropology, but the AHRC also supports anthropological research where the research questions and methods are significantly concerned with arts and humanities phenomena and critical, historical and practice-led approaches. This includes studies of archaeology, history, language, law, literature, the creative and performing arts and religion.

Research Councils' Statement on Societal and Economic Impact

The statement below ('Demonstrating potential impact') has been agreed across the Research Councils to provide a clear statement on their role in enhancing the economic and social wellbeing and of their expectations of those who receive Research Council funding in terms of fostering societal and economic impact.

It also provides the context, objective and rationale behind the Impact Summary and Pathways to Impact requirements on the standard grants application form. These sections require applicants to consider, as appropriate given the nature of their research, the possible societal and economic impacts of the research, the potential beneficiaries beyond academia and the mechanisms through which they will be engaged.

Excellent research without obvious or immediate impact will continued to be funded by the Research Councils and will not be disadvantaged as a result of these changes.

Demonstrating potential impact

The excellent research funded by the UK Research Councils has a huge impact on the wellbeing and economy of the UK.

Working together with our communities and other partners, we want to ensure that these impacts are effectively demonstrated and supported throughout the research lifecycle and beyond. This will add value, stimulate interest from wider stakeholders - including the general public - and, where needed, actively highlight the need for continued investment in the research base.

The onus rests with applicants to demonstrate how they will achieve this excellence with impact, bearing in mind that impacts can take many forms and be promoted in different ways.

The Research Councils describe impact as the demonstrable contribution that excellent research makes to society and the economy. Impact embraces all the extremely diverse ways in which research-related knowledge and skills benefit individuals, organisations and nations by:

• fostering global economic performance, and specifically the economic competitiveness of the United Kingdom
• increasing the effectiveness of public services and policy, and
• enhancing quality of life, health and creative output.

This accords with the Royal Charters of the Councils and with HM Treasury guidance on the appraisal of economic impact.

The AHRC is committed to the principles below, as articulated in the RCUK Expectations for Societal and Economic Impact (PDF).

The Research Councils give their funding recipients considerable flexibility and autonomy in the delivery of their research, postgraduate training, and knowledge transfer activities. This flexibility and autonomy encompasses project definition, management, collaboration, participation, promotion, and the dissemination of research outputs; this approach enables excellence with impact.

In return, the Research Councils expect those who receive funding to:

• demonstrate an awareness of the wider environment and context in which their research takes place
• demonstrate an awareness of the social and ethical implications of their research, beyond usual research conduct considerations, and take account of public attitudes towards those issues
• engage actively with the public at both the local and national levels about their research and its broader implications
• identify potential benefits and beneficiaries from the outset, and through the full life cycle of the project(s)
• maintain professional networks that extend beyond their own discipline and research community
• publish results widely – considering the academics, user and public audiences for research outcomes
• exploit results where appropriate, in order to secure social and economic return to the UK
• manage collaborations professionally, in order to secure maximum impact without restricting the future progression of research
• ensure that research staff and students develop research, vocational and entrepreneurial skills that are matched to the demands of their future career paths
• take responsibility for the duration, management and exploitation of data for future use
• work in partnership with the Research Councils for the benefit of the UK.

The expectations clarify the position of the Research Councils with respect to impact, rather than introducing a new approach. Many of these expectations are already incorporated into Research Council processes and guidance, for example exploitation is addressed within grant terms and conditions, and continuing professional development through the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers.

The AHRC recognises that not all research will have direct impacts, but aims to encourage researchers to maximise potential impacts where they occur. We have introduced the Impact Summary and Pathways to Impact attachment to encourage researchers to think about the potential impacts and beneficiaries of their work at the planning stage and the possible pathways through which impacts might be achieved. In doing so we expect applicants to consider what is reasonable and expected for research of the nature they are proposing.

The nature of your research may mean that identifying potential impacts or beneficiaries outside academia is not straightforward at the time of application. Where this is the case you should explain the reasons in your Impact Summary. The amount of information provided in the Pathways to Impact will therefore depend on the nature of the project, but you must complete this and the other sections in order to submit your application. Excellent research without obvious or immediate impact will continue to be funded by the AHRC and will not be disadvantaged as a result of the introduction of these sections to applications.

For more information on Pathways to Impact, please see the RCUK website.

The following attachments are required for the Research Grants Scheme both standard and early career routes (unless stated as optional).

• Case for Support
• CV
• Publication lists
• Visual evidence (optional)
• Data Management Plan
• Justification of resources
• Pathways to Impact
• International Co-Investigator Head of Dept Statement (if applicable)

Naming conventions

It is recommended that you use naming conventions for all attachments, as this will make it easier for peer reviewers and staff to identify documents. The recommended standard is listed below under each attachment type.

If your proposal includes an international co-investigator, their institution must submit a Head of Department Statement. This statement must include the following information:

• What the international co-investigator is bringing to the project and why they are best placed to conduct the research
• How they will deliver the project's objectives
• How their institution will support them during the lifetime of the project
• Assurances that their contract will be in place for the duration of the project

Naming convention: [PI Surname] CoI HoD

The Pathways to Impact attachment is your opportunity to describe in more detail how the potential impacts of the research beyond academia, as outlined in the Impact Summary, will be realised. Taking into account what is reasonable and appropriate given the nature of the research you propose to conduct, you are asked to describe how the proposed research will be managed to engage any users and beneficiaries that have been identified, or to identify potential users and beneficiaries as the research progresses, and to increase the likelihood of achieving impacts. In presenting your plans, you should tailor and target your impact activities to ensure that they are relevant to the specific user and beneficiary groups likely to be interested in your research and appropriate for supporting the potential research impacts outlined. Innovative and creative approaches are strongly encouraged.

When completing the attachment, you should consider (and address if appropriate) methods for communications and engagement, collaboration and exploitation. You should also detail who will be undertaking any impact activities and include any resource implications in the financial summary and in the separate Justification of Resources attachment.

The attachment should be up to 2 sides of A4 in Arial font no smaller than size 11 and normal margin sizes of 2cm must be used.

For up to date guidance on Pathways to Impact, please see the RCUK website.

This statement should be used to justify the resources required to undertake the research project.

You should:

• explain why the indicated resources are needed, taking account of the nature and complexity of the research proposed. Note, that it is not sufficient merely to list what is required
• have regard for the breakdown of resources into the summary fund headings Directly Incurred, Directly Allocated and (where appropriate) Exceptions
• where costs incurred by international co-investigators are sought, a breakdown of these costs should be fully justified under a subheading of 'International Co-Investigator Exceptions'
• in some cases, such as investigator time, use of internal facilities and shared staff costs (all likely to be Directly Allocated costs), the basis of the costing need not be justified, but the need for the resources does need justification
• try to be explicit about the need for the level of investigator time sought, bearing in mind the complexity of the research, the need to manage the project and supervise staff and any wider considerations such as collaboration, research communication or facilities usage
• not justify estates and indirect costs
• include a justification for both why items expected to be found in a department (if sought) are required for the project and why they cannot be provided from the RO's own resources (including funding from Indirect costs).

In drafting the Justification of Resources, you should ensure you identify which headings in the Summary of Resources the costs relate to, in order to make cross-referencing more transparent.

The attachment should be up to 2 sides of A4 in Arial font no smaller than size 11.

Naming convention: [PI Surname]_JoR

This statement should be used to justify the resources required to undertake the research project.

In addition to the general requirements listed below for the Justification of Resources the breakdown of costs in Research Networking should also clearly explain any additional costs sought for international participation, where applicable.

Proposals are required to justify the inclusion of any international participants itemised within the budget breakdown and outline why they are necessary for the success of the proposed activities.

You should:

• explain why the indicated resources are needed, taking account of the nature and complexity of the research proposed. Note, that it is not sufficient merely to list what is required
• have regard for the breakdown of resources into the summary fund headings Directly Incurred, Directly Allocated and (where appropriate) Exceptions
• where costs incurred by international co-investigators are sought, a breakdown of these costs should be fully justified under a subheading of 'International Co-Investigator Exceptions'
• in some cases, such as investigator time, use of internal facilities and shared staff costs (all likely to be Directly Allocated costs), the basis of the costing need not be justified, but the need for the resources does need justification
• try to be explicit about the need for the level of investigator time sought, bearing in mind the complexity of the research, the need to manage the project and supervise staff and any wider considerations such as collaboration, research communication or facilities usage
• not justify estates and indirect costs
• include a justification for both why items expected to be found in a department (if sought) are required for the project and why they cannot be provided from the RO's own resources (including funding from Indirect costs).

In drafting the Justification of Resources, you should ensure you identify which headings in the Summary of Resources the costs relate to, in order to make cross-referencing more transparent.

The attachment should be up to 2 sides of A4 in Arial font no smaller than size 11.

Naming convention: [PI Surname]_JoR

Naming Convention: Surname_DMP

The Data Management Plan should outline the project’s approach to managing data. It is mandatory to include for all Leadership Fellows, Research Grants and Follow on Funding applications but is not required for Research Networking. Applicants should address the below points:

1. Briefly introduce the types of data the research will create. Why did you decide to use these data types?
2. Give details on the proposed methodologies that will be used to create the data. Advise how the project team selected will be suitable for the data/digital aspects of the work, including details of how the institution’s data support teams may need to support the project
3. How will the data be stored in the short term?
   a. What backup will you have in the in-project period to ensure no data is lost?
4. How the data will be stored in the long term
   a. Where have you decided to store it, why is this appropriate?
   b. How long will it be stored for and why?
   c. Costs of storage – why are these appropriate? Costs related to long term storage will be permitted providing these are fully justified and relate to the project Full justification must be provided in Justification of Resources (JoR)
5. How the data will be shared and the value it will have to others
   a. How the data will enhance the area and how it could be used in the future?
   b. Releasing the data – advise when you will be releasing and justify if not releasing in line with AHRC guidelines of a minimum of three years. If the data will have value to different audiences, how these groups will be informed?
   c. Will the data need to be updated? Include future plans for updating if this is the case.
   d. Will the data be open or will you charge for it? Justify if charging to access the data
   e. Financial requirements of sharing – include full justification in the JoR
6. Ethical and Legal considerations
   a. Any legal and ethical considerations of collecting the data
   b. Legal and ethical considerations around releasing and storing the data – anonymity of any participants, following promises made to participants

You may wish to consult external sources of knowledge in order to provide a more fulsome data management plan. Below are some useful links to assist with creation of the plan and these can provide some guidance and pointers in conjunction with your institution’s own knowledge. You do not need to specifically reference these sources in the Data Management Plan unless you feel it is appropriate to do so.

If you are using any of the advice contained in external information you should explain this in your data management plan in order to ensure that reviewers are aware as to why you have written the plan in this way.

Data storage and sharing, including future planning for the data:

• Digital Preservation Coalition Knowledge Base
• Digital Curation Centre

Costs of preserving the data:

• 4C (Collaboration to clarify the costs of Curation)

The data management plan will be assessed by reviewers from our Academic College. The plan should be written in Arial or Times New Roman font at size 11 with normal 2cm margins and entitled Data Management Plan. The data management plan can be up to a maximum of two pages long and can include diagrams, but these must be within the 2 page limits.

By submitting the application you are confirming your institution has considered and will meet the following points listed below. Unless the proposal is inherently digital in its methodology and naturally requires the information in these points to be specified and detailed in order to furnish the application you do not need to go into any further detail explaining these points.

By submitting you are confirming that:

• The proposal has been written in line with your institution’s data management policy
• You have consulted with the institution’s data support (e.g. library services, IT department)
• The institution is able to store the data appropriately during the lifecycle of the grant, the relevant people have been consulted and this has been considered and agreed
• The institution has considered all the risks, and storage will be in line with the institution’s data management policy (provide a link to the policy if applicable)
• The institution will ensure the format/quality of the data (how will you make it as easy as possible to access the data?)
• You have consulted the relevant people in your organisation and you are aware of any IP considerations
• You have considered any data protection requirements
• You have considered the legal considerations of collecting and releasing the data and have consulted with appropriate support
• The data collection, creation, storage and dissemination will conform to the institution’s ethical policy
• We expect the Data Management Plan will be revisited each year during the award and as long as is required following the award to take into account any potential changes in (for instance) technology/IP/institutional data management policy/copyright to ensure legal compliance.

You must confirm these points via a yes/no box on the application form and we do not expect applications to be submitted if they do not comply. If you do not confirm the institution will comply with these points the proposal will be rejected.

Applications may include no more than two sides of A4 non-textual, visual evidence in support of the proposal, to illustrate the proposed aims and objectives and/or research methods.

It is not permitted to include this material to supplement or replace your CV or publications list or to illustrate previous work in any way nor should it be used to circumvent the page limit for the case for support.

Naming convention: [PI Surname] VisEv

Summary lists of publications/research outputs should be attached as separate documents for each PI and any Co-Investigators or named postdoctoral researchers. These should cover major publications/outputs in the last five years and should be no more than one side of A4 paper and in a Arial font no smaller than size 11. Normal margin sizes of 2.54cm must be used.

Brief articles, conference papers and more need not be included. You should asterisk those of particular relevance to your current research proposal.

Naming convention: Surname Initials Pubs

A summary curriculum vitae should be attached as separate documents for each Principal Investigator (PI) and any Co- Investigators, named postdoctoral researchers or named project students. These should be no more than two sides of A4 and in an Arial font no smaller than size 11. Normal margin sizes of 2.54cm must be used. CVs should include basic information about education, employment history, and academic responsibilities.

Naming convention: Surname Initials CV

• Case for Support Overview

  About the Case for Support

  Your proposal must be accompanied by a Case for Support attachment. It is extremely important that this includes the information described below and that you format the attachment as requested. Proposals containing attachments exceeding the stated limits, or not adhering to the specified format, will not be considered.

  Naming convention: [PI Surname] CfS

  Page limit

  If you choose to include footnotes or a bibliography (you are not required to do so) they must be included within the stated page limit:

  • Research Grants: 7 pages
  • Research Grants - Early Career: 7 pages*
  • Fellowships Scheme: 7 pages
  • Fellowships Scheme - Early Career: 7 pages
  • Research Networking Scheme: 4 pages
  • Follow-on Funding Scheme for Impact and Engagement: 7 pages

  *For the Research Grants - Early Career route the Statement of Eligibility does not count as part of the page limit and should be written on a separate page.

  Typeface and font size

  Your Case for Support should be in a standard 'Arial' or 'Times New Roman' font and size 11 or higher and normal margin sizes of 2cm must be used. Scheme specific guidance on what should be included in the Case for Support is contained in Funding Opportunities section.

  If the Case for Support has been submitted to us incorrectly or breaks the rules in some way the proposal will be rejected AHRC. This will be rejected prior to peer review and/or the panel meeting and as such will be eligible to be resubmitted to us with changes made; please see section 6.3 of this guide for full details of our resubmission policy.

  Style and focus

  While you should aim to make the Case for Support as concise, specific and clear as possible, the work to be undertaken should nonetheless be fully explained, as failure to provide adequate detail on any aspects may seriously prejudice your application.

  In short, you are advised to focus your application and to provide sufficient evidence to enable members of the Peer Review College and panellists to reach a considered judgement as to the quality of your proposal, its significance, its feasibility and value for money.

  Resubmission

  If your application is an invited resubmission (one that has been assessed via the peer review/meetings process and following peer review has been invited to resubmit to the scheme), you should ensure that any changes you make are integrated into the revised Case for Support, so that it can be reviewed on its own merits either by a reviewer who considered the previous proposal or by a reviewer looking at the proposal for the first time.

  Required Case for Support headings

  You should describe your proposed project/programme of research using the required headings for your scheme, which can be found for each scheme using the links below:

  • Research Grants
  • Research Grants - Early Career
  • Fellowships Scheme
  • Fellowships Scheme - Early Career
  • Follow-on-Funding for Impact and Engagement
  • Research Networking

• Research Grants – Case for Support headings to be used

  • Highlight notice (if applicable)
  • Research questions or problems
  • Research context
  • Research methods
  • Project management
  • Dissemination

  A maximum of 7 sides of A4 are permitted for the Case for Support

  Highlight notice (if applicable)

  If applying for funding under a highlight notice, please specify which one you are addressing and how you envisage your research contributing towards it. Full details should also be given regarding who will be involved in the project, including any collaborative partners.

  Research questions or problems

  You should describe clearly the research questions, issues or problems that you intend to address. What are the issues that you will be exploring in the course of your research?

  Research context

  You should describe the research context for your project/programme of work. Why is it important that these questions or issues are explored? What other research is being or has been conducted in this area? What contribution will your project make to improving, enhancing, or developing creativity, insights, knowledge or understanding in your chosen area of study? To whom will the outcomes of your research be of particular interest?

  Research methods

  What research methods will you be using to address the questions or issues that you have set yourself, or solve the problems you have identified, or to explore the matters you intend to investigate? Why have you chosen these methods? Why are they the best way to answer the research questions or problems you have identified? What will be your role? If there are other people involved, what will their roles be and why are they the appropriate people to be involved?

  In describing your research methods it is not sufficient to state, for example, that you intend to visit a particular archive, or an exhibition abroad. You must provide adequate details of sources to be consulted, and you should state briefly what kinds of material you will be consulting, why they are relevant to your programme of research, and how you will interrogate them.

  Depending on the approach you are using throughout your research, you may also need to explain clearly the creative and/or performance aspects of the work, explain how you will develop a new process, product or tool, or provide details on who you have consulted or will be involved in the process of research.

  Under the Research Methods heading you should also outline how any copyright or intellectual property issues relating to the project and the production of any outputs will be addressed.

  Project management

  How will the project be managed? What will be the roles of the members of staff involved (including you and, if applicable, any Co-Investigator(s), any research assistants and/or PhD project students)?

  What is the timetable for the project? Does it include appropriate milestones and is it realistic? When will the outputs of the project be completed? How will you ensure that they meet the needs of your audience? Can the costs be justified? How will you ensure good value for money?

  The project management section should also include the management of the technical aspects of the projects, if applicable. It should be clear what the milestones for the completion of this element and the work should incorporated into the timetable for the whole project. The project management of the technical aspects of the project should include an assessment of risk in relation to the complexity and delivery of the project.

  If a postdoctoral researcher is to be employed, you should state clearly the nature of the work they will be undertaking, and describe clearly the working relationships that are envisaged between all the members of the research team. You should describe fully the arrangements for supervising and managing the research assistant. If the researcher is unknown you should state the skills and qualifications sought.

  Similarly, if the project involves a visit to or a secondment from a member of staff from another organisation, you must state clearly what work they will pursue and describe the working relationships envisaged with other members of the team.

  In terms of supporting the research staff funded on the project, you should clearly outline the development opportunities which the project will make available. These should include opportunities both in relation to research expertise, and wider opportunities, for example, in connection with the activities proposed in the Pathways to Impact statement.

  The AHRC is one of the signatories of the RCUK Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers.

  Dissemination

  Information under this heading should build on the details given in the Academic Beneficiaries and Impact Summary sections of the Je-S form.

  Please provide examples of the kinds of outputs you propose to produce during the award and their proposed focus. Please explain further how the research will benefit other researchers in the field and – where relevant – academic beneficiaries in other disciplines.

  How do you propose to maximise the value of the proposed research outputs? You should cross refer here to the separate attachment, ‘Pathways to Impact’.

• Research Grants Early Career – Case for Support headings to be used

  • Highlight notice (if applicable)
  • Research questions or problems
  • Research context
  • Research methods
  • Project management
  • Dissemination
  • Statement of Eligibility

  A maximum of 7 sides of A4 are permitted for the Case for Support plus an extra page for the Statement of Eligibility

  Highlight notice (if applicable)

  If applying for funding under a highlight notice, please specify which one you are addressing and how you envisage your research contributing towards it. Full details should also be given regarding who will be involved in the project, including any collaborative partners.

  Research questions or problems

  You should describe clearly the research questions, issues or problems that you intend to address. What are the issues that you will be exploring in the course of your research?

  Research context

  You should describe the research context for your project/programme of work. Why is it important that these questions or issues are explored? What other research is being or has been conducted in this area? What contribution will your project make to improving, enhancing, or developing creativity, insights, knowledge or understanding in your chosen area of study? To whom will the outcomes of your research be of particular interest?

  Research methods

  What research methods will you be using to address the questions or issues that you have set yourself, or solve the problems you have identified, or to explore the matters you intend to investigate? Why have you chosen these methods? Why are they the best way to answer the research questions or problems you have identified? What will be your role? If there are other people involved, what will their roles be and why are they the appropriate people to be involved?

  In describing your research methods it is not sufficient to state, for example, that you intend to visit a particular archive, or an exhibition abroad. You must provide adequate details of sources to be consulted, and you should state briefly what kinds of material you will be consulting, why they are relevant to your programme of research, and how you will interrogate them.

  Depending on the approach you are using throughout your research, you may also need to explain clearly the creative and/or performance aspects of the work, explain how you will develop a new process, product or tool, or provide details on who you have consulted or will be involved in the process of research.

  Under the Research Methods heading you should also outline how any copyright or intellectual property issues relating to the project and the production of any outputs will be addressed.

  Project management

  How will the project be managed? What will be the roles of the members of staff involved (including you and, if applicable, any Co-Investigator(s), any research assistants and/or PhD project students)?

  What is the timetable for the project? Does it include appropriate milestones and is it realistic? When will the outputs of the project be completed? How will you ensure that they meet the needs of your audience? Can the costs be justified? How will you ensure good value for money?

  The project management section should also include the management of the technical aspects of the projects. It should be clear what the milestones for the completion of this element and the work should incorporated into the timetable for the whole project. The project management of the technical aspects of the project should include an assessment of risk in relation to the complexity and delivery of the project.

  If a postdoctoral researcher is to be employed, you should state clearly the nature of the work they will be undertaking, and describe clearly the working relationships that are envisaged between all the members of the research team. You should describe fully the arrangements for supervising and managing the research assistant. If the researcher is unknown you should state the skills and qualifications sought.

  Similarly, if the project involves a visit to or a secondment from a member of staff from another organisation, you must state clearly what work they will pursue and describe the working relationships envisaged with other members of the team.

  In terms of supporting the research staff funded on the project, you should clearly outline the development opportunities which the project will make available. These should include opportunities both in relation to research expertise, and wider opportunities, for example, in connection with the activities proposed in the Pathways to Impact statement.

  The AHRC is one of the signatories of the RCUK Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers.

  Dissemination

  Information under this heading should build on the details given in the Academic Beneficiaries and Impact Summary sections of the Je-S form.

  Please provide examples of the kinds of outputs you propose to produce during the award and their proposed focus. Please explain further how the research will benefit other researchers in the field and – where relevant – academic beneficiaries in other disciplines.

  How do you propose to maximise the value of the proposed research outputs? You should cross refer here to the separate attachment, ‘Pathways to Impact’.

  Statement of Eligibility

  You should briefly explain how you meet the eligibility criteria for the early career route and this should be included within an extra page in the Case for Support. In addition to the criteria outlined in Eligibility you must have not already been a Principal Applicant/Investigator on an AHRC funded research grant, large grant or Follow-on Funding grant.

• Leadership Fellows – Case for Support headings to be used

  • Highlight notice (if applicable)
  • Research questions or problems
  • Research context
  • Research methods
  • Leadership Development Plan
  • Project management
  • Dissemination

  A maximum of 7 sides of A4 are permitted for the Case for Support

  Highlight notice (if applicable)

  If applying for funding under a highlight notice, please specify which one you are addressing and how you envisage your research contributing towards it. Full details should also be given regarding who will be involved in the project, including any collaborative partners.

  Research questions or problems

  You should describe clearly the research questions, issues or problems that you intend to address. What are the issues that you will be exploring in the course of your research?

  Research context

  You should describe the research context for your project/programme of work. Why is it important that these questions or issues are explored? What other research is being or has been conducted in this area? What contribution will your project make to improving, enhancing, or developing creativity, insights, knowledge or understanding in your chosen area of study? To whom will the outcomes of your research be of particular interest?

  Research methods

  What research methods will you be using to address the questions or issues that you have set yourself, or solve the problems you have identified, or to explore the matters you intend to investigate? Why have you chosen these methods? Why are they the best way to answer the research questions or problems you have identified? What will be your role? If there are other people involved, what will their roles be and why are they the appropriate people to be involved?

  In describing your research methods it is not sufficient to state, for example, that you intend to visit a particular archive, or an exhibition abroad. You must provide adequate details of sources to be consulted, and you should state briefly what kinds of material you will be consulting, why they are relevant to your programme of research, and how you will interrogate them.

  Depending on the approach you are using throughout your research, you may also need to explain clearly the creative and/or performance aspects of the work, explain how you will develop a new process, product or tool, or provide details on who you have consulted or will be involved in the process of research.

  Under the Research Methods heading you should also outline how any copyright or intellectual property issues relating to the project and the production of any outputs will be addressed.

  Leaderships Development Plans (Fellowships scheme only)

  This section of the Case for Support should include details of your proposed leadership activities, and an explanation of why these activities are appropriate to exercising research leadership in your field. You should make clear how these activities enhance the transformational potential of the research and its broader influence and importance. A sense of leadership will need to be Please refer to Research and Leadership Activities for further details on leadership requirements and information about ensuring leadership is considered throughout the proposal.

  Project management

  How will the project be managed? What will be the roles of the members of staff involved (including you and, if applicable, any Co-Investigator(s), any research assistants and/or PhD project students)?

  What is the timetable for the project? Does it include appropriate milestones and is it realistic? When will the outputs of the project be completed? How will you ensure that they meet the needs of your audience? Can the costs be justified? How will you ensure good value for money?

  The project management section should also include the management of the technical aspects of the projects. It should be clear what the milestones for the completion of this element and the work should incorporated into the timetable for the whole project. The project management of the technical aspects of the project should include an assessment of risk in relation to the complexity and delivery of the project.

  If a postdoctoral researcher is to be employed, you should state clearly the nature of the work they will be undertaking, and describe clearly the working relationships that are envisaged between all the members of the research team. You should describe fully the arrangements for supervising and managing the research assistant. If the researcher is unknown you should state the skills and qualifications sought.

  Similarly, if the project involves a visit to or a secondment from a member of staff from another organisation, you must state clearly what work they will pursue and describe the working relationships envisaged with other members of the team.

  In terms of supporting the research staff funded on the project, you should clearly outline the development opportunities which the project will make available. These should include opportunities both in relation to research expertise, and wider opportunities, for example, in connection with the activities proposed in the Pathways to Impact statement.

  The AHRC is one of the signatories of the RCUK Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers.

  Dissemination

  Information under this heading should build on the details given in the Academic Beneficiaries and Impact Summary sections of the Je-S form.

  Please provide examples of the kinds of outputs you propose to produce during the award and their proposed focus. Please explain further how the research will benefit other researchers in the field and – where relevant – academic beneficiaries in other disciplines.

  How do you propose to maximise the value of the proposed research outputs? You should cross refer here to the separate attachment, ‘Pathways to Impact’.

• Leadership Fellows Early Career – Case for Support headings to be used

  • Highlight notice (if applicable)
  • Research questions or problems
  • Research context
  • Research methods
  • Leadership Development Plan
  • Project management
  • Dissemination
  • Statement of Eligibility

  A maximum of 7 sides of A4 are permitted for the Case for Support plus an extra page for the Statement of Eligibility

  Highlight notice (if applicable)

  If applying for funding under a highlight notice, please specify which one you are addressing and how you envisage your research contributing towards it. Full details should also be given regarding who will be involved in the project, including any collaborative partners.

  Research questions or problems

  You should describe clearly the research questions, issues or problems that you intend to address. What are the issues that you will be exploring in the course of your research?

  Research context

  You should describe the research context for your project/programme of work. Why is it important that these questions or issues are explored? What other research is being or has been conducted in this area? What contribution will your project make to improving, enhancing, or developing creativity, insights, knowledge or understanding in your chosen area of study? To whom will the outcomes of your research be of particular interest?

  Research methods

  What research methods will you be using to address the questions or issues that you have set yourself, or solve the problems you have identified, or to explore the matters you intend to investigate? Why have you chosen these methods? Why are they the best way to answer the research questions or problems you have identified? What will be your role? If there are other people involved, what will their roles be and why are they the appropriate people to be involved?

  In describing your research methods it is not sufficient to state, for example, that you intend to visit a particular archive, or an exhibition abroad. You must provide adequate details of sources to be consulted, and you should state briefly what kinds of material you will be consulting, why they are relevant to your programme of research, and how you will interrogate them.

  Depending on the approach you are using throughout your research, you may also need to explain clearly the creative and/or performance aspects of the work, explain how you will develop a new process, product or tool, or provide details on who you have consulted or will be involved in the process of research.

  Under the Research Methods heading you should also outline how any copyright or intellectual property issues relating to the project and the production of any outputs will be addressed.

  Leaderships Development Plans (Fellowships scheme only)

  This section of the Case for Support should include details of your proposed leadership activities, and an explanation of why these activities are appropriate to exercising research leadership in your field. You should make clear how these activities enhance the transformational potential of the research and its broader influence and importance. A sense of leadership will need to be Please refer to Research and Leadership Activities for further details on leadership requirements and information about ensuring leadership is considered throughout the proposal. Please see the Fellowships section of the Guide for more information regarding this heading.

  Project management

  How will the project be managed? What will be the roles of the members of staff involved (including you and, if applicable, any Co-Investigator(s), any research assistants and/or PhD project students)?

  What is the timetable for the project? Does it include appropriate milestones and is it realistic? When will the outputs of the project be completed? How will you ensure that they meet the needs of your audience? Can the costs be justified? How will you ensure good value for money?

  The project management section should also include the management of the technical aspects of the projects. It should be clear what the milestones for the completion of this element and the work should incorporated into the timetable for the whole project. The project management of the technical aspects of the project should include an assessment of risk in relation to the complexity and delivery of the project.

  If a postdoctoral researcher is to be employed, you should state clearly the nature of the work they will be undertaking, and describe clearly the working relationships that are envisaged between all the members of the research team. You should describe fully the arrangements for supervising and managing the research assistant. If the researcher is unknown you should state the skills and qualifications sought.

  Similarly, if the project involves a visit to or a secondment from a member of staff from another organisation, you must state clearly what work they will pursue and describe the working relationships envisaged with other members of the team.

  In terms of supporting the research staff funded on the project, you should clearly outline the development opportunities which the project will make available. These should include opportunities both in relation to research expertise, and wider opportunities, for example, in connection with the activities proposed in the Pathways to Impact statement.

  The AHRC is one of the signatories of the RCUK Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers.

  Dissemination

  Information under this heading should build on the details given in the Academic Beneficiaries and Impact Summary sections of the Je-S form.

  Please provide examples of the kinds of outputs you propose to produce during the award and their proposed focus. Please explain further how the research will benefit other researchers in the field and – where relevant – academic beneficiaries in other disciplines.

  How do you propose to maximise the value of the proposed research outputs? You should cross refer here to the separate attachment, ‘Pathways to Impact’.

  Statement of Eligibility

  You should briefly explain how you meet the eligibility criteria for the early career route and this should be included within an extra page in the Case for Support. In addition to the criteria outlined in Eligibility you must have not already been a Principal Applicant/Investigator on an AHRC funded research grant, large grant or Follow-on Funding grant.

• Research Networking – Case for Support headings to be used

  You must outline clearly the rationale for the activities, approach and the research context in which they will operate by answering the following questions:

  • What is the central theme of the proposed activity?
  • Why is it important that this theme be explored?
  • What is new and novel about the network?
  • How will the questions be addressed?
  • How will the proposed activities generate genuine and novel interaction across boundaries and so lead to advances in understanding?

  You should also give details regarding the aims and objectives, the timetable for any activities proposed, proposed participants and key speakers, and plans for management and co-ordination, including the membership of any proposed advisory group or steering committee.

  Provided that you meet the eligibility criteria, additional participation from those in other organisations can be as broad as is needed to achieve the aims of the networking (within the budget available), and additional members can be brought in during the course of the award. To meet the scheme's intention of crossing boundaries, activities of participants from beyond the academic community is encouraged. As well as any named participants, an indication of the subject and sector interests to be represented should be provided.

  Please use the headings below for your Case for Support.

  • Rationale and research context
  • Aims and objectives
  • Timetable of activities
  • Key speakers or participants
  • Management and co-ordination
  • Dissemination
  • Justification of Resources Attachment

  A maximum of 4 sides of A4 are permitted for the Case for Support

The following attachments are required for Leadership Fellows (unless stated as optional).

• Case for Support
• CV
• Publication lists
• Visual evidence (optional)
• Data Management Plan
• Justification of resources
• Pathways to Impact
• Work plan
• Head of Department statement

The following attachments are required for Leadership fellows - Early Career (unless stated as optional).

• Case for Support
• CV
• Publication lists
• Visual evidence (optional)
• Data Management Plan
• Justification of resources
• Pathways to Impact
• Work plan
• Head of Department statement

The following attachments are required for the Follow-on Funding Scheme (unless stated as optional).

• Case for Support
• CV
• Publication lists
• Visual evidence (optional)
• Data Management Plan
• Justification of resources
• International Co-Investigator Head of Dept Statement (if applicable)

Naming conventions

It is recommended that you use naming conventions for all attachments, as this will make it easier for peer reviewers and staff to identify documents. The recommended standard is listed below under each attachment type.

The following attachments are required for the Research Networking Scheme (unless stated as optional).

• Case for Support
• CV
• Publication lists
• Visual evidence (optional)
• Justification of resources
• Pathways to Impact
• International Co-Investigator Head of Dept Statement (if applicable)

Naming conventions

It is recommended that you use naming conventions for all attachments, as this will make it easier for peer reviewers and staff to identify documents. The recommended standard is listed below under each attachment type.

A Workplan attachment is required for all Leadership Fellows applications. It must be used to outline your timetable for the project (both research and leadership activities) and to indicate the work to be undertaken in each month of the award. The Work plan should clearly outline your time commitment for each phase of the Fellowship. The Work plan should be a maximum of one page of A4 in length and in an Arial font no smaller than size 11.

Naming Convention: [PI Surname]_WorkPlan

A statement is required from the Head of Department or other relevant Senior Manager for Leadership Fellows applications (if you are the Head of Department, then the statement should be completed by your line manager).

The Head of Department should briefly outline the process by which they have identified you to be a research leader, or potential future research leader, suitable to apply for a Fellowship. It should outline previous institutional support for you and detail the programme of leadership support that will be undertaken during and after the Fellowship period. The support should be appropriate to your career stage and nature of your research but could include, for example, various combinations of:

• allocation of a place on a leadership development programme or other training and development support aimed at developing leadership capabilities
• significant additional support for research time/sabbaticals to enable the Fellow to enhance their research leadership
• awarding of institutional research development funding to support development of the applicant’s research profile
• creation of research groups or development of departmental/institutional research strategies in relation to the applicant’s research area
• supporting knowledge exchange or partnership activities involving the applicant, or providing a platform for the Fellow to take part in high profile public engagement activities
• support for networking activities, inter-disciplinary or international collaborations
• provision of specialist technical support for the Fellow’s research and/or to sustain its legacy
• nominations for high profile prizes, awards or positions in the field.

The statement should indicate how the individual’s needs have been identified and supported, and should distinguish between generic support available for leadership development available in the institution, and specific support for you that has been, and will be provided.

The provision of institutional support is an important assessment criterion under this scheme. Poorly supported applications may not be accepted and any that are assessed as merely meeting minimum requirements are unlikely to be funded.

If you are committing less than 100 per cent of your normal contracted working time to the Fellowship, the Head of Department should outline any teaching, examining and administrative commitments that will continue alongside the award. Fellows must be released from duties for the time specified and must not be expected to take on additional work within the institution once an award has started.

The Head of Department Statement should be a maximum of two sides of A4 in length and in an Arial font no smaller than size 11. It should be attached to the Je-S proposal by the approver/submitter at the Research Organisation rather than by the applicant.

Naming Convention: [PI Surname]_WorkPlan

For the Leadership Fellows Early Career route a Mentor Statement must be provided. Research Organisations are required to provide mentoring support for early career researchers for the duration of the Fellowship. An appropriate mentor is regarded as a key component in the development of an early career researcher’s leadership role in their field, helping them to understand the dynamics and sensitivities of research leadership.

This single attachment should include both:

• details of the named mentor, a specified time commitment to mentoring, a clear programme of meetings and statement of contact time with the Fellow, and commitment to a training and development plan
• a summary curriculum vitae for the proposed mentor. The CV should include basic information about education, employment history and academic responsibilities
• The statement should also demonstrate how the mentor activity fits in with the institutional support outlined in the Head of Department statement
• The Mentor Statement, including the summary CV, should be a maximum of two sides of A4 in length and in an Arial font no smaller than size 11. It should be attached to the Je-S proposal by the approver/submitter at the Research Organisation rather than by the applicant.

Naming Convention: [PI Surname]_MentorStmt

Each Project Partner must provide a Project Partner letter of support, of no more than 2 sides of A4 or equivalent on headed paper or by email. Emails must be included as an attachment to the grant on submission via Je-S. The letter or email should be written when the proposal is being prepared and should be targeted specifically to the project, it must therefore be dated within 6 months of the date of submission of the proposal. To provide assurance that the project partner has authorised the proposed contribution or commitment the letter or email should be signed by the named contact, stating the capacity in which they are providing the sign off. Project Partner letters of support that merely indicate that an organisation is interested in the research are not permitted. The individual named as contact for the Project Partner organisation cannot also be named as staff, for example Co-Investigator on a grant proposal.

A well written project partner letter of support will confirm the organisation’s commitment to the proposed project by articulating the benefits of the collaboration, its relevance and potential impact. The Project Partner letter or email should also, identify the value, relevance and possible benefits of the proposed work to the partner, the period of support, the full nature of the collaboration/support and how the partner will provide added value. Where relevant to the project, details should be provided of the projected market size, customers and sales and how the organisation will commercialise the technology beyond the project. Project Partner contributions, whether in cash or in kind, should be explained in detail in the project partner letter of support. Detail of how this support relates to the proposal as a whole should be included in the case for support and in the Pathways to Impact attachment.

The project partners should not submit any other ordinary letters of support unless in exceptional cases and where this has been agreed to with the research council. The Research councils reserve the right to remove all other letters of support from the proposal. Applicants should refer to the research council or call guidance for additional information regarding acceptable letters of support.

For AHRC-FAPESP MoU Research Grants the UK applicant will need to attach a Letter of Support from the Brazilian Institution agreeing to the Brazilian Partner’s involvement. The document should be attached to the application using the attachment type: Project Partner Letter of Support.

All letters should be signed, dated and on headed paper. Project Partner Letters of Support must be sent directly to the Research Organisation who should submit the letter to AHRC via Je-S at the same time as the rest of the application. The project partner must also be listed on the application form along with their costs, please see the section 'Project Partners and Collaborating Organisations' for further details.

Notification of the outcome

The AHRC is not able to notify you of the outcome of your proposal by telephone. All outcome notifications are sent electronically to the email address shown on your Je-S record.

If you are unsuccessful, you will receive an email advising that you have not been offered an award, and indicating the final outcome your proposal received. The AHRC is unable to provide information on why your proposal was unsuccessful.

Applicants are advised that under no circumstances should they contact peer review panel members to discuss individual proposals, meeting details, or outcomes.

Offer acceptance and payment

If you are successful, you will receive a notification email and the Research Organisation (RO) will receive Offer Documentation which will detail the overall cash limit of the award.

This will also include the Terms and Conditions of the Award, a Budget Summary and the details of the Acceptance Form Process. The RO is required to complete "The Start Confirmation" process only after the grant has started. The Start Confirmation, which will be sent out on completion of the Acceptance Form, needs to be completed before the Research Council will release funds for an award. Payments will be made direct to the institution, and will be individually identified. The AHRC will make payments four times a year to each lead RO.

The AHRC, on advice from peer reviewers or panels, or if items are not allowed under the terms of the AHRC scheme may remove items if they are not justified.

The AHRC's peer reviewers, on occasion, may revise the level of staff resources on the project (Research Grants routes). Under the arrangements for the full economic costing of Research Council grants, this reduction has an impact on the estates and indirect cost figures that have been provided. In such circumstances the AHRC will contact the research organisation and request that you provide revised figures for these two budget headings. The research organisation will have ten working days to provide these revised figures.

The amount awarded may be different from the sum you sought as it may include an element for indexation. The sum may also differ if the Council considers that a lower level of funding to the one you sought is more appropriate. You will be notified of any amendments made for this reason.

For details on the complaints procedure, please refer to the AHRC's Complaints procedure  Complaints procedure.

The AHRC has clarified its rules on resubmissions. An application will normally be rejected prior to review stage (termed ‘Office Reject’ in Je-S Status Reporting), because of a failure to adhere to AHRC’s scheme or call rules. Applicants rejected in this way will be informed of the reasons why their application was rejected and that they are permitted to submit the application again. The notification used in such rejections can be found on our website here.

If the application is rejected at any further point in the peer review process (either following the review stage or the meeting stage) applicants will not be allowed to resubmit the same, or substantively similar, proposal to the same scheme unless explicitly invited to do so in the outcome notification of the proposal. Such invitations will only be given in very particular circumstances. For information, the notifications used in our rejection notification emails are listed on our website here.

Invited resubmissions will be assessed in the usual way in competition with all other proposals. The original notification will advise clearly that the application has been rejected following review or meeting stage and any issues the applicant may need to consider in submitting the proposal again. If the same or similar application to one which was previously rejected following the review stage or the meeting stage is received but which was not an invited resubmission, it will be rejected.

Assessment process

The AHRC is committed to assessment by process of peer review. At the point of submission, each proposal will be assessed on the following criteria:

• all applicants and named staff must be eligible under the scheme requirements
• the proposal must meet the aims and criteria of the scheme to which it has been submitted
• all application documents must be eligible under the scheme requirements.

Proposals which do not meet these criteria will be rejected with feedback on why it could not proceed.

The Peer Review College

All proposals will be considered where possible, by a minimum of two members of the AHRC's Peer Review College. A complete list of Peer Review College members is available on our website. The Peer Review College members will provide the AHRC with graded reviews.

The AHRC reserves the right to seek reviews from specialists who are not current members of the Peer Review College, if suitable College members are not available or where such peer review input is required as part of agreements with other funding bodies. Reviews may be sought from specialists within the UK or abroad.

All peer reviews are subject to a quality check. Reviews deemed by the AHRC to be of insufficient quality will either be sent back to the reviewer for revision or rejected from the assessment process.

Confidentiality

The Research Councils operate an open peer review process, while at the same time preserving reviewer anonymity. Reviewers are required to treat proposals in confidence and keep any personally retained documentation (paper or electronic) secure. Reviewers should review in accordance with instructions given in the Je-S Helptext and should refer any questions relating to reviewing the application to the Council, and must not contact applicants. Applicants may be given the opportunity to respond to any completed reviews, the applicants' research organisation will also be given access to the anonymised review to support transparency of decision making. The Councils expect all parties to respect the roles of all involved in the peer review process.

Peer Review grading scale

The Peer Review grading scale is provided on the Peer Review grading scale page.

Sifting of proposals

Proposals will be sifted before going to moderating panel based on the following principles:

• the AHRC will reject a proposal upon submission where the proposal does not meet the published eligibility criteria; either relating to documentation requirements or where it does not meet the aims or criteria of the scheme to which it has been submitted
• the AHRC will sift proposals against quality criteria, solely on the basis of information supplied by an AHRC peer review process.

The sifting process

Sift stage 1 - Each proposal is assessed on the following criteria, in reference to eligibility and assessment requirements:

• all application documents must be eligible under the scheme requirements
• all applicants and named staff must be eligible under the scheme requirements
• the proposal must meet the aims and criteria of the scheme to which it has been submitted.

Sift stage 2 - A sifting decision is made based on the overall confidence levels and grades given by the peer review process. A proposal is rejected if it receives two or more reviews that give the proposal an un-fundable grade.

A grade is considered ‘un-fundable’ where it is described as either Not Recommended for Funding or Not Suitable for Funding (grades 1 – 3). If a proposal is rejected at sift stage 2 it will not be made available for PI Response. A few weeks after the sift decision the reviews will however be made available to the PI and RO via Je-S for information purposes.

Principal Investigator Response

For all schemes except the Research Networking scheme, the applicant will be given the right of reply to the reviews received. The Principal Investigator (PI) response allows applicants to correct any factual errors or conceptual misunderstandings, or to respond to any queries highlighted in the comments from the peer reviewers.

It is not intended to be an opportunity to change or re-constitute a proposal in the light of the reviewers' comments. You are not obliged to submit a response, but it is recommended that you do so as responses from applicants are forwarded to the peer review panel(s) and are taken into account in the grading and prioritisation of proposals.

For schemes which operate with open deadlines, we will not be able to provide you with exact dates of when we will contact you for the PI response. You will be contacted once the reviews have been obtained and you will be sent an e-mail which will detail the size limit and deadline that apply to your PI response.

These vary according to the scheme and the number of reviews you have received so it is vital to read the email carefully. Please note that the AHRC will not chase for late PI Responses and it is the PI’s responsibility to ensure they submit the PI Response within the period allowed. If your response is not received within the period stated, then your application will proceed without it.

Peer Review panels

Non-standing Peer Review Panels are convened ad hoc from the Peer Review College membership.

In selecting panel members, we will aim to achieve a balance in terms of gender, ethnicity, institution and regional distribution, and to achieve a range of expertise which broadly reflects that of the applicant population.

The proposal, peer reviews, and the PI’s response to these reviews will be considered individually by members of the peer review panel and then discussed at the panel meeting.

The peer review panel will determine a final grade for each application and will rank proposals in order of priority for funding. The panel will consider only the expert peer reviews and the PI’s response to these reviews to reach its decisions. Final funding decisions will rest with the AHRC.

Peer review panel members are not permitted to discuss with applicants the content of any proposals they have reviewed, either during or after the assessment process.

Unless otherwise stated in the scheme-specific guidance in the Research funding section, the following criteria are taken into account by the peer reviewers when assessing your proposal.

Quality and importance

• the extent to which the proposal meets the specific aims of the scheme to which you are applying
• the significance and importance of the project, and of the contribution it will make, if successful, to enhancing or developing creativity, insights, knowledge or understanding of the area to be studied in a national or international context
• the extent to which the research questions, issues or problems that will be addressed in the course of the research are defined and their importance and appropriateness specified
• the appropriateness of the research context and specification of why it is important that these particular questions, issues or problems are addressed. The extent to which other current research conducted in this area has been considered, and the range of audiences that might be targeted
• the appropriateness, effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed research methods and/or approach.

People

• The quality and importance of your work to date
• your ability to monitor the project and bring it to completion as demonstrated in the application
• the appropriateness of the level and balance (in terms of time and seniority) of the proposed staffing on the project, and the extent to which opportunities will be made available for less experienced researchers
• whether the other named participants have the appropriate experience and expertise to deliver the project
• The suitability of the opportunities which the project will make available to support the development of the research staff on the project

Management of the project

• Whether the lines of responsibility and accountability are clearly articulated
• whether a realistic timetable, incorporating milestones, is presented which will achieve the project’s aims and objectives within the proposed timescale
• the extent to which you have understood the amount of work to be involved, allocated sufficient time and resources to achieving each aspect.

Data Management

• does the information in the DMP seem appropriate for the research project being proposed? Would you expect to see anything different in your view?
• will the DMP enable the project’s data creation, outputs and storage needs in your opinion?
• are there any other areas that need more attention?
• overall - does the plan for data seem feasible, sensible, appropriate and valid?

Value for money

• The extent to which the likely outcome of the research will represent value for money, and in particular the relationship between the funds that are sought and the significance and quality of the projected outcomes of the research
• whether the resources requested are reasonable in the context of the proposed research.

Outputs, dissemination, and Impact

• The appropriateness and effectiveness of the proposed dissemination methods
• the extent to which the research process is documented or recorded in a way to enable dissemination of research outcomes to the widest possible audience
• the likelihood that the outputs and outcomes of the project will be highly valued and widely exploited, both in the research community and in wider contexts where they can make a difference
• whether the plans to increase impact are appropriate and justified, given the nature of the proposed research
• whether sufficient attention has been given to who the beneficiaries of the research might be and appropriate ways to engage with them throughout the project.

You are encouraged to disseminate your research and its outcomes to as wide an audience as possible, and where appropriate to engage in communication, dissemination and exploitation activities throughout the period of the project. You should therefore specify the audiences to whom your research could be of interest, and how you propose to engage with those audiences about your research.

Although nothing debars an AHRC-supported project from aiming to charge for access to its results whether in electronic or other format, peer reviewers are encouraged to scrutinise dissemination and access strategies and to consider the extent to which the outputs that are produced by AHRC-funded projects will be utilised by the arts and humanities research community and other interested parties.

Unless otherwise stated in the scheme-specific guidance in the Research funding section, the following criteria are taken into account by the peer reviewers when assessing your proposal.

Quality and importance

• the extent to which the proposal meets the specific aims of the scheme to which you are applying
• the significance and importance of the project, and of the contribution it will make, if successful, to enhancing or developing creativity, insights, knowledge or understanding of the area to be studied in a national or international context
• the extent to which the research questions, issues or problems that will be addressed in the course of the research are defined and their importance and appropriateness specified
• the appropriateness of the research context and specification of why it is important that these particular questions, issues or problems are addressed. The extent to which other current research conducted in this area has been considered, and the range of audiences that might be targeted
• the appropriateness, effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed research methods and/or approach.

Proposed Leadership Activities

• the appropriateness of the plans for leadership development activity and their transformational potential, considering the applicant’s career stage. The extent to which the proposed activities are proactive and innovative
• The extent to which the institution has already demonstrated support for the leadership development of the proposed fellow and has outlined a clear programme of appropriate support both during the fellowship and beyond.

People

• The quality and importance of your work to date
• your ability to monitor the project and bring it to completion as demonstrated in the application
• the appropriateness of the level and balance (in terms of time and seniority) of the proposed staffing on the project, and the extent to which opportunities will be made available for less experienced researchers
• whether the other named participants have the appropriate experience and expertise to deliver the project
• The suitability of the opportunities which the project will make available to support the development of the research staff on the project
• Your ability or potential to set research agendas, lead research communities, provide intellectual leadership in your own discipline and beyond
• Your ability or potential to act as an advocate for the value and benefit of the arts and humanities to publics beyond academia
• The extent to which the proposed Fellowship would fit within relevant institutional/departmental research, career development and knowledge exchange strategies, as appropriate.

Management of the project

• Whether the lines of responsibility and accountability are clearly articulated
• whether a realistic timetable, incorporating milestones, is presented which will achieve the project’s aims and objectives within the proposed timescale
• the extent to which you have understood the amount of work to be involved, allocated sufficient time and resources to achieving each aspect

Value for money

• The extent to which the likely outcome of the research will represent value for money, and in particular the relationship between the funds that are sought and the significance and quality of the projected outcomes of the research
• whether the resources requested are reasonable in the context of the proposed research.

Outputs, dissemination, and Impact

• The appropriateness and effectiveness of the proposed dissemination methods
• the extent to which the research process is documented or recorded in a way to enable dissemination of research outcomes to the widest possible audience
• the likelihood that the outputs and outcomes of the project will be highly valued and widely exploited, both in the research community and in wider contexts where they can make a difference
• whether the plans to increase impact are appropriate and justified, given the nature of the proposed research
• whether sufficient attention has been given to who the beneficiaries of the research might be and appropriate ways to engage with them throughout the project.

You are encouraged to disseminate your research and its outcomes to as wide an audience as possible, and where appropriate to engage in communication, dissemination and exploitation activities throughout the period of the project. You should therefore specify the audiences to whom your research could be of interest, and how you propose to engage with those audiences about your research.

Although nothing debars an AHRC-supported project from aiming to charge for access to its results whether in electronic or other format, peer reviewers are encouraged to scrutinise dissemination and access strategies and to consider the extent to which the outputs that are produced by AHRC-funded projects will be utilised by the arts and humanities research community and other interested parties.

Unless otherwise stated in the scheme-specific guidance in the Research funding section, the following criteria are taken into account by the peer reviewers when assessing your proposal.

Quality and importance

• the extent to which the proposal meets the specific aims of the scheme to which you are applying
• the significance and importance of the project, and of the contribution it will make, if successful, to enhancing or developing creativity, insights, knowledge or understanding of the area to be studied in a national or international context
• the extent to which the research questions, issues or problems that will be addressed in the course of the research are defined and their importance and appropriateness specified
• the appropriateness of the research context and specification of why it is important that these particular questions, issues or problems are addressed. The extent to which other current research conducted in this area has been considered, and the range of audiences that might be targeted
• the appropriateness, effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed research methods and/or approach.

Proposed Leadership Activities

• the appropriateness of the plans for leadership development activity and their transformational potential, considering the applicant’s career stage. The extent to which the proposed activities are proactive and innovative
• The extent to which the institution has already demonstrated support for the leadership development of the proposed fellow and has outlined a clear programme of appropriate support both during the fellowship and beyond
• The relevance of the research project and leadership development activities to your career development.

People

• The quality and importance of your work to date
• your ability to monitor the project and bring it to completion as demonstrated in the application
• the appropriateness of the level and balance (in terms of time and seniority) of the proposed staffing on the project, and the extent to which opportunities will be made available for less experienced researchers
• whether the other named participants have the appropriate experience and expertise to deliver the project
• The suitability of the opportunities which the project will make available to support the development of the research staff on the project
• Your ability or potential to set research agendas, lead research communities, provide intellectual leadership in your own discipline and beyond
• Your ability or potential to act as an advocate for the value and benefit of the arts and humanities to publics beyond academia
• The extent to which the proposed Fellowship would fit within relevant institutional/departmental research, career development and knowledge exchange strategies, as appropriate.

Management of the project

• Whether the lines of responsibility and accountability are clearly articulated
• whether a realistic timetable, incorporating milestones, is presented which will achieve the project’s aims and objectives within the proposed timescale
• the extent to which you have understood the amount of work to be involved, allocated sufficient time and resources to achieving each aspect

Value for money

• The extent to which the likely outcome of the research will represent value for money, and in particular the relationship between the funds that are sought and the significance and quality of the projected outcomes of the research
• whether the resources requested are reasonable in the context of the proposed research.

Outputs, dissemination, and Impact

• The appropriateness and effectiveness of the proposed dissemination methods
• the extent to which the research process is documented or recorded in a way to enable dissemination of research outcomes to the widest possible audience
• the likelihood that the outputs and outcomes of the project will be highly valued and widely exploited, both in the research community and in wider contexts where they can make a difference
• whether the plans to increase impact are appropriate and justified, given the nature of the proposed research
• whether sufficient attention has been given to who the beneficiaries of the research might be and appropriate ways to engage with them throughout the project.

You are encouraged to disseminate your research and its outcomes to as wide an audience as possible, and where appropriate to engage in communication, dissemination and exploitation activities throughout the period of the project. You should therefore specify the audiences to whom your research could be of interest, and how you propose to engage with those audiences about your research.

Although nothing debars an AHRC-supported project from aiming to charge for access to its results whether in electronic or other format, peer reviewers are encouraged to scrutinise dissemination and access strategies and to consider the extent to which the outputs that are produced by AHRC-funded projects will be utilised by the arts and humanities research community and other interested parties.

Grade 6

An exceptional and innovative proposal meeting the highest quality and standards of knowledge exchange, active dissemination and/or public engagement which targets new audiences and is likely to lead to significant impact. It fully meets all the assessment criteria for the scheme and provides full and consistent evidence and justification for the proposal in terms of concept, design, methodology and management. It should be funded as a matter of the very highest priority.

Grade 5

An excellent and innovative proposal meeting the highest quality and standards of knowledge exchange, active dissemination and/or public engagement which targets new audiences and is likely to lead to significant impact. It fully meets all the assessment criteria for the scheme and provides full and consistent evidence and justification for the proposal in terms of concept, design, methodology and management. It should be funded as a matter of priority, but does not merit the very highest priority rating.

Grade 4

A good proposal meeting a high quality and standard of knowledge exchange, active dissemination and/or public engagement and is likely to lead to impact. It meets all the assessment criteria for the scheme, and provides good evidence and justification for the proposal in terms of concept, design, methodology and management. It is suitable for funding.

Grade 3

A satisfactory proposal in terms of the overall quality and standard of knowledge exchange, active dissemination and/or public engagement and likely to lead to some impact, which meets the assessment criteria for the scheme and provides reasonable evidence and justification for the proposal in terms of concept, design, methodology and management but which in a competitive context is not a priority. It is not recommend for funding.

Grade 2

A proposal of inconsistent quality and standard of knowledge exchange, active dissemination and/or public engagement which is unlikely to lead to any significant impact, which has some strengths, but also contains a number of major weaknesses or flaws in its concept, design, methodology and/or management. It does not meet all the assessment criteria for the scheme. It is not recommended for funding.

Grade 1

A proposal of an unsatisfactory quality and standard of knowledge exchange, active dissemination and/or public engagement which will not lead to any significant impact, which does not meet the assessment criteria for the scheme and does not provide satisfaction evidence and justification for the proposal. It is not suitable for funding.

Please note that proposals submitted once the scheme name has change to the Leadership Fellows scheme will be assessed using a slightly revised grading scale.

Grade 6

An outstanding proposal that is world-leading in all of the following: scholarship, originality, quality, and significance. It fully meets all the assessment criteria for the scheme and excels in many or all of these. A convincing case is made that the proposed Fellowship has outstanding leadership and transformational potential, commensurate with the applicant's career stage. It provides full and consistent evidence and justification for the proposal, demonstrates very strong institutional support, and management arrangements are clear and convincing. It should be funded as a matter of the very highest priority.

Grade 5

A proposal that is internationally excellent in all of the following: scholarship, originality, quality and significance. It fully meets or surpasses all the assessment criteria for the scheme. A convincing case is made that the proposed Fellowship has excellent leadership and transformational potential, commensurate with the applicant's career stage. It provides full and consistent evidence and justification for the proposal, demonstrates strong institutional support and management arrangements are clear and convincing. It should be funded as a matter of priority, but does not merit the very highest priority rating.

Grade 4

A very good proposal demonstrating high international standards of scholarship, originality, quality and significance. It meets all the assessment criteria for the scheme. A convincing case is made that the proposed Fellowship has leadership and transformational potential, commensurate with the applicant's career stage. It provides good evidence and justification for the proposal, demonstrates good institutional support and management arrangements are clear and sound. It is suitable for funding.

Grade 3

A satisfactory proposal in terms of the overall standard of scholarship and quality but which is not internationally competitive and/or does not make a fully convincing case that the proposed Fellowship has significant leadership and/or transformational potential, commensurate with the applicant's career stage, and/or which is more limited in terms of originality/innovation, significance and/or its contribution to the research field. It satisfies at least minimum requirements in relation to the assessment criteria for the scheme, provides reasonable evidence and justification for the proposal, demonstrates institutional support and management arrangement are adequate overall. In a competitive context, the proposal is not considered of sufficient priority to recommend for funding.

Grade 2

A proposal of inconsistent quality which has some strengths, innovative ideas and/or good components or dimensions, but also has significant weaknesses or flaws in one or more of the following: conceptualisation, design, methodology, management, leadership and transformational potential, collaborative activities, and/or institutional support. As a result of the flaws or weaknesses identified, the proposal is not considered to be of fundable quality. A proposal should also be graded 2 if it does not meet all the assessment criteria for the scheme. It is not recommended for funding.

Grade 1

A proposal which falls into one or more of the following categories:

• has unsatisfactory levels of originality, quality, and/or significance
• falls significantly short of meeting the assessment criteria for the scheme
• contains insufficient evidence and justification for the proposal
• displays limited potential to advance the research field
• potential outcomes or outputs do not merit the levels of funding sought
• is unconvincing in terms of its management arrangements or capacity to deliver the proposed activities
• displays inadequate institutional support
• does not make a convincing case that the proposed Fellowship had leadership and transformational potential commensurate with the applicant's career stage
• contains insufficient proposals for relevant collaborative activities

It is not suitable for funding.

Unless otherwise indicated grades awarded to proposals and their definitions are listed below.

For Leadership Fellows please see the Leadership Fellows Peer Review grading scale

For Follow on Fund please see the Follow on Fund for Impact and Engagement Peer Review grading scale

Grade 6

Work that is at the leading edge internationally, in all of the assessment criteria – scholarship, originality, quality and significance, and meets the majority of them to an exceptional level. Likely to have a significant impact on the field. The proposal’s evidence and justification are fully and consistently provided and management arrangements are clear and convincing. It should be funded as a matter of the very highest priority.

Grade 5

Work that is internationally excellent in all of the assessment criteria – scholarship, originality, quality and significance, and meets them to an excellent level. It will answer important questions in the field. The proposal’s evidence and justification are fully and consistently provided and management arrangements are clear and convincing. It should be funded as a matter of priority.

Grade 4

Work that demonstrates high international standards of scholarship, originality, quality and significance. It will advance the field of research. It meets all assessment criteria. The proposal’s evidence and justification are good and management arrangements are clear and sound. It is worthy of consideration for funding.

Grade 3

Work that is satisfactory in terms of scholarship and quality but lacking in international competitiveness. It is limited in terms of originality, innovation and significance and its contribution to the research field. It meets minimum requirements in terms of the assessment criteria and the proposal’s evidence and justification are adequate overall. In a competitive context, the proposal is not considered of sufficient priority to recommend for funding.

Grade 2

Work that is of inconsistent quality with some strengths, innovative ideas and good components, but has significant weaknesses or flaws in its conceptualisation, design, methodology and management. It is unlikely to advance the field significantly. It does not meet all scheme assessment criteria. It is not recommended for funding.

Grade 1

A proposal that has an unsatisfactory level of originality, quality and significance. It has limited potential to advance research within the field and may be unconvincing in terms of its management arrangements or capacity to deliver proposed activities, especially for the amount of funding being sought. It is unlikely to advance the field. It falls short of meeting the assessment criteria for the scheme. It is not suitable for funding.

All Scheme and Call rules and their requirements can be found either in the Research Funding Guide for Responsive Mode or in the individual Call document for Directed Mode Calls. If general AHRC rules or individual scheme rules are not adhered to the proposal may be rejected. Common errors to avoid are listed below, and this list can serve as a checklist to make sure everything is completed on submission of the proposal. Please note however the list below may not be exhaustive and is only a guide to show where common errors are made with applications.

Prior to submission if you need to clarify any queries which you may have please contact enquiries@ahrc.ac.uk for assistance.

General

• Page limits: The application’s documents must not exceed the stated lengths. On conversion to PDF and upload to Je-S please check that the page lengths have remained the same, if documents exceed stated page limits the proposal may be rejected
• Font size and margins: the font must be in Arial or a similar sans serif font, the font size must be 11 and the margins must be normal sized or the proposal may be rejected
• Required documents: An application may be rejected if a required document, stated by the Call document or Funding Guide as being required, has not been added or has some sort of error on it
• No attachments should be submitted to AHRC if they are not in the Call’s required attachments or optional attachments list. Attachments such as this may be removed if they are not eligible to be part of the scheme or the proposal may be rejected
• Documents readable: Please check all documents are readable, none are in a foreign language and none have been corrupted on conversion to PDF and upload to Je-S. Please also make sure any Track Changes have been removed and all sections of attachments are completed where appropriate. If attachments or any part of the application are unreadable in any way the proposal may be rejected.

Individual documents

Case for Support:

• Ensure the document does not exceed stated page limits
• Ensure the technical summary is filled in, even if it is to advise there will be no technical outputs
• If there are technical outputs, note this in the summary and make sure a Technical Plan is added as a separate attachment
• For Leadership Fellows make sure the Leadership Development Plan section has been added to the Case for Support

Project Partner Letter of Support

• If a Project Partner has been added to the application a Project Partner Letter of Support must be added as well. This attachment should only be used where a project partner has been added to the application and is making some sort of contribution, either in kind or monetary. Please note this is a different attachment to the Letter of Support

Letters of Support

• Should only be provided if there is a collaborating organisation (not a project partner) that is providing something essential to the project. This could be for instance where a project requires access to an Archive, a letter of support from that Archive showing they are willing to grant access and provide assistance
• Please note this is a different attachment to the Project Partner Letter of Support

CVs and Publication Lists

• Must only be added for named researchers on the grant. Extra CVs are not permitted and if added these will be removed

Justification of Resources

• Ensure that this fully explains the costs requested, especially if these are contentious (such as if items are being requested that would normally be found in a department). If costs aren’t fully explained items are liable to be removed

Costs

• Ensure all fields filled in where required (especially Estates and Indirect Costs)
• Costs are not being provided by the RO to bring the proposal under the scheme limits or make the grant ‘cheaper’
• The hours of staff members per week charged to the grant is the same as the hours per week that will actually be worked

Start date

• The start date must adhere to the Call requirements as listed by the Research Funding Guide or the Call document

Classification of proposals

• Make sure the proposal is classified correctly and that it is an AHRC discipline. Where there may be a query Research Organisations can check with AHRC beforehand
• When inputting the proposal in Je-S make sure the parent and primary lower classifications are both AHRC disciplines and an incorrect lower classification has not been selected by mistake
• If an application is multi-disciplinary include other Councils’ classifications, but if the proposal is submitted to AHRC these should not be the primary classification and should make up less than 50% of overall proposal’s remit

Common errors with proposals to individual Calls

Leadership Fellows

• Ensure the Head of Department Statement letter is submitted and this underlines the commitment from the RO to the project
• Ensure the Leadership Development Plan is added as part of the Case for Support
• If the proposal is an Early Career application make sure that a Mentor Statement is included with the application

Follow-on-Funding

• Ensure the fit of the proposal to the scheme is correct and that the proposal is aimed at receiving funding for impact and engagement
• The scheme is not designed for applications looking for funding to do further research

Research Networking

• If the proposal has an international co-investigator this should be clearly evidenced and costs should go into the 'Exceptions' heading
• In individual projects, the international element can be more than £15k, but the UK element can be no more than £30k. So for instance a project could have an international element of £20k and a UK element of £25k if this was appropriate, but if the international element was less than £15k (e.g. £12k for example) you could not have the UK element at £33k – the total costs allowed in this instance would be £42k (£12k international and maximum £30k UK element)

If appropriate, the project may be delivered in collaboration with one or more non-academic partner organisations. Both UK and International organisations are eligible and must be existing organisations, although there is no minimum period stipulated for which they must have been operating. When collaborating with international partners you must demonstrate that the UK research is at the international leading edge.

Please note that the Impact Summary will be published on publicly available websites to demonstrate potential impact of Research Council funded research and so should not include any confidential information. The impact summary is a section to complete in the proposal form.

The Impact summary asks you to address two questions: Who might benefit from the research? How might they benefit?

In this section, you are asked to consider users and beneficiaries of the research who are outside the academic research community (they can be individuals, specific organisations or groups/sectors), for example:

• policy-makers, governments (at local, regional, devolved, national, and/or trans-national levels)
• public sector agencies or bodies
• international organisations
• the commercial/private sector
• professional or practitioner groups
• the third sector, including charities, museums and galleries, organisations, and individuals in the creative and performing arts
• the media
• local communities or the wider public in general.

The Impact Summary will be published to demonstrate potential impact of Research Council funded research and so should not include any confidential information.

The Academic Beneficiaries section asks you to summarise how your research will benefit other researchers in your field and – where relevant – academic beneficiaries in other disciplines. Academic Beneficiaries is a section to complete within the proposal form.

Academic communication and dissemination plans should be elaborated further in your Case for Support.

• Deadlines Overview

  Deadlines

  The schemes listed in this guide operate without formal deadlines and you are able to submit proposals at any time of the year. Unless otherwise stated, the assessment process for a proposal will take approximately 30 weeks.

  The start date entered on the proposal should be no earlier than nine months after submission and should be no later than 18 months after submission. If the start date is not adhered to as above, if the proposal is successful you may be asked to change the start date. Your proposed start date should allow enough time to make the necessary preparations and to recruit staff (if applicable) once you have been notified of the award.

  You should note that, on occasions, where there is a delay in obtaining the peer reviews for a proposal then the assessment process may take longer. In such circumstances, the AHRC will contact you regarding any delay.

  Completing the proposal

  Joint Electronic Submission System (JeS)

  All proposals must be completed and submitted via the Research Councils’ Joint Electronic Submission System (Je-S). To submit proposals using Je-S, both individual applicants and the submitting Research Organisation (the one that will hold the award) must be registered on the system.

  Please ensure that the correct contact details are in your Je-S record, as we will use this to notify you of the outcome of your application.

  There is detailed 'Helptext' within the Je-S system that provides information on how to complete each section of the proposal form. There is also a dedicated Je-S Helpdesk that provides telephone and email support with the proposal process. They are available between 9am and 5pm, Monday to Friday, and can be contacted by:

  Email: jeshelp@rcuk.ac.uk
  Telephone: 01793 44 4164.

  Creating a proposal

  To prepare a proposal form in Je-S, log into your account and choose ‘New Document’, then select AHRC as the Council, choose your Document Type and Scheme to which you are applying and ‘Create Document’. Je-S will then create a proposal form, displaying section headings appropriate to the Scheme you have chosen. Using the ‘Help’ link at the top of each page will provide guidance relevant to that section of  the Je-S form.

  Once complete, you should upload a Case for Support and other supporting information as attachments, and submit your proposal. Je-S will forward your proposal to your Research Organisation, who in turn will submit your proposal to AHRC. Please therefore ensure you allow sufficient time prior to AHRC deadlines for your Research Organisation to be able to do this (note that some Research Organisations will have their own internal deadlines). The published scheme deadline is for submission of the completed application to the AHRC by the Research Organisation and late proposals will not be considered. Awards cannot be made for work that has already been done.

  Submission Rules

  If a proposal breaks any of the submission rules (listed either in the appropriate Funding Guide or Call Document) in any way it may be rejected. Further information about common errors to avoid with proposals that may lead to a proposal being rejected can be found here.

  Late proposals will not be accepted.

  Proposals containing attachments exceeding the stated limits, or not adhering to the specified format, will not be considered. If the proposal or any attachments on the proposal are missing required information (as detailed in the relevant Funding Guide or Call Document) the proposal will be rejected. Proposals submitted to any scheme must only contain permitted attachments; if any unpermitted attachments are added this will result in the document being removed or the proposal being rejected. Please see our attachments page for details of permitted attachments. If a proposal has been rejected following initial checks and before it has been to reviewers it will be eligible for resubmission; please see our Resubmission Policy for full details.

• Research Networking - Deadlines

  This scheme operates without formal deadlines. You are able to submit proposals at any time of the year and we will aim to inform you of the outcome within five months of submission.

  The proposed start date of your project must be at least six months from the date of submission. For example, if you submit a proposal on 15 January, the earliest possible start date would be 15 July.  If the start date is not at least six months from the date of submission, if the proposal is successful you may be asked to change the start date.

• Follow-on Fund - Deadlines

  This scheme operates without formal deadlines and you are able to submit proposals at any time of year. There are no restrictions on how long ago the original project was funded, but the case must be made as to how the new proposal is appropriate and relevant if a significant amount of time has elapsed.

  Applications over £30,000 fEC:

  We aim, where possible to complete the assessment process within 14-16 weeks and the earliest start date for a project should be no earlier than five and no later than nine months after submission. If the start date is not as adhered to as above, if the proposal is successful you may be asked to change the start date.

  Applications under £30,000 fEC:

  We aim where possible, to complete the assessment process within six weeks and the earliest start date for a project should be no earlier than three and no later than nine months after submission. If the start date is not as adhered to as above, if the proposal is successful you may be asked to change the start date.

• Research Grants - Deadlines

  The schemes listed in this guide operate without formal deadlines and you are able to submit proposals at any time of the year. Unless otherwise stated, the assessment process for a proposal will take approximately 30 weeks. The start date entered on the proposal should be no earlier than 9 months after submission and should be no later than 18 months after submission. If the start date is not adhered to as above if the proposal is successful you may be asked to change the start date. You should note that, on occasions, where there is a delay in obtaining the peer reviews for a proposal then the assessment process may take longer. In such circumstances the AHRC will contact you regarding any delay.

• Leadership Fellows - Deadlines

  The schemes listed in this guide operate without formal deadlines and you are able to submit proposals at any time of the year. Unless otherwise stated, the assessment process for a proposal will take approximately 30 weeks. The start date entered on the proposal should be no earlier than 9 months after submission and should be no later than 18 months after submission. If the start date is not adhered to as above if the proposal is successful you may be asked to change the start date. You should note that, on occasions, where there is a delay in obtaining the peer reviews for a proposal then the assessment process may take longer. In such circumstances the AHRC will contact you regarding any delay.

For all schemes, you are asked to classify your proposal in terms of subject area and keywords. This information will be used to assist in selecting Peer Review College reviewers. Further details can be found in the section titled "Additional information: Subject remit and proposal classification".

You are advised to keep in mind, that while your proposal will be considered by panellists who have a broad knowledge and understanding of the subject areas and disciplines with which their panel is concerned, they might necessarily have detailed knowledge of your particular specialism. Specialist advice is made available to the peer review panel via the reviews provided by Peer Review College members in the section titled "Peer Review and Assessment Criteria".

You are therefore, encouraged to address your proposal to a group of peers conceived as broadly as is consistent with the specialist nature of your project.

The Council is committed to the principle that the work it funds should be disseminated to as wide an audience as possible, both within the UK and internationally. In framing proposals for peer review, therefore, principal investigators are advised to address as wide a group of peers as possible.

It is recommended that you use naming conventions for all attachments, as this will make it easier for peer reviewers and staff to identify documents. The recommended standard is listed under each attachment type.

By submitting a proposal you are giving your permission to the AHRC to process and disclose the data you provide, including processing of personal data.

The AHRC will publish on publicly available websites the details of funded projects such as the project title, project summary, impact summary, names of all investigators, project dates, amount awarded, names of project partner organisations etc.

Proposals with investigators from more than one Research Organisation should be submitted on one proposal form.

If successful, payment of the grant will be made to the institution in which the Principal Investigator (PI) is based and which submitted the proposal.

The AHRC considers that you should be responsible for determining your own research priorities, and you should normally only submit one proposal at any one time to the same scheme.

If you choose nevertheless to submit more than one proposal, then you must demonstrate that you will be able to carry out all of the projects that are successful.

You should describe fully the scope and extent of your involvement in each of the projects, as our reviewers will evaluate the extent to which you, any Co-Investigator(s) and members of the research team (as appropriate), are able actively to conduct and manage the research set out in your proposals.

Exceptions

These instructions do not apply to Fellowships Scheme.

You can apply for further funds for a related or continuation project at a later stage, provided that you have submitted satisfactory report(s) (where applicable) and output details in relation to the previous award through the Research Outcomes System.

The AHRC will not, however, provide further funding to enable you to complete work that you were unable to deliver in a previously funded project.

You can also apply for funding through other AHRC schemes. You should bear in mind that all such proposals will be assessed in open competition, with no guarantee of funding, and the reviewers will give careful consideration to your ability to complete the project given your existing commitments.

All proposals must outline a specific programme of work that will be conducted with the funds requested from the AHRC. The AHRC will not provide duplicate funding for activities funded by other bodies. It will, however, provide funding which complements that provided by other sources. The Proposals therefore ask you to provide information about any funding for the same work, or for work related to the proposal, that you are receiving or for which you have applied.

You must keep the AHRC informed of the progress of any such proposals. Failure to do so could have an adverse effect on your application. If you are successful in securing funding from any other bodies, you may need to choose which source of funding you wish to pursue.

Highlight notice (if applicable)

If applying for funding under a highlight notice, please specify which one you are addressing and how you envisage your research contributing towards it. Full details should also be given regarding who will be involved in the project, including any collaborative partners.

Research questions or problems

You should describe clearly the research questions, issues or problems that you intend to address. What are the issues that you will be exploring in the course of your research?

Research context

You should describe the research context for your project/programme of work. Why is it important that these questions or issues are explored? What other research is being or has been conducted in this area? What contribution will your project make to improving, enhancing, or developing creativity, insights, knowledge or understanding in your chosen area of study? To whom will the outcomes of your research be of particular interest?

Research methods

What research methods will you be using to address the questions or issues that you have set yourself, or solve the problems you have identified, or to explore the matters you intend to investigate? Why have you chosen these methods? Why are they the best way to answer the research questions or problems you have identified? What will be your role? If there are other people involved, what will their roles be and why are they the appropriate people to be involved?

In describing your research methods it is not sufficient to state, for example, that you intend to visit a particular archive, or an exhibition abroad. You must provide adequate details of sources to be consulted, and you should state briefly what kinds of material you will be consulting, why they are relevant to your programme of research, and how you will interrogate them.

Depending on the approach you are using throughout your research, you may also need to explain clearly the creative and/or performance aspects of the work, explain how you will develop a new process, product or tool, or provide details on who you have consulted or will be involved in the process of research.

Under the Research Methods heading you should also outline how any copyright or intellectual property issues relating to the project and the production of any technical outputs will be addressed.

Leaderships Development Plans (Fellowships scheme only)

Please see the Fellowships section of the Guide for more information regarding this heading.

Technical Summary

All proposals must complete this section.

If digital outputs or digital technologies are essential to the planned research outcomes of your proposal, then you should:-

a) use this section to provide a brief description of the project’s proposed digital outputs and/or digital technologies.

AND

b) complete a Technical Plan and add this as an attachment to your proposal (for more information on see the Technical Plan section)

If your application does involve digital outputs or digital technologies, but you believe that the inclusion of a Technical Plan is not warranted

Use this section to explain and justify this, for instance on the grounds that the digital output or technologies are not essential to the planned research outcomes. If your only proposed digital output or technology consists in web-pages containing information about the project, you should say so in this section. In this last case, you do not need to complete a Technical Plan.

If your application does not involve digital outputs or digital technologies you should

Use this section to state that this is the case. You should note that for present purposes digital technologies do not include conventional software such as word processing packages and ICT activities such as email, which do not require any explanation or justification in this context.

Project management

How will the project be managed? What will be the roles of the members of staff involved (including you and, if applicable, any Co-Investigator(s), any research assistants and/or PhD project students)?

What is the timetable for the project? Does it include appropriate milestones and is it realistic? When will the outputs of the project be completed? How will you ensure that they meet the needs of your audience? Can the costs be justified? How will you ensure good value for money?

The project management section should also include the management of the digital and data management aspects of the projects, if applicable, and should be coordinated with the information in the Data Management Plan (Section 4.2.9.5 above). It should be clear what the milestones for the completion of this element and the work should be incorporated into the timetable for the whole project. The project management of the data management aspects of the project should include an assessment of risk in relation to the complexity and delivery of the project.

If a postdoctoral researcher is to be employed, you should state clearly the nature of the work they will be undertaking, and describe clearly the working relationships that are envisaged between all the members of the research team. You should describe fully the arrangements for supervising and managing the research assistant. If the researcher is unknown you should state the skills and qualifications sought.

Similarly, if the project involves a visit to or a secondment from a member of staff from another organisation, you must state clearly what work they will pursue and describe the working relationships envisaged with other members of the team.

In terms of supporting the research staff funded on the project, you should clearly outline the development opportunities which the project will make available. These should include opportunities both in relation to research expertise, and wider opportunities, for example, in connection with the activities proposed in the Pathways to Impact statement.

The AHRC is one of the signatories of the RCUK Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers.

Dissemination

Information under this heading should build on the details given in the Academic Beneficiaries and Impact Summary sections of the Je-S form.

Please provide examples of the kinds of outputs you propose to produce during the award and their proposed focus. Please explain further how the research will benefit other researchers in the field and – where relevant – academic beneficiaries in other disciplines.

How do you propose to maximise the value of the proposed research outputs? You should cross refer here to the separate attachment, ‘Pathways to Impact’.

In order to be eligible to apply to the AHRC or be part of a research proposal individuals and institutions need to fulfil certain criteria. These criteria are listed in the different eligibility pages in this section.

• Research Assistants and Leadership Fellows

  The Fellowship project can also include a small period of research assistance or technical assistance (no more than twelve months FTE in total) to support specific activities in support of your research project. However, the Fellow must be doing the majority of the proposed research activity.

• Research Assistants Overview

  Research Assistants must be of postdoctoral standing. This means that they should possess either a PhD or have the equivalent research experience.

  The responsibilities of the post requested on the project should be commensurate with the level of experience and skills of the proposed Research Assistant (whether named or unnamed).

  The AHRC does not fund the employment of researchers who are registered for higher degrees unless the researcher is already of postdoctoral standing and:

  • The work of the higher degree is not an integral part of, does not arise directly from, or feed directly into, the work of the project
  • The salary costs sought are appropriate and directly related to the actual time the postdoctoral researcher will spend working on the project.

  It is expected that the RA will be based at the same institution as an investigator on the research project. If this is not to be the case thorough justification as to how the Research Assistant will be supported must be provided.

To be a PI on an AHRC Follow-on-Funding grant, the PI must fulfil the below criteria:

• The Principal Investigator must be resident in the UK
• You must be actively engaged in postdoctoral research and be of postdoctoral standing. This means that you either have a doctorate or can demonstrate in the application that you have equivalent research experience and/or training
• You must have a level of skills, knowledge and experience appropriate to the nature of the proposed project
• It is not permissible for someone to be both a Principal Investigator or Co-Investigator and a research assistant on the same project
• Professors Emeriti are eligible to apply to Research Grants schemes. If you are a holder of any other senior non-stipendiary post you may also be eligible to apply for funding if you meet the requirement outlined in Contractual Arrangement – nature, bullet point two . It is possible for the RO to propose that any contract put in place if the proposal was successful would be stipendiary even if the current arrangement is not.

To be a PI on an AHRC-funded grant, the PI must fulfil the below criteria. If you wish to apply to the Leadership Fellows Early Career route, you also must fulfil the early career criteria listed here:

• The Principal Investigator must be resident in the UK
• You must be actively engaged in postdoctoral research and be of postdoctoral standing. This means that you either have a doctorate or can demonstrate in the application that you have equivalent research experience and/or training
• You must have a level of skills, knowledge and experience appropriate to the nature of the proposed project
• The Research Organisation will need to confirm that it has identified you as a research leader, or potential future research leader, and that it will provide specific support for the Fellowship
• You must have at least two years of post-doctoral experience in an academic/research environment or have an equivalent level of professional/practice experience of direct relevance to the proposed research. You must also have a track record of research publications and/or other research outputs as appropriate
• If you are a previous holder of an AHRC Fellowship, you are not permitted to submit a proposal to this scheme until at least one year after the end of the previous Fellowship
• If you are unsuccessful, you are not permitted to submit a new (different) application under the scheme within one year of the announcement of the outcome of your previous application
• You are only permitted to have only one application under consideration in the Leadership Fellows scheme at any one time.

This page applies to Leadership Fellows applications only

Previous award holders

If you are a previous holder of an AHRC Fellowship, you are not permitted to submit a proposal to this scheme until at least one year after the end of the previous Fellowship.

Previous applicants

If you are unsuccessful, you are not permitted to submit a new (different) application under the scheme within one year of the announcement of the outcome of your previous application.

Submitting more than one application to the same scheme

You are only permitted to have only one application under consideration in the Leadership Fellows scheme at any one time.

The Principal Investigator (PI) takes responsibility for the intellectual leadership of the research project and for the overall management of the research or other activities. S/he will be the person to whom we shall address all correspondence and must be based at the organisation at which the grant will be held.

Recipients of Research Council Fellowships, who are initially supported as postdoctoral research assistants (PDRAs) on Research Grants, are eligible to apply for new research grants in their own right. However, it is not possible to start any award until the PDRA duties on the original grant have been completed.

At the point of application, you are either:

• within eight years of the award of your PhD or equivalent professional training. This period is measured from the date of successful PhD viva to the point of submission. (this duration should exclude any period of career break, for example, family care or health reasons), or
• within six years of your first academic appointment (by 'first academic appointment', this is a paid contract of employment, either full-time or part-time, which lists research and/or teaching as the primary function.

Evidence that you meet these criteria must be provided in the case for support.

• Co-investigators overview

  The role of Co-Investigator

  A Co-Investigator assists the Principal Investigator in the management and leadership of the research project. The Co-Investigator can also undertake research activity themselves, there is no limit to the amount of time that the Co-Investigator can contribute although it needs to allow time for the management and leadership duties on the project. Please note co-Investigators are not permitted for the Leadership Fellows Scheme.

  Eligibility of Co-Investigator

  The same eligibility criteria apply to Co-Investigators as Principal Investigators except that, in addition to the organisations listed as eligible to submit proposals, the AHRC permits a Co-Investigator to be employed by any Independent Research Organisation that is recognised by any Research Council.

  The Principal Investigator must fulfil the Early Career eligibility criteria as stated under Early Career Eligibility; however any Co-Investigators named on the proposal do not have to be Early Career Researchers.

  Numbers of Co-Investigators

  There is no maximum number of Co-Investigators that can be included on a Research Grant or Follow-on Funding application. However, the inclusion of each Co-Investigator needs to be fully justified in the proposal. For Research Networking only one Co-Investigator is permitted. Co-Investigators are not permitted for the Leadership Fellows Scheme.

• International Co-Investigators

  The AHRC allows international researchers to act as Co-Investigators on some of its schemes. Following a successful trial period for this policy, and in line with the commitments made in the Council’s current delivery plan, it has been decided to incorporate provision for International Co-Investigators into AHRC’s core eligibility requirements and standard funding terms and conditions on an ongoing basis.

  In order to be considered eligible, an international co-investigator needs to have suitable academic experience (i.e. someone holding a PhD or equivalent qualification or experience) and be based at an established research organisation with significant research capacity. This organisation should be of comparable status and standing to a UK organisation which is eligible for UK Research Council funding, for example, a publicly funded university or a ‘not-for-profit’ research institution with a track record and distinctive research capacity and capability and distinctive research capacity in areas relevant to the proposed research. If an international co-Investigator is on the proposal an International Co-Investigator Head of Department Statement from the international co-I’s Head of Department must be attached to the proposal. If this is not attached the proposal will be rejected at sift stage 1. Further information about what to add in the International Co-Investigator Head of Department Statement can be found below in Attachments - International Co-Investigator Head of Department Statement.

  International research organisations must have the necessary research capacity and capability to support the conduct of the specified research. It is the PI’s responsibility to articulate in the proposal the added value that an international co-investigator will bring to the overall leadership of the research and their role in the management of the project, as well as the relevant research experience and expertise that they will bring to the project team. It is the responsibility of the UK RO to check that the international co-investigator’s organisation is an appropriate organisation to receive and has systems in place to manage the funding provided. The RO will also need assurance that appropriate agreements are put in place for the delivery of the overseas activities funded under the grant. The AHRC will not be able to provide any additional assurance to ROs about overseas partners, but may by exception undertake additional checks or seek further information from ROs.

  International co-investigators will not be permitted to take over as lead researcher (i.e. Principal Investigator) should the UK Principal Investigator step down for any reason.

  Please note that before applying an international co-Investigator must have an active Je-S account, and it is the UK Research Organisation’s responsibility to ensure that this is the case.

A list of eligible Research Council Institutes can be found on the RCUK website.

Members of staff at Research Council institutes need to ensure that they meet the relevant criteria for each particular scheme in relation to their academic experience and to the nature of their contract.   

Institutes that are considering submitting a proposal to a Council to which they will be newly eligible are encouraged to discuss the proposal with the relevant Council staff in the first instance.

AHRC awards are not intended to enable researchers who have recently completed their Ph.D. to write up their doctoral thesis for publication or other dissemination.

Rather, they are designed to support you to take forward new avenues of research which you have developed since completion of your doctorate or to pursue new research directions which have evolved from your doctoral research.

Where applicable you will be expected to lead to substantive new research outputs and to explain in your proposal how your proposal differs, or takes a new direction, from your original doctoral research in the Case for Support.

In Research Council proposals, the term 'Project Partner' has a specific meaning and cannot be used for all organisations with whom you are collaborating.

An organisation can only be identified as a 'Project Partner' if it is providing a specific contribution (cash or in in-kind) without charge to the research project. Resources to be provided by the project partners, whether cash or in-kind contributions, should be clearly identified in the 'Project Partner' section of the proposal. Failure to do this will lead to the application being rejected. These contributions are not considered to be part of the fEC of the project.

If you include an organisation as a 'Project Partner', you must also included a Letter of Support from that organisation. Failure to do this will lead to the application being rejected.

If all the cost of collaborating organisation's involvement is being charged to the project as part of the fEC, then this organisation is not a 'Project Partner' and their role as a collaborating organisation should be outlined in the Case for Support.

If some of the cost of collaborating organisation's involvement is being charged to the project but other parts are being provided without charge, or at a heavily discounted rate than the organisation can be listed as a Project Partner. In this case, the application should make it very clear which costs are being charged and which are being provided.

An organisation that is merely interested in the research and not providing anything to the project are not are not considered as a project partner and are not permitted to be listed as such, or to submit letters of support. If you have any queries about what constitutes a project partner or what is necessary to fill in on Je-S please contact AHRC by email via enquiries@ahrc.ac.uk.

Please note that project partners can be based in the UK or abroad.

All UK Higher Education Institutions that receive grant funding from one of the UK higher education funding bodies are eligible to receive funds for research, postgraduate training and associated activities.

These bodies consist of Higher Education Funding council England (HEFCE), Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW), Scottish Funding Council (SFC) and Department for Employment and Learning Northern Ireland (DEL).

Research institutes for which the Research Councils have established a long-term involvement as major funder are also eligible to receive research funding, from any Council. A list of these institutes can be found on the RCUK website.

Other independent research organisations (IROs) may also be eligible if they possess an existing in-house capacity to carry out research that materially extends and enhances the national research base and are able to demonstrate an independent capability to undertake and lead research programmes. They must also satisfy other criteria related to their financial and legal status: these are set out in full in the Research Councils' joint statement on eligibility. The statement itself can be found in the eligibility statement document on the RCUK website (PDF).

The current list of eligible IROs can be found in the RCUK eligible IROs document (PDF).

Please note that for Leadership Fellows Schemes co-Investigators are not permitted.

This page is applies to Leadership Fellows Schemes only. For other open schemes please see XXXXX

Contractual arrangement – nature

You must be a salaried member of staff at the Research Organisation submitting the proposal and have been employed by the Research Organisation for at least one year before the date of submission of the proposal

Contractual arrangement – duration

The Research Organisation must confirm that you have a contract of employment that extends beyond the duration of the proposed Fellowship that allows you to complete the work outlined in the proposal and is consistent with the Research Organisation’s commitments to support your longer term career development beyond the end of the Fellowship

This page applies to Research Grants schemes, Follow-on-Funding and Research Networking.

Contractual arrangement - nature

You must either:

• be employed by the Research Organisation (RO) submitting the proposal, or
• if not employed by the submitting organisation (see note 1), have an existing written formal arrangement with the organisation confirming that the research will be conducted as if you were an employee, that is that enables you to carry out research there and receive from the organisation all necessary management and infrastructural support, and that commits the organisation to take full responsibility for the research and its proper governance, or
• be scheduled to move to the submitting organisation before the proposed start date of the grant, whether or not the proposal is successful, in such a way that would ensure that criterion a) or b) is met by the time the grant starts (see note 2).

Please note, that you must provide evidence of the contractual arrangement with the host RO and the host RO must support and endorse your application. The contractual arrangement must outline the nature of your relationship with the RO, state the contact that you are expected to maintain with its staff and students, and you must be able to demonstrate that your research proposal is consistent with its research culture and strategies.

Contractual arrangement – duration

The RO must confirm that you have:

• an existing contract of employment that extends to beyond the duration of the proposed grant (or, if not employed by the submitting organisation, a formal arrangement as described in "contractual arrangement - nature - b"), or
• an assurance from the submitting organisation that, if the proposal is successful, the existing contract of employment, or formal commitment to provide support if not employed at the organisation, will extend to beyond the end date of the grant.

For Co-investigators, where there is mention of "submitting organisation", this should be replaced by "an eligible organisation".

Notes

Note 1

That is, employed elsewhere and seconded to the submitting organisation; or not employed at all (for example, retired investigators, honorary or visiting fellow (see section on additional individual eligibility criteria)

Note 2

In this case, the affiliation shown for the investigator should be the organisation that would hold the grant.

To be a PI on an AHRC-funded grant, the PI must fulfil the below criteria. If you wish to apply to the Research Grants Early Career route, you also must fulfil the early career criteria listed here:

• The Principal Investigator must be resident in the UK
• You must be actively engaged in postdoctoral research and be of postdoctoral standing. This means that you either have a doctorate or can demonstrate in the application that you have equivalent research experience and/or training
• You must have a level of skills, knowledge and experience appropriate to the nature of the proposed project
• It is not permissible for someone to be both a Principal Investigator or Co-Investigator and a research assistant on the same project
• Professors Emeriti are eligible to apply to Research Grants schemes. If you are a holder of any other senior non-stipendiary post you may also be eligible to apply for funding if you meet the requirement outlined in Contractual Arrangement – nature, bullet point two . It is possible for the RO to propose that any contract put in place if the proposal was successful would be stipendiary even if the current arrangement is not
• Recipients of Research Council Fellowships, who are initially supported as postdoctoral research assistants (PDRAs) on Research Grants, are eligible to apply for new research grants in their own right. However, it is not possible to start any award until the PDRA duties on the original grant have been completed.

To be a PI on an AHRC Research Networking proposal, the PI must fulfil the below criteria:

• The Principal Investigator must be resident in the UK
• You must be actively engaged in postdoctoral research and be of postdoctoral standing. This means that you either have a doctorate or can demonstrate in the application that you have equivalent research experience and/or training
• You must have a level of skills, knowledge and experience appropriate to the nature of the proposed project.
• The PI must be the person who will be responsible for co-ordinating the activities. They must justify why the research and approaches proposed are majority situated within the arts and humanities subject domain.
• It is not permissible for someone to be both a Principal Investigator or Co-Investigator and a research assistant on the same project
• Professors Emeriti are eligible to apply to Research Networking. If you are a holder of any other senior non-stipendiary post you may also be eligible to apply for funding if you meet the requirement outlined in ‘Contractual Arrangement – nature’, bullet point two . It is possible for the RO to propose that any contract put in place if the proposal was successful would be stipendiary even if the current arrangement is not.

All proposals to AHRC responsive mode schemes should be costed on the basis of the full economic costs (fEC) of the research and all costs that contribute to the full economic costs of the proposal should be included.

Proposals should be costed using TRAC (Transparent Approach to Costing) methodology and should only include the costs required to support the research related to the proposal (i.e. costs which fall outside the scope of the grant should not be included). RCUK has produced a FAQ document (PDF) for more information regarding costings.

If the proposal is successful, the AHRC will contribute 80 per cent of these costs.

Please note that patent and the other IPR costs, such as those relating to licensing agreements and the establishment of spin out companies, are not eligible.

Overview of the minimum and maximum scheme limits

Some schemes have overall limits within which costs must fall, based on what is considered appropriate given the aims of the scheme. The figures below reflect the Full Economic Costing (fEC).

Fellowships Scheme

The minimum scheme limit is 50,000 and the maximum scheme limit is 250,000.

Fellowships Scheme - Early Career

The minimum scheme limit is 50,000 and the maximum scheme limit is 250,000.

Research Grants

The minimum scheme limit is 50,000 and the maximum scheme limit is 1,000,000. The maximum limit includes the cost of any project students requested.

Research Grants - Early Career

The minimum scheme limit is 50,000 and the maximum scheme limit is 250,000. That is, employed elsewhere and seconded to the submitting organisation; or not employed at all (for example, retired investigators, honorary or visiting fellow (see section on additional individual eligibility criteria)).

Research Networking Scheme

There is no minimum scheme limit and the maximum scheme limit is 30,000.

Research Networking that includes international participation

There is no minimum scheme limit and the maximum scheme limit is 45,000.

Follow-on Funding for Impact and Engagement Scheme

There is no minimum scheme limit and the maximum scheme limit is 100,000.

Further notes

The application should demonstrate the full economic cost (fEC) of the proposed project. Applications should not be under-costed in order to meet a scheme limit. Rather, the scope of the project should be altered so that the project’s fEC meets the scheme’s limit.

If you include an international co-investigator in your proposal, you may request up to 30% of the overall project budget (up to scheme maximum) to include costs incurred by the co-investigator. Salary costs for the international co-investigator will be eligible in certain circumstances. These costs will be paid 100% fEC directly to the PI;s institution and it is the institution's responsibility to transfer these costs to the international organisation.

Within any particular scheme, with the exception of FoF (see Assessment and Peer Review for the FOF Scheme), there is no differentiation in the assessment procedures between shorter projects and those of longer duration. Thorough consideration is always given to lower value bids.

You should be aware, that value for money is an important criterion in the assessment of applications and that, as the level of funding sought increases, so too does the challenge of meeting this criterion. Reviewers will particularly scrutinise the balance of staffing and the amount of time devoted by Investigators to the project.

The AHRC will not fund items that would ordinarily be found in a department, such as non-specialist computers. Any proposals requesting these items should include justification both for why they are required for the project and why they cannot be provided from the Research Organisation's own resources (including funding from indirect costs from grants).

All costs associated with the research project must be justified in the Justification for Resources attachment, with the following exceptions:

• Estates costs
• Indirect costs
• Investigator salary costs
• Some other Directly Allocated - general technical services
• Shared lab equipment.

Although Investigators’ precise salary level need not be justified, the balance of staffing - between investigators, research assistants and project students of different levels of experience and seniority - and the amount of time that Investigators will devote to the project, must be justified fully within the Case for Support. If your proposal includes international co-investigators and you are applying to cover their salary or replacement teaching costs, you must state the reasons why are applying those costs as well as the amount of time the co-investigator is committed to the project (although you are not required to justify the level of salary the co-investigator is being paid).

If you wish to include costs associated with dissemination and the knowledge exchange of activities within your research proposal, you should ensure that the end-date for your project is timed to accommodate these activities. Any such costs must be directly related to the research.

Costs may only be claimed for activities undertaken during the period of an AHRC award. Any such costs must be directly related to the research.

If you are collaborating with another organisation which is providing a specific contribution (cash or in kind) to the research project you can identify them in the application as a ‘Project Partner’. If a collaborating organisation’s involvement is being charged to the project you should not include this within the project partner section.

Resources to be provided by project partners, whether cash or in-kind contributions, should be clearly identified in the proposal. Failure to do this will result in the proposal being rejected. These contributions are not considered to be part of the full economic cost of the project.

All costs should fall under one of the following headings.

Directly Incurred

These are costs that are explicitly identifiable as arising from the conduct of a project, are charged as the cash value actually spent and are supported by an audit record. They include:

Staff

Payroll costs requested for staff, full or part-time, who will work on the project and whose time can be supported by a full audit trail during the life of the project.

For Leadership Fellows as the amount of time to be dedicated to the Fellowship is a known amount, your salary costs should be recorded as a Directly Incurred cost.

Travel and Subsistence

Funds for travel and subsistence for use by staff who work on the project where these are required by the nature of the work.

Equipment

Individual items of equipment up to £10,000 (including VAT) are permissible to be included in the full economic cost (fEC) of the proposal and should be included in the ‘Directly Incurred – Other’ fund heading.

AHRC cannot support the funding of individual items of equipment costing more than £10,000 (including VAT). Therefore, if your project requires the use of the equipment at this value, this will need to be provided from other sources.

Other Directly Incurred Costs

Costs of other items dedicated to the project, including consumables, books, survey fees, purchase/hire of vehicles, publication costs or recruitment and advertising costs for staff directly employed on the project. Items of equipment costing less than £10,000 should also be included under this heading. Salary costs for international Co-Investigators, when eligible, should be included here using the 'Exception' option.

Directly Allocated

These are the costs of resources used by a project that are shared by other activities. They are charged to projects on the basis of estimates rather than actual costs and do not represent actual costs on a project-by-project basis. They include:

Investigators

Proposals will need to show the costs of the Principal Investigator and any Co-Investigators if their time charged to the project is based on estimates rather than actual costs.

Estates

These costs may include building and premises costs, basic services and utilities, and any clerical staff and equipment maintenance or operational costs not already included under other cost headings. International co-investigators are not eligible for Estate Costs.

Other Directly Allocated

These costs may include, for example, the costs of other research staff, technical, administrative and other support staff, or access to institutional research facilities such as equipment and IT systems.

Indirect Costs

These include non-specific costs charged across all projects based on estimates that are not otherwise included as Directly Allocated costs. They include the costs of the Research Organisation’s administration, such as personnel, finance, library and some departmental services. International co-investigators are not eligible for Indirect Costs.

Exceptions

These are directly incurred costs that Research Councils will fund in full (that is, at 100 per cent), subject to actual expenditure incurred, or items that are outside fEC. Use this heading to add Project Students and costs incurred by the international co-investigator, including salary, where applicable. If you are working with an international co-investigator and want to apply for Project Student costs, note that the student must be registered with a UK HEI (registration in other countries in not permitted).

Indexation

All costings should be at current prices, inclusive of VAT and other taxes where applicable, with no allowance for inflation. The AHRC will calculate inflation if a grant is awarded.

For some of our schemes the AHRC allows international elements to proposals. Costs are permitted to be included for some international elements and full details are listed in this section. This section is broken into two parts, International co-Investigators and Other international elements to proposals. For details of the eligibility required for international co-Investigators please see Eligibility – Co-investigators - International Co-investigators.

International co-Investigators

The AHRC has a policy to allow international researchers to act as Co-Investigators on some of its schemes. Please note that co-Investigators are not eligible in the Leadership Fellows Scheme and as such no costs can be claimed for these.

All costs incurred by the international co-investigator, including salary costs will need to be listed as ‘Exceptions’ under the Other Directly Incurred Costs heading (see Costs – Cost Headings – Exceptions for more information) and the reason for requesting costs articulated in the Justification of Resources attachment (see Attachments – Justification of Resources). We would not normally expect to see salary costs for international co-investigators applied for; however, we would allow it in some circumstances, for example:

• Where a co-investigator is paid term-time only and is expected to supplement their income for the rest of the year
• Where a co-investigator is required to secure external funding in order to conduct research
• Where the co-investigator’s university agrees to free up teaching time for him/her, provided s/he can secure funding for replacement teaching

Infrastructure costs (estates, indirect costs, etc.) for the international co-investigator’s organisation are not eligible; however, you may apply for all costs associated with supporting the international co-investigator in conducting the research.

Research Assistants can be employed and supervised by the international co-investigator if this is deemed necessary to the success of the research project; however, justification for why this is necessary should be articulated in the Justification of Resources attachment.

Other international elements to proposals

If you are applying to a scheme in which international co-investigators are not eligible or if it is not appropriate for you to have an international co-investigator on your project, you can still involve international elements within your grant application. These will be paid at the usual 80% FEC (as opposed to the 100% FEC for international co-Investigators – only elements associated with the international co-Investigator costs can be paid at 100% FEC). There is no limit to how much of the proposal can be spent on other international elements but the requested funds should be appropriate to the needs of the proposal:

• UK investigators and co-investigators can request funding for travel and subsistence to visit and/or research in other countries where this is essential to the conduct of the research proposed
• Non-UK based academics can be part of certain activities associated with a grant where their input is justified and essential to the delivery of grant objectives, for example through being members of an advisory group. Costs such as travel and subsistence associated with this can be included if fully justified
• Funds can be paid to a non-UK based researcher or expert on a 'consultancy' basis if their expertise is seen to be vital to the success of the project. This would need special justification in the proposal. For example, applicants would need to consider:
  • Is the expertise available within the UK?
  • Proportion of the overall costs that the consultancy constitutes (i.e. the majority of the research must still be undertaken by UK based researchers)
  • Access to research data and IPR: PIs collaborating with overseas organisations in any capacity are required to have assurances in place before the start of the research project regarding access to research data, outputs, resource material, etc. as well as have an understanding of the expectations of the overseas organisation regarding ownership of material

Non-UK based consultancy costs would need to be listed under ‘Other Directly Incurred Costs’ on the proposal form and applicants must demonstrate clear value for money and justification.

Non UK organisations who are contributing their own resources (in cash or in kind) can be ‘project partners’ on grant proposals. This contribution could include supporting the time of researchers to be involved in the grant. A letter of support from the project partner would need to accompany the proposal. For further information please see Eligibility – Project Partners and Collaborating Organisations.

Following the publication of the revised RCUK policy on access to research outputs, and the decision to provide research organisations with block funding for publication costs, the Arts and Humanities Research Council will no longer provide funding in research grants for any publication costs associated with peer-reviewed journal articles and conference papers.

Publication costs associated with research outputs other than journal articles and conference papers, such as books, monographs, critical editions, catalogues etc. may, however, continue to be included in grants as a Directly Incurred Other Cost. Any request for such costs will of course need to be fully justified in the Case for Support or Justification of Resources attachments.

Additional terms and conditions

The following are additional terms and conditions and should be read in conjunction with the Terms and Conditions of Research Council Grants. Where the additional term and condition only applies to once scheme this is indicated.

References to research projects and activities apply in this scheme to the programme of knowledge exchange, public engagement, dissemination or commercialisation activities.

The Fellow will be expected to work with the AHRC to support the development of the UK’s research leadership in the arts and humanities and to advocate the value and benefits of arts and humanities research to broader society.

The Fellow may also be expected to attend at least one annual meeting of Fellows, where appropriate to attend relevant AHRC events during the Fellowship period and/or to participate in development activities organised for Fellows during, or within six months of the end of, the Fellowship.

For the Fellowships early career route, the Research Organisation must appoint a mentor to support the award holder and monitor the progress of the award.

In addition to the restrictions outlined in the Terms and Conditions of Research Council Grants (GC5 Changes in Research Project), it is the Principal Investigator's responsibility to ensure that any output in electronic form is prepared in accordance with best practice.

Project Studentships (Research Grants) and international investigators

Project Studentships

In addition to the restrictions outlined in the Terms and Conditions of Research Council Grants (GC6 Transfer of funds between Headings) the following rules apply to the use of costs for Project Students. Monies in the Exceptions Fund Heading relating to project students cannot be vired to other headings to support other activity on the Research Grant.

However, it is possible to vire from Directly Incurred headings into the Exceptions heading to supplement the costs for project student travel and subsistence. Any such virement can only be done when there is a legitimate saving in another DI heading and where the travel is in line with undertaking a study visits or conferences allowed by AHRC Studentship rules.

International Investigators

In addition to the restrictions outlined in the Terms and Conditions of Research Council Grants (GC6 Transfer of funds between Headings) the following rules apply to the use of costs for international co-investigators; monies in the Exceptions Fund Heading related to international co-investigators may be vired to the Other Directly Incurred Cost Heading (and vice versa) provided the organisation incurring those costs change and subject to AHRC approval

The AHRC no longer requires award holders to complete a Final Report at the end of the award. Instead, award holders are expected to update the Research Outcomes System (ROS) with details of the outputs, outcomes and impacts of their research. Award holders will be sent information on how to access Researchfish during the first year of their award.

Due acknowledgement of support received from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) must be made in accordance with the AHRC’s acknowledgement of support guidelines.

Access to Data - deposit of resources or datasets

Grant Holders should abide by the RCUK Common Principles on Data.

Grant Holders in all areas must make any significant electronic resources or datasets created as a result of research funded by the Council available in an accessible and appropriate depository for at least three years after the end of their grant. The choice of depository should be appropriate to the nature of the project and accessible to the targeted audiences for the material produced.

Non-academic partner (Follow-On Funding for Impact and Engagement)

Where a grant has a non-academic partner, then the Research Organisation must notify the Research Council if there are any changes to the commitments outlined in the Letter of Support. The RO must provide the Research Council with details of their plans to respond to any such changes.

Terminology (Follow-On Funding for Impact and Engagement)

References to research projects and activities apply in this scheme to the programme of knowledge exchange, public engagement, dissemination or commercialisation activities.

PhD project studentships (Research Grants)

The period of the PhD project studentship must fall within the dates of the AHRC Research Grants award. The RO must contact the Research Council to request an extension to the Research Grant if any suspension (due to maternity leave or sick leave) of the studentship occurs which will result in the end date of the studentship falling after the current end date of the grant.

Project students funded by the Council must meet the conditions relating to residence and academic qualifications set out in the Council’s Student Funding Guide.

ROs must keep all information relating to included studentships updated on Je-S in a timely and accurate fashion in accordance with the Council’s Student Funding Guide

PhD Project Students supported by the Council must be registered either as a probationary research student or for a doctoral degree. By the beginning of the final year of the award, the student must be fully registered for a doctoral degree.

PhD Project Studentships attached to Research Grants will be subject to the same terms and conditions, with respect to such matters as monitoring and supervision of study, as are set out in the Council’s Student Funding Guide. Submission rates will be monitored alongside those of students funded through the Council’s postgraduate studentship schemes.

Please note that Je-S must be updated with the details of the project student within one month of the student’s start date in accordance with the AHRC Training Grant Funding Guide.

The AHRC holds a contractual relationship with the research organisation, and the responsibilities of the research organisation are detailed in the common Terms and Conditions of Research Council Grants. Awards are made to the RO rather than the successful applicant as an individual.

Where a grant has a non-academic partner, then the Research Organisation (RO) must notify the Research Council if there are any changes to the commitments outlined in the Letter of Support.

The RO must provide the Research Council with details of their plans to respond to any such changes.