pipette.jpg
microscope.jpg
male_scientist.jpg


 

Log in


Forgot your password?
 

Research Grants

Research Strategy
The Foundation’s Research Strategy aims to:

  • provide financial support for neuroscience researchers
  • provide optimum environments and equipment to conduct and support research
  • strengthen research programmes
  • enable publication of the results of supported research


In achieving these aims, we are committed to:

  • developing effective links between clinical and non-clinical researchers
  • promoting the translation of research outcomes into products, devices and enabling technology for the benefit of patients
  • the use of research outcomes in the development of clinical practice


In furtherance of these aims the Foundation has made initial funding of research fellowships for promising academic graduates a priority. This policy has enabled a number of areas of ground breaking research in the neurosciences to begin and permitted many talented graduates to begin academic careers over the 25 years since the inception of the Foundation.

 

Conflicts of Interest Policy

To minimise and manage any potential conflicts of interest, members of the Foundation’s Council and Grant Review Committee must declare any interests held by themselves or their families which fall under specified categories:

Categories of interest

  • Personal remuneration (employment, pensions, consultancies, directorships, honoraria, etc.).
  • Registrable shareholdings and financial interests in companies.
  • Major academic collaborations (national and international).
  • Unremunerated involvement with and membership of medical, biomedical, pharmaceutical, healthcare provision or similar activities/organisations.
  • Political/pressure group associations.


Advisory groups involved

We hold registers of declarations of interest for people who sit on:

  • Council
  • Grant Review Committee


Lists of the members' interests are included within the Council and Grant Review Committee sections of this site. For each person, categories are only included where an interest has been declared.

Scientific reviewers

Individuals asked to review and assess Foundation funding proposals are required to declare any private, professional, political, commercial, academic or other interest that may influence their judgment, or which might reasonably be seen by members of the public to influence or bias judgment. Only current interests at the time of reviewing need to be declared, although if an individual has a past interest that could influence them, then it would also need to be mentioned.

Automatic exclusion from grant decisions

1 References to "grant" shall include any charitable funding of any type.
2 Individuals must absent themselves from the relevant part of any meeting where matters concerning a grant proposal with which they are connected are discussed. They may not take part in any decisions taken in relation to such a grant proposal, and should not receive any papers relating to it.
3 An individual will be connected with a grant proposal in any of the following cases, if the individual is:
(a) the sole applicant
(b) a joint applicant in collaboration with others or is a named collaborator
(c) a relative of one of the grant applicants - "relative" for this purpose includes, but is not limited to, spouse (or civil partner), children, siblings and parents
(d) a business partner of one of the grant applicants
4 Exceptionally, where the exclusion of a particular member under paragraph 3(e) would compromise the efficient working of a committee, the automatic exclusion may be overridden provided that both the chair and secretary are satisfied that there is no significant conflict of interests for the committee member. Where there are justifiable reasons for not excluding such a member, these reasons will be declared and minuted.

Exclusion at the Foundation's discretion

5 If an individual:
(a) holds (or is seeking), from the Foundation or another funding agency, a research grant on a similar topic to a proposal that is due to be considered at a particular Foundation meeting, such that the individual could be considered to be a direct competitor of the applicant
(b) has acted as an external referee or on a committee or panel in respect of a proposal at a time when this was being considered by another funding body
(c) has collaborated or published with the applicant in the past three years; or
(d) is aware of any other matter that would reasonably be expected to give rise to, or be viewed as, a conflict of interest (whether academic, scientific, financial, personal, or otherwise)
then he or she must declare the matter to the secretary of the committee before the meeting or, if not practicable, as soon as the potential conflict becomes apparent at the meeting.
6 The secretary (or where there is doubt as to whether an individual should be excluded, the secretary in consultation with the chair) will determine whether the individual should:
(a) be permitted to take a full part in the meeting
(b) be permitted to comment on the application and participate in discussions but not present the application to the committee
(c) be permitted to comment on the application and participate in discussions but not take part in the decision; or
(d) absent himself or herself from the relevant part of the meeting.
A unanimous decision of the chair and secretary will be final. If a unanimous decision cannot be reached, the individual must absent himself or herself from the relevant part of the meeting.
7 The following guidance should be noted:
(a) an individual who has acted as an external referee to a similar proposal submitted to another funding body may be invited to take a full part in the meeting.
(b) an individual who has acted on a committee or panel in respect of a proposal at a time when this was being considered by another funding body should normally be excluded from the relevant part of the meeting.
8 Paragraphs 5 to 7 apply even where a proposal has been rejected by another funding body. The Foundation is committed to considering each proposal on its merits.
9 The secretary should bring to the chair's attention all relevant information concerning any form of connection between an application and a member of the committee.

 

Cases of uncertainty

10 If an individual is in any doubt as to the relevance of an interest that he or she has, such interest should be disclosed to the secretary before the meeting or, if not practicable, as soon as the potential conflict becomes apparent at the meeting. The secretary will consult as necessary and the chair and secretary shall determine whether the individual should absent himself or herself from the relevant part of the meeting in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 6 above.

Grant Review Committee Members

Professor G M Hall, Chairman Professor of Anaesthesia
Dr F A Howe Senior Lecturer in MRI
Mr M C Papadopoulos Senior Lecturer in Neurosurgery
Professor R Horton Professor of Neuropharmacology
Professor G Dickson Professor of Biomedical & Molecular Cell Biology
Professor N Leigh Professor of Neurology
Professor M Brada Professor of Neuro-Oncology
Mrs A Williamson Lay Member

Grant Applications

The Neurosciences Research Foundation holds two Grant Rounds per annum. Further information and Application Forms for Research Grants are available from the address on our contacts page

Applications will be considered by the Grant Review Committee and sent to a minimum of two external peer reviewers. Applicants will be contacted by letter from the Chairman with the outcome of the review.

Document Actions