Programme - Parker Derrington Ltd...Research-Grant Workshop [email protected] Parker Derrington Ltd 33 Dovecot Road Edinburgh EH12 7LF T: 07952 154999 E: [email protected]

Research-Grant Workshop [email protected]

Parker Derrington Ltd

33 Dovecot RoadEdinburghEH12 7LFT: 07952 154999E: [email protected]: www.parkerderrington.com

One Day Writing Workshop

Programme

10:00 Welcome and IntroductionsThe grant-writing game

10:45 Coffee

11:00 What makes a good grant application?

12:00 Outlining and testing the research project.

13:00 Lunch

13:30 Using the Outline to write.

14:00 Writing the perfect opening sentence.

14:45 Coffee

15:00 Using Key sentences to structure a case for support.

15:30 Writing Key sentences 7-9 and 3-5

16:00 Close

Preparation

The workshop is designed to start you working on an extremely efficient ’recipe’ for a research project grant, such as aresearch council standard grant, that makes it possible to produce a case for support in 2 weeks. The case for support isthe central component of a grant application. All the rest of the information in the application should derive from the casefor support.If you have a fundable project in mind at the start of the workshop, you should have a rough draft of the skeleton of thecase for support, in the form of 10 key sentences, by the end of the day. If you don’t have a fundable project in mind at thestart of the day you will practise the skills of writing the 10 key sentences with a dummy project.There are three things you need to do to prepare for the workshop.

• First, it is essential for several of the exercises that you come prepared to talk about a research project. Ideally thiswill be a project for which you intend to write a grant application. If you don’t have such a project you can use apiece of research that you have already or one that somebody else has already won support for.

• Please come prepared to participate actively in discussions.

• See if you can find out a bit about possible funders for you. The course is aimed at mainstream UK project funderslike the research councils (AHRC, BBSRC, EPSRC, ESRC, MRC, NERC), the Leverhulme Trust and the WellcomeTrust. See if you can find out which one would be most suitable for you. If you can’t find this out for yourself, youshould consider whether you might need to develop your research skills before you try writing a grant application.

Andrew Derrington

Research-Grant WritingAndrew Derrington

April 2016

Contents

I. What Makes a Good Grant Application? 3

1. A Good Grant Application is Designed for the Decision Process. 31.1. What do Funders want to Know? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.1.1. The case for support must Contain the Right Information. . . . . . . . . . . 41.2. How Funders make decisions? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.2.1. Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.2.2. Referees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.2.3. Committee Meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2. Requirements 72.1. You want referees to find the detail easily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.2. You need the committee to know what is in your application. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.2.1. But most of them will not read it. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.3. You need the committee to think they understand your research . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.3.1. But they won’t know anything except what you tell them. . . . . . . . . . . 72.4. You need readers to remember your case for support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.5. You need different versions of the story to be consistent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3. The Magic Formula 7

II. The Perfect First Sentence 10

4. What should the first sentence say? 10

5. Gathering information for a first sentence 10

6. Writing the First Sentence 10

7. Compare Sentences 10

1

III. Key Sentence Writing and Story Boarding 11

8. Get the Raw Material 11

9. Create A Key Sentence Skeleton 11

10.Build the Structure with Key Sentences 12

11.StoryBoard The Case for Support 13

2

Part I.What Makes a Good Grant

Application?

1. A Good Grant Application is Designed for the Decision

Process.

1.1. What do Funders want to Know?

Funders have four questions in mind

1. IS THE PROJECT IMPORTANT?

• Does the project meet the funder’s priorities?

– Direct Outcomes (discoveries)– Indirect Outcomes (training, career development, mobility...)

2. WILL THE PROJECT BE SUCCESSFUL?

• Will the project produce the direct outcomes?• Will the outcomes be put to use?• Will the project produce good indirect outcomes?

3. ARE THE APPLICANTS COMPETENT?

• Is the applicant capable of carrying out the project?• Is the institution capable of supporting it?

4. WOULD A GRANT BE VALUE for MONEY?

• Are the resources requested Necessary• and Sufficient• and Proportionate

3

1.1.1. The case for support must Contain the Right Information.

The application has to answer the four questions.

• IMPORTANCE (evidence)

– Evidence about direct outcomes⇤ Literature review

– Evidence about indirect outcomes⇤ Information about the project, institutions, and investigators

• SUCCESS (project details)

– Map the research activities onto the outcomes– Describe impact and dissemination plans

• COMPETENCE (evidence)

– Evidence that the team has the skills to produce the outcomes.⇤ Appropriate publications.

– Evidence that the PI can deliver and the institution can support the project.⇤ Track record⇤ Assurances

• VALUE for MONEY (project details)

– Describe how grant resources will be used in the project.– Describe how institutional resources will be used in the project.

Which question do you start with?

• IMPORTANCE?

– Pick an important question⇤ Start the literature review⇤ ......

That’s how you write a zombie grant...

Always start with the competence question

• It’s not what you can do, it’s what you can provide evidence of your competence to do.

• Pick research activities for which you can demonstrate your competence

– Cite appropriate quality publications showing ALL relevant Skills

• Design a project that you can give evidence that you can deliver

– Successful completion of projects up to that point on the cost ladder⇤ £1K / £10K / £100K / £1M / £10M

– And the complexity ladder⇤ Student / RA / Post Doc / Team / International network

4

1.2. How Funders make decisions?

1.2.1. Committee

1.2.2. Referees

1.2.3. Committee Meeting

The Decision: who decides?

• Committee of successful researchers

– Very busy people– Very successful

⇤ Have their own grants⇤ And research groups⇤ And jobs

– Not knowledgeable about your particular research area.

• May have ’user’ representation

• Supported by secretariat

The Decision: what information do they have?

• Applications

– Usually a set of 50-100 per meeting.– Arrive 3-6 weeks before meeting.– Everybody delays reading them as long as possible.

• Expert referees’ reports

– Written reports with evaluation and score.– Usually 2-5 per application– Usually arrive before the meeting but often after the applications– Often conflicting

• Designated members’ reports

– Oral report by 2 or 3 members who have read the application.– Usually lasts < 5 minutes

5

The Decision: what is the process?

• Members with conflict of interest leave the room.

• Designated members report on the proposal

– Usually less than 5 minutes– Who, what, why, how, outcomes, strengths, weaknesses, summary of referees, how im-

portant and exciting, suggested score– One person may have to do this for 10 or more grants in a day.– Probably based on 30-60 minutes preparation.

• Discussion by all members of the committee.

– Even though some of them may be reading it for the first time during the discussion.

⇤ They will probably have read the summary beforehand.

• All members in the discussion can influence the score.

– No matter how little they know.– And how little time they have spent reading your proposal.

The Decision: what are the implications

• The decision is based on a 5 minute talk

– by someone relatively ignorant about your research area– who spends less than an hour learning from your proposal– and has to present up to 10 other proposals the same day– plus the contribution and votes from people who know even less and spend <10 minutes

reading it

• What requirements does this impose on the case for support?

– Easy to analyse at a deep level (Referee).– Easy to understand at a superficial level (Committee Member).– Know what’s in it by skimming it (Committee Member).– Memorable and Distinctive (Designated Member).

• These properties need a magic formula

– Key Statements– Layout– Tag Phrases

6

2. Requirements

2.1. You want referees to find the detail easily

2.2. You need the committee to know what is in your application.

2.2.1. But most of them will not read it.

2.3. You need the committee to think they understand your research

2.3.1. But they won’t know anything except what you tell them.

2.4. You need readers to remember your case for support

2.5. You need different versions of the story to be consistent.

3. The Magic Formula

Use Key Statements to Define the Application10 Key statements define a standard grant-application

1 State the outcome (overall aim)

2 Say what makes the outcome important

3,4,5 State (& justify) the aims (outcomes of the sub-projects)

6 Summarise the project

7,8,9 Describe the sub-projects (objectives) and their outcomes.

10 State the dissemination plans

• Specialist applications (e.g. fellowships, networks)may have different Key Statements

• Use the key statements as the summary.

• Re-use the key statements to introduce the case for support

• Use a key statement to begin each subsection

• Then follow it with the detail

– that convinces the referee

Use Space to Communicate with Skimmers and Speed-Readers

• Message on first line of paragraph (ASSERT then JUSTIFY)

– First sentence of para ASSERTS (topic sentence)– Remainder of para JUSTIFIES

⇤ This is where you cite literature⇤ This is how you avoid citing too much literature.

• White space above each paragraph

7

• Readers’ eye movements land on blank lines.

– Speed-readers will read first line of every paragraph.– Browsers will only read first lines.– Detail readers will know what to expect in each para

Teach Terminology with Tag Phrases

Key Sentence 3,4,5 ’We need to know’ + tag phrase because....

• We need to understand the relationship between the performance of single neurons andthe performance of the whole visual system in order to establish the likely contribution ofindividual neurons to perception

Key Sentence 7,8,9 ’We will do this sub-project in order to discover’ + tag phrase

• We will record the responses of single neurons during perceptual tasks and calculatesensitivity functions for neural responses and for task performance in order to understandthe relationship between the performance of single neurons and the performance of thewhole visual system.

Structure Makes it Easy to Remember the Case

1. Introduction - 10 Key Statements

2. Background - sets out the need for the project


• Then add the detail



3,4,5 State (& justify) the aims (outcomes of the sub-projects)


3. Description of the Project

6 Summarise the project


7,8,9 Describe the sub-projects (objectives) and their outcomes.10 State the dissemination plans


8

Different versions of the Case should be consistent

• Use key sentences and tag phrases

– to provide common structure, and– to link

• Maintain structure and order

Resources

• Research Council Project Summaries

– http://gtr.rcuk.ac.uk– ERC Summaries

⇤ https://erc.europa.eu/projects-and-results/erc-funded-projects

– Leverhulme Awards 2016

⇤ https://www.leverhulme.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Awards_made/2016-03-RPG.pdf

• Helpful Blog Posts

– How to construct a project

⇤ http://www.parkerderrington.com/build-the-project/

– The key sentences

⇤ http://www.parkerderrington.com/key-sentence-skeletons/

– How to get feedback

⇤ http://www.parkerderrington.com/ten-questions-to-get-feedback-on-a-grant-application/

9

OUTLININGand TESTINGTHE PROJECT

THE OUTLINECONSISTS OFFIVE LISTS(OARRS)

WHAT ARETHE LISTS?

OUTCOMESEach Sub-project produces oneOutcome

O

ACTIVITIES,needed to produce the outcomeincluding:preparationresearch/data collectionanalysispreparation of outputsdissemination

A

SKILLSNeededto carry out theACTIVITIES

S

RESOURCESNeeded to carry outthe ACTIVITIES

RESOURCESto be paid forby the grant.

R

RESOURCESthat will beprovided bythe Institution

R

HOW DO YOUCOMPILETHE LISTS?

Generate a SUB-PROJECTThink of a piece of researchthat you want to dothat will take 25-35%of the duration of the project

OUTCOMESLIST

What will the OUTCOME BE?What will the sub-project discover?or establish?or tell us?

WILL YOU BE ABLETO MAKE A CASETHAT WE NEEDTHIS OUTCOME?

NO

DISCARD THESUB-PROJECT

YES

ADD IT TO THEOUTCOMES LIST

Compile theACTIVITIES LIST

ACTIVITIES LIST What is thefirst activity?ADD IT TOTHEACTIVITIESLIST

Any otheractivitiesneeded toproduceOUTCOME?

NO

Use eachactivity on theACTIVITY LISTto fill theresourcesand skillslists

Who willdo it?

How manymonths willeach personspend on it?

Add THE STAFF TIME theGrant will pay for to theGrant Resources List

Add the other STAFF TIMEto the Institutional Resources List

Whatequipment,consumables,services,spaceand facilitieswill be used?

Add those the Grantwill pay for to theGrant Resources List

Tag byresearchactivity

Add the othersto the InstitutionalResources List


What skillswill beneeded?

Add the skillsto theSkills List


Note WHOhas each skill

And WHICHPUBLICATIONSdemonstrate itLists all

done?PROJECT TESTDo you have a set of 3 or 4 sub-projects?Do they make a coherent overall project.Are they free from 'hostages'Are resource totals in the right range?Are institutional resources available?Do staff posts add up to simple FTE equivalents Yes

StartWriting

No

Generateanothersub-project

YES

Generate thenext activity

TESTINGTHE PROJECT

USING THEPROJECT OUTLINETO WRITE

OUTCOMES

TEST THEIMPORTANCEPROPOSITION

OVERALL AIM/OUTCOME/RESEARCH QUESTION

ENCOMPASSESS ALLTHE SUB-PROJECTOUTCOMES

You MUST giveEVIDENCE that it isIMPORTANT

IMPORTANT,AS DEFINED BY THEFUNDING AGENCY

HEALTH

ENGINEERING

SCIENCE

SOCIAL SCIENCE

HUMANITIES

ECONOMY

SOCIETY

INDIVIDUAL AIMS/SUB-PROJECTOUTCOMES

You MUST giveEVIDENCE that EACH ONE isIMPORTANT

A GOOD WAY TO DO THIS,CAN BE TO SHOW ITIS PART OF YOUR OVERALL AIM

IF YOU CAN'TDO THISDO NOT USETHIS SUBPROJECT

GENERATEKEYSENTENCES

1

THIS PROJECT WILLPRODUCE THE OVERALL

OUTCOME

AIM

BY THISRESPECTABLEMETHOD

WHICH WE HAVE USEDTO ACHIEVE THISOTHER OUTCOME[REFERENCE]

ADDRESS THE BIG QUESTION

2 STATEMENT ABOUT WHAT MAKES THE OVERALL OUTCOME,OR THE BIG QUESTION, IMPORTANT

3-5 WE NEED THIS OUTCOME

AIM

BECAUSE?

6 THE PROJECTWILL COMPRISE

SUMMARY OFALL ACTIVITIES

7-9 THE ACTIVITIES INTHIS SUBPROJECT

OBJECTIVEWILLLEAD TOTHIS

OUTCOME

AIM

10THE OVERALLOUTCOME

WILL MAKE ITPOSSIBLE

TO ADDRESS THISREAL WORLD PROBLEMIN THIS WAY

TO ADDRESS THESERESEARCH QUESTIONSIN THESE WAYS

ACTIVITIES

ContentChecklist

SUCCESSPROPOSITION

DESCRIPTION OF SUB-PROJECTMUST CONVINCE THAT SUB-PROJECTACTIVITIES WILL LEAD TOOUTCOME

DESCRIBERESEARCHACTIVITIES 2-Way

CHECK

Does the descriptioninclude all theactivities.

Do the describedactivities lead to theOUTCOME

GrantRESOURCES

ContentChecklist

VALUE PROPOSITIONChecklist for mentionin the description ofthe project

Resources not mentionedin the description of theresearch may not be funded

InstitutionRESOURCES

ContentChecklist

VALUE PROPOSITIONThey show that the institutionwill contribute to the project.

SUCCESS PROPOSITIONChecklist for mentionINDESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

Resources not mentionedin the description of theresearch may be assumednot to exist.

SKILLS

ContentChecklists

VALUE PROPOSITIONChecklist forjustifying staffpaid for by GrantINDESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

If you don't mentionthe use of a skill inan activity the readermay not know you needstaff with that skill.

Checklist forCOMPETENCEPROPOSITIONinDESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT,BACKGROUND,REFERENCES,SUPPORTING STATEMENTS

Cite Teampublicationsshowing competencein techniques

Achievements sectionshould show successfuluse of all techniques

Mention how youhave used key techniques

Part II.The Perfect First Sentence

4. What should the first sentence say?

What should the first sentence say?What is the first thing the reader wants to know?

• What can you tell the reader that will make them want to read on?

• They will have about 100 other applications they could be reading

• And a TV.

5. Gathering information for a first sentence

Gathering information for a first sentenceAsk your neighbour about their project. Try to understand and remember:-

• What will the project achieve?

• Why would that achievement be important?

• How will the project achieve it?

• Why would they be a good person to carry out the project?

After 3 minutes, change roles and repeat.

6. Writing the First Sentence

Write a first sentence

1. Imagine that you are trying to persuade a committee to invest in your neighbour’s project.

• Write a single sentence that will convince them to do so.• You have 2 minutes.

2. Imagine that you are trying to persuade a committee to invest in your project.

• Write a single sentence that will convince them to do so.• You have 2 minutes.

7. Compare Sentences

Comparing Sentences

• Discuss the first sentences on your table

– Pick the best.– Pick someone to read it.

10

Part III.Key Sentence Writing and Story

Boarding

8. Get the Raw Material

Questions to gather raw material.Imagine you got your grant 6 months ago

1. For the current sub-project

a) What are you actually doing in this sub-project (40 words)?b) What outcome will you get?c) What makes this outcome important?

2. Repeat for the other 2 sub-projects

3. What will be the overall outcome of the project?

• What makes the overall method inherently plausible?• Have you used the method to produce high quality outputs?

4. What is the significance of the overall outcome?

a) What will it allow us to do that we can’t do now?b) Who wants to do that?

5. Which priorities of the funder does the project meet, and how?

6. What must be done to maximise the benefit from the project?

Use your answers to write the key sentences.

9. Create A Key Sentence Skeleton

Sentences 7, 8 & 9 and 3, 4 & 5

• Sentences 7, 8 and 9: Describe what you will do in one of your sub-projects. Then say whatoutcome the sub-project will produce.

– Introduces a subsection of the description of the project.– We will [do the relevant research] in order to [know or establish or develop] + [subproject

outcome].

• Sentences 3, 4 and 5 ’We need to know’ say why we need the outcomes of the sub-projects.

– Introduces a subsection of the Background.– We need to [know or establish or develop]+[sub-project outcome] because......

11

• Rookie mistakes

– Failing to describe the research in 789– Describing the research in 345

Sentence 6

• Sentence 6 introduces the introductory part of the description of the project.

– Summarise the research approach of the project in fewer than 40 words.

Sentence 10

• Sentence 10 introduces your discussion of what will happen after the research is complete

• It will depend to a certain extent on whether the importance is academic or practical or both.

– State in about 40 words what you will do to maximise the benefit from the project.

Sentence 1 & 2: The Elevator Pitch

1. Sentence 1 can have 3 parts:-

a) What the project will achieve.b) The general research approachc) An example of your success using that approach previously.

2. Sentence 2 says what it is that makes the outcome important. For example....

a) Will it allow us to do something that we can’t do now?b) Which named priorities of your funder does it contribute to, and how?

10. Build the Structure with Key Sentences

Build the Structure with Key Sentences

1. Introduction - 10 Key Sentences

2. Background - sets out the need for the project





3,4,5 State (& justify) the aims

• Then add the detail• If you can’t do this revise KS 7,8 & 9 until you can

3. Description of the Project

12

6 Summarise the project• Then add the detail

7,8,9 Describe the sub-projects (objectives) and state that they will achieve the aims.• Then add the detail

10 State the dissemination plans• Then add the detail

11. StoryBoard The Case for Support

StoryBoard a SubProject

• How Storyboarding works

– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrvawtrRxsw

SubProject StoryBoard

• What will you do?– Methodology step by step from start to outcome.

• What outcome will you get?– Background, Methodology

• What are the things that make that outcome important to the funder?– Background

• Who are the real-world beneficiaries?– Background Impact

• How will they benefit?– Background Impact

StoryBoard a Case For Support

CaseForSupport StoryBoard - Reorganise the sub-project storyboards

• Background– Overview of the outcomes– Importance– What makes each individual outcome Important

• Methodology– Overview of the 3 SubProjects– Each SubProject– Dissemination

• Introduction– First sentences of each subsection

• Impact– Who Benefits?– How will they benefit?

13

Ways to Storyboard

• Hardware

– Index cards– Notebooks

• Software

– Powerpoint slides & Slide Sorter– MS Word Outline View– Scrivener– Ulysses– Storify

Index Cards

Powerpoint

14

MS Word Outline View

15

Scrivener

16

Structuring the Case for Support AHRC

ResearchContext

Introduce TopicExplain Context

Demonstrate Knowledge

Key Sentence 1.1

Key Sentence 2

Key Sentence 3

Key Sentence 4

Key Sentence 5

ImportanceProposition

TechnicalSummary

ProjectManagement

Dissemination Key Sentence 10 Activities

Research Questions

or Problems

Key Sentences 1-5As Introduction

ResearchMethods

Key Sentence 9 Activities




Key Sentence 1.1and 5-10 as Aim & Objectives

Section that IntroducesProgramme & Methodology

SuccessProposition

Structuring the Case for Support ESRC

Introduction

Set aims & objectivesin context;"sketch the main work on which the research will draw, with references"state research questions'Include policy or practical background'

Key Sentence 1.1Justification(Literature)

Key Sentence 2

Justification(Literature)


Key Sentence 3


Key Sentence 4


Key Sentence 5Justification(Literature)

ImportanceProposition

ResearchMethods

'Full and Detailed Description of Methods"Data CollectionSamplingAnalysisPotential ProblemsExplain anyInnovationin Methodology





Key Sentence 6Activities

SuccessProposition

DatasetsReview

Structuring the case for support

EPSRC

EPSRC Guidance

Track Record

This section gives you the opportunity to demonstrate

that the team involved in the proposed project has

the appropriate mix of skills, expertise and experience to carry out the research

Summary of resultsand conclusions of recent work

in area.

Specific Expertise

Relevant collaboration

Contribution of past work to UK competitiveness or

quality of life.

CompetenceProposition

Description ofProposed Research

and its Context

Background

Introduce topic and explain context

Demonstrate knowledge & understanding of past

and current work

Academic Impact

Describe benefit to other researchers

Explain collaborationand role of each visiting

researcher.

Research Hypothesisand Objectives

Set out idea or hypothesis

Explain why it'stimely and novel

Identify overall aimand individual objectives.

Programme andMethodology

Methodology

Programme of work& milestones

Managementof ProjectNational Importance

AMD Guidance

Description ofProposed Research

and its Context Background

Introduce TopicKey Sentence 1 Background

KS 1-5 as Introduction

KS 6-10 Can be hereor below

Explain why it'stimely and novel

Demonstrate knowledge & understanding of past

and current work

Key Sentence 2 Background

Key Sentence 3Background



Explain Context

Importanceproposition

ResearchHypothesis

and Objectives

Set out idea or hypothesis

Identify overall aimand individual objectives.

KS 1 and 6-10as Link to Programme

and Methodology

Programme andMethodology

Methodology

Key Sentence 6Descriptionof Project

Programme of work& milestones

Key Sentence 8 Descriptionof Project

Key Sentence 7 Descriptionof Project

Key Sentence 9 Descriptionof ProjectManagement

of Project

Academic Impact

Key Sentence 10

DisseminationPlans

Explain collaborationand role of each visiting

researcher.

National Importance

Describe benefit to other researchers

SuccessProposition

Track Record

Follow EPSRCGuidance Exactly

Structuring the Case for Support

BBSRC

Track Record1 or 2 pages

Summary ofPrevious Work

BBSRC

Non BBSRC

CollaborationWith Industry

RelevantExpertise

Past Contributionto UK

Pilot Data?

6 or 7 pages8 page total

Background

Introduce TopicExplain Context

Demonstrate Knowledge

Key Sentence 1.1 Justification(Literature)

Key Sentence 2 Justification(Literature)





Programme &Methodology

Aim & Objectives

Key Sentence 1.1and 6-10 as Aim & Objectives

Section that IntroducesProgramme & MethodologyMethodology

ExplainTimeliness & Novelty

Detailed Programme






MRC Case for Support and Key Sentences

November 4, 2015

Notes on how the key sentences fit into different sections of the MRC case

for support. MRC Instructions are on-line at Je-S

1 Title

2 Importance

2.1 This project will..... (start with Key sentence 1)

Amplify it a bit and link to Key sentence 2. You should only need a very short

paragraph.

2.2 Fact about the world or about science that makes it

clear the project is important to the funder KS2

You should only need a couple of paragraphs to make it clear how your project

meets MRC priorities. In their words “Justify the research either through its im-

portance for human health, or its contribution to relevant areas of basic biomed-

ical science”.

2.3 “We need to know....” Subsection headed by KS 3

The meat of this subsection is about how we need to know what the correspond-

ing part of the project will discover, either because it is part of the overall aim

(KS-1) or because it is important in its own right.





1





3 Scientific potential

3.1 People and track record

MRC instructions are pretty clear.

3.2 Environment

MRC instructions are pretty clear.

3.3 Research plans

3.3.1 “Overview of the project” Subsection headed by KS 6

3.3.2 Introduction to sub-project; Subsection headed by KS 7



4 Ethics and Research Governance

See MRC Instructions, on-line at Je-S - keep it very short

5 Data Preservation for Sharing

See MRC Instructions, on-line at Je-S - keep it very short

6 Public engagement in science

See MRC Instructions, on-line at Je-S - keep it short unless you are requesting

funds.

7 Exploitation and dissemination Subsection headed

by KS-10

2

SELPH Research-Grant Workshop [email protected]

4.4. Dissecting the role of Osteoprotegerin and related signallingpathways in the pathogenesis of pulmonary arterial hypertension

AbstractPulmonary arterial hypertension is a devastating and life threatening condition that often affectsthe young. The disease is characterised by the loss of blood vessels within the lung. However,the exact mechanisms of the disease process remain unclear. We have evidence from both clinicalstudies and experiments in the laboratory to suggest that a protein called osteoprotegerin (OPG) ispresent at abnormally high levels in this condition. I will investigate how OPG and related proteinsare controlled and whether the abnormally high level of OPG is actively causing/driving disease or adiagnostic bystander. To do this I will perform studies in animal models of disease and engineer amouse that over-expresses OPG to test whether these mice develop pulmonary arterial hypertension.In addition I will use new high throughput protein screening techniques to identify the importantintermediary molecules with the goal of identifying novel targets for potential new therapies.

Technical SummaryPulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a devastating and life threatening condition often affectingyoung women, limiting their physical capacity, and decreasing life expectancy (median 2.8 years with-out treatment). Current drug treatments fail to reverse disease, leaving lung transplant as the onlycurative treatment. Pathologically PAH is characterised by the obliteration of the distal pulmonaryarteries. Early endothelial cell (EC) dysfunction and apoptosis, and the subsequent abnormal pro-liferation and migration of pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells (PA-SMC) are thought to be themajor contributing factors but the molecular mechanisms responsible are unknown. I have recentlydescribed heightened expression of osteoprotegerin (OPG) in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH)patients, and that OPG induces proliferation and migration of pulmonary artery smooth muscle cellsin vitro. These data are the first to demonstrate that OPG is increased in PAH and that it regulatesPA-SMC proliferation and migration. It is unclear, and I aim to determine whether OPG is causaland/or a potential new biomarker in PAH. To this end, the objectives for this fellowship are to 1)determine the temporal relationship between the pattern of OPG expression and onset/progressionof PAH in animal models 2) Determine whether over-expression of OPG expression causes PAH ina transgenic mouse model. 3) Determine whether blocking OPG with a neutralising OPG antibodyprevents and/or reverses PAH in animal models, and 4) Identify associated binding partners andsignalling processes involved in OPG-induced PA-SMC proliferation and migration. To achieve theseobjectives I will use a combination of established rodent models for PAH and generate a transgenicmouse that over-expresses OPG in vascular smooth muscle cells. Finally using a systems biologyapproach, I will identify OPG binding partners and subsequent signalling mechanisms by a combina-tion of Biacore technology, MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry and protein array to determine the keymolecules that mediate OPG-induced PA-SMC proliferation and migration. The data generated willprovide valuable insights into the role of OPG in that pathogenesis of PAH and potentially identifynovel therapeutic targets for the treatment of PAH.

SELPH Research-Grant Workshop [email protected]

4.5. Key Sentence rewrite: Dissecting the role of Osteoprotegerin andrelated signalling pathways in the pathogenesis of pulmonary arterialhypertension

1. This project will test a potential therapeutic target for pulmonary arterial hypertension by ex-tending our recent discovery that osteoprotegerin is increased in pulmonary arterial hypertensionand that it regulates pulmonary arterial smooth muscle cell proliferation and migration.

2. Pulmonary arterial hypertension is a devastating disease that often affects young women, lim-iting physical capacity and life expectancy (median 2.8 years without treatment). Abnormalproliferation and migration of pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells are thought to be the majorcontributing factors in the disease. Current drug treatments fail to reverse the disease, leavinglung transplant as the only curative treatment.

3. We need to know the temporal relationship between osteoprotegerin expression and diseaseonset/progression in animal models in order to establish whether osteoprotegerin is a potentialbiomarker for pulmonary arterial hypertension.

4. We need to know the causal relationship between over-expression of osteoprotegerin and on-set/progression of pulmonary arterial hypertension in animal models.

5. We need to know the associated binding partners and signalling processes involved in osteoprotegerin-induced proliferation and migration of pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells in order to identifypotential therapeutic targets.

6. The project will use a systems biology approach, based on established rodent models for pul-monary arterial hypertension and a transgenic mouse that over-expresses osteoprotegerin invascular smooth muscle cells and that will be created in the project.

7. The project will characterise disease progression in established animal models to establish thetemporal relationship between the pattern of osteoprotegerin expression and onset/progressionof pulmonary arterial hypertension in animal models.

8. The project will create a transgenic mouse model that overexpresses osteoprotegerin and testwhether blocking OPG with a neutralising osteoprotegerin antibody prevents and/or reversespulmonary arterial hypertension in the transgenic mouse and in established animal models toestablish the causal relationship between over-expression of osteoprotegerin and disease on-set/progression.

9. The projectwill use a combination of Biacore technology, MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry andprotein array to determine the associated binding partners and signalling processes involved inosteoprotegerin-induced proliferation and migration of pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells.

10. The data generated will clarify the role of osteoprotegerin in the pathogenesis of pulmonary ar-terial hypertension and potentially identify a number of novel therapeutic targets for treatment.

Is (8) a hostage?

Research-Grant Workshop [email protected]

Presenter

Andrew Derrington has in-depth experience of the research funding process. He obtainedhis first research grant, a Beit Memorial Fellowship for Medical Research, while he was writ-ing his PhD. His research was continuously funded by fellowships, project and programmegrants for the next 30 years. He served on research grant committees for The Science andEngineering Research Council, the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust. Hisbook,The Research Funding Toolkit, which he co-wrote with Jacqueline Aldridge, researchmanager at Kent Business School, is the definitive guide to grant writing for early ca-reer academics and research professionals. It is based on Andrew’s analysis of how grantscommittees make funding decisions.Andrew has worked in eight Universities including two in the world top ten. He has led aSchool of Biology in a Faculty of Science, Agriculture and Engineering. He has been Deanof a Faculty of Social Sciences and Pro Vice Chancellor of a Faculty of Humanities andSocial Sciences.Andrew has also worked as a journalist. Over several years he wrote two successful columnsin the Financial Times. The Nature of Things covered science – from astrophysics tozoology. Psych Yourself Up was a guide to the different psychotherapies available in the

UK.

Testimonials

Andrew blends easy authority and extensive experience with humour and approachability. The result is a workshop full of practical,memorable advice on how to compete more successfully for research funding.

Professor Peter Clegg, Institute Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool

I attended one of Andrew’s workshops when I was a senior lecturer. The hands on advice about how to structure my applications ina really appealing fashion enabled me to win a grant of nearly £600K the next year. I still implement the advice that I received inthat workshop, and pass it down to junior colleagues. I find that Andrew’s advice has a high success rate!

Prof Theresa Gannon, University of Kent

I still use the tips you gave me for my successful Wellcome SRF application. Your advice on "12 key sentences" is spot-on and helpspeople focus on the aspects of the proposal that are critical to success instead of getting bogged down in reams of text.

Prof Mark Baxter, Mount Sinai School of Medicine

Andrew’s grant-writing workshops teach you how to convince the worldthat it needs your research. They are the most useful training eventsI have ever attended. His advice about how to sell the big idea withoutcompromising on the science was critical to the success of our £9.3 millionESRC application.

Prof Julian Pine, University of Liverpool

Parker Derrington Ltd

33 Dovecot RoadEdinburghEH12 7LFT: 07952 154999E: [email protected]: www.parkerderrington.com

Documents

Programme - Parker Derrington Ltd...Research-Grant Workshop [email protected] Parker Derrington Ltd 33 Dovecot Road Edinburgh EH12 7LF T: 07952 154999 E: [email protected]