World Report

www.thelancet.com Vol 384 November 29, 2014 1913

Wellcome Trust overhauls its funding frameworkThe Wellcome Trust changed its funding policy last week to focus more on collaborative and innovative research eff orts. Emma Wilkinson asked researchers their views on the reforms.

As the UK’s largest charity and one of the world’s biggest funders of biomedical research, the Wellcome Trust has deep pockets, spending around £700 million a year. Last week, the organisation revamped the way it plans to distribute its funds—a move that has received a positive reception by many in the UK science community.

Under the new system researchers will be able to apply for funding as a group to make team projects easier to plan and cross-discipline studies less onerous as well as speeding up the pace of discovery.

Additionally, researchers are being encouraged to bid for seed funding of up to £100 000 to test out “new and original ideas” that might need some early work before a larger research application is possible.

The renewed framework also scraps the concept of new and senior investigators after concerns that researchers were falling through the cracks in the middle of their careers, explains Wellcome Trust director Jeremy Farrar. The Trust also wants to draw a clearer line between strategic and responsive funding—that is a distinction between long-term priorities and the day-to-day resourcing of people, ideas, and equipment.

“Organisations such as the Wellcome Trust are independent and not part of the political cycle and we have a responsibility to step back and look at where the gaps are and what our long-term vision should be”, said Farrar.

But it is also about making sure that at a time when the overall spend of the Wellcome Trust is growing, the “right opportunities” are available for the diff erent kinds of researcher and projects that make up the charity’s portfolio, he explained.

Farrar added that the introduction of seed funding was not just about

“blue-sky thinking. It is about an appreciation of how science works and that sometimes you just need some preliminary data to take you to the next step.”

Although there remains “great store” to be had in supporting individual researchers, Farrar said, collaboration was a vital part of the picture. Using the example of combating the spread of Ebola, he said the approach will lead to solutions that “are more than the sum of their parts”.

He also believes that having one route for those seeking investigator awards rather than pigeon-holing people into being “new” or “senior” will make career progression a simpler process. “The reality is there are a lot of researchers who fall into a grey area, and I was worried we were becoming compartmentalised”, he explained. “We wanted to put the person first again rather than put them in a box, and judge them on where they are and their experience to date.”

“You need a really vibrant community coming into research and you need to off er them a pathway, a starting point with a degree of independence and a welcoming environment”, he said.

Nigel Brown, president of the Society for General Microbiology, said any simplifi cation of the funding process had to be a helpful step. “Even established researchers can be confused by the complex funding schemes of diff erent funding agencies.”

Adrian Bird, professor of genetics at the University of Edinburgh, agreed that collaborative grants would be useful. “There are many opportunities for collaborative research, but much grant funding is traditionally oriented towards single groups.”

He added: “I don’t see a relentless trend towards ‘bigger’ science as either inevitable or intrinsically good. That being said, collaborative projects are often vital and this provides a straightforward way of funding them.”

For those whose research falls between disciplines, the announce-ment might offer a sense of relief. Jennifer Rohn, a cell biologist at University College London is collaborating with engineers using nanotechnology to solve problems with treating urinary tract infections. “We have been piecing together funding in dribs and drabs and it is really ineffi cient”, she said.

Rohn, who founded Science is Vital to campaign against public cuts to funding in the UK, added: “You used to be able to get project grants for interesting ideas but that has fallen out of fashion and it now seems to all be about funding people. If you had an idea but you’re not famous it has been harder and harder to get the money. So this [new framework] is good news.”

Will other funders be following the Wellcome Trust’s lead? John Savill, chief executive of the Medical Research Council, said the revamped funding framework showed “tremendous vision” for the future of UK science. “Innovation doesn’t happen within a rigid set of boundaries, and this new framework will give our brightest scientific minds the freedom and fl exibility to respond to new challenges as and when they occur.”

Emma Wilkinson

Jeremy Farrar

“‘Innovation doesn’t happen within a rigid set of boundaries, and this new framework will give our brightest scientifi c minds the freedom and fl exibility to respond to new challenges as and when they occur.’”

Wel

lcom

e Tru

st, W

ellco

me

Imag

es