The lifecycle of a grant

1
The life-cycle of a grant

• Belinda Richardson
• Head of Research Development
• Queensland University of Technology
• b2.richardson_at_qut.edu.au

2
Program

• Preparing for the Team activities
• Stages in the life-cycle of a grant
• Team activities considering some fundamental
  processes and services around the life-cycle of a
  grant
• Team findings and discussion

3
Preparing for the Team activities

• ARC Discovery-Projects Grants will be used as the
  working scheme
• At least one person at each table who has been
  involved in ARC Discovery Grants
• Mix of Go8 and others at each table
• Try to mix pre- and post-award managers spread
  others (e.g. ethics officers)
• Allocate each table as Group 1,2,3 or 4
• Each group will be allocated an activity and
  report back

4
Stages in the life-cycle of a grant
5
Think about

• Further flow-charts could be shown for each
  process step shown within each phase of the
  life-cyclehow long is a piece of string?
• The participants in each stage of the cycle
  (individuals and organisational units internal
  and external) and how they need to
  interact/communicate within and between stages in
  the cycle.
• Skills and knowledge sets needed to undertake
  each stage of the cycle and where you will find
  these people in your organisation.
• Management of grants involves many individuals
  and teams with different skills and knowledge
  sets across each stage of the life-cycle of a
  grant.

6

• Individuals and teams cut across organisational
  units and sometimes even organisations (e.g.
  CRCs, ARC Linkage)
• You will never be an expert on the whole
  life-cycle of a grant
• Relationship of each stage of the cycle to
  relevant University policies (not just Research
  policy), Commonwealth/State regulations and
  legislation (e.g. ethics)
• External factors (things you cant change) fixed
  deadlines and rules/guidelines, ethics, etc.

7

• Variables change, so you need to build in
  flexibility
• Every application, grant and grant scheme is
  unique
• Schemes change from round to round
• University parameters change (policies
  procedures, sources of corporate knowledge,
  strategic priorities, etc.)
• Every University does things differently, e.g.
• Differences between Go8 and non-Go8 are
  particularly obvious
• Different administrative structures
  (central/devolved/dual models differently
  structured admin divisions, etc.)
• The old way will not necessarily be the
  benchmark (review processes frequently and aim
  for continual improvement), but dont change just
  for the sake of it.

8

• Always consider your clients when designing
  business processes and services
• Research teams, funding organisations, faculty
  administrators
• Researchers despise red tape minimise it and
  emphasise benefits of a process to them (e.g.
  early closing dates and peer-review higher
  quality application higher success rate ethics
  approval affirmation of approach and
  respectability, etc.)
• Hierarchies sometimes you have to follow
  direction (e.g. from your DVCR) even if you think
  its flawed
• Do express your opinion to your supervisor
• Dont express your opinion elsewhere
• You may have to champion the direction even if
  you dont like it

9
Pre-award cycle
10
Acceptance cycle
11
Set-up cycle
12
Post-award cycle
13
Team activities

14
Team 1

• Outline an administrative process (detailing
  participants, dates etc. at each process point)
  for the preparation, internal and ARC submission
  of Discovery applications by University X. Assume
  University X is a Go8 who submits an avg. 300
  applications annually with an RO Discovery team
  of around 4 people.
• How would you vary the process if you were
  University Y, a non-Go8 with 8 faculties who
  submits about 50 applications annually with an RO
  Discovery team of 2 people?

15
Team 2

• Outline an ARC Discovery peer-review program for
  draft applications that would be suitable for
  University X (Go8 University submitting 300
  applications, last round had a 30 success rate).
  Think about, e.g.
• Who would run the program
• Where would peer-reviewers be found
• Timing, etc.
• Would this program work for University Y (non Go8
  submitting 50 applications, last few rounds had a
  success rate of 15)? Would you organise anything
  differently?

16
Team 3

• You have been appointed Research Manager in your
  Faculty, which in the past few years has
  submitted 30 Discovery applications annually but
  only won 1-3 grants annually. You have been given
  a target of increasing new Discovery grants to
  6-10 annually and a budget of 20,000 p.a. to
  help achieve it.
• The Faculty has 10 staff with Discovery track
  records. Three are maxed out and cant reapply
  next round.
• The Faculty has not had an ARC Discovery
  strategy to increase its success rate (it has
  just followed Research Office process).
• (1) how would you determine the reasons for the
  Facultys poor success rate?
• (2) summarise a strategy the Faculty can follow
  to improve it. Include how you would apply the
  20,000 budget.

17
Team 4

• To attract top-rate Discovery fellowship
  applicants, your universitys DVC Research has
  offered to top up Discovery fellowship salaries
  on new grants by 10,000 per annum for APDs
  15,000 per annum for ARF/QEIIs and 20,000 per
  annum for APFs. The offer only applies to
  external applicants, contributions must be
  matched by Faculties, and must be pre-approved
  before Discovery applications are submitted.
• (1) Outline a process for approval of requests,
  including what information the DVCR will need to
  consider and potential issues that may need
  clarification.
• (2) Outline a process for ensuring that
  contributions are managed appropriately for
  successful fellowships (i.e. that contributions
  are received and applied as directed).

18
Team findings and discussion