ATTENTION! The procedure for issuing Consent to recognition electronic documents signed in KIAS RFBR simple electronic signature
- Consent to the recognition of electronic documents is issued in accordance with the Procedure for issuing Consent to the recognition of electronic documents signed in the CIAS RFBR with a simple electronic signature, equivalent to documents drawn up on paper, and confirmation of the information specified by the Users in the CIAS RFBR (hereinafter referred to as the Consent), published in personal accounts KIAS RFBR.
- authorized person to certify the signature of the CIAS User - an employee (postgraduate student, student) of MSU, the dean / director, deputy dean / director for scientific work or academic secretary can be on Consent structural unit, whose signature is certified by the seal of the unit. Responsibility for the accuracy of the certified information rests with the authorized person.
- The issued Consent (certified and stamped) can be sent to the RFBR, including in batches, both by mail and through a mailbox in the building of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
I. Registration of Applications for participation in RFBR competitions
The Application for the Competition is submitted by the Project Manager in accordance with the procedure established by the Foundation (http://www.rfbr.ru/rffi/ru/): in electronic format through the information system - KIAS RFBR.
If the project is planned to be implemented at Moscow State University, then when applying to the KIAS RFBR for correct design Forms 3(Information about the organization) as the organization through which the project will be financed, you must select the organization:
TIN/KPP 7729082090/772901001
federal state budget educational institution higher education"Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov";
short name of the organization: Lomonosov Moscow State University, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow University or Moscow State University
In accordance with the Rules for granting federal state budget institution"Russian Foundation for Basic Research" grants at the expense of a targeted subsidy from federal budget only a legal entity can act as an organization in which a scientific project is being implemented. In this regard, project financing through branches, representative offices and other separate institutions that are not legal entities, not allowed.
If a subdivision of Moscow State University is specified as a financing organization, then the Application Forms will be generated by the CIAS system incorrectly.
It is necessary to specify the organization of financing when forming the application. This can be done without changing the information about the place of work in your personal account.
In accordance with the “Procedure for the implementation of projects supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research”, approved by the Order of the Moscow State University dated March 12, 2019, in order to obtain the consent of the organization to provide conditions for the implementation of the project at Moscow University, it is necessary to issue an application from the Grantee, agreed with the head (deputy head for scientific work) of the structural unit at the main place of work of the project head.
! For participation in Competition for best projects fundamental scientific research carried out by young scientists studying in graduate school ("Postgraduates") Application for participation in the RFBR competition "ASPIRANT"
!
For participation in Competition for the best projects of fundamental scientific research carried out by young scientists - candidates of sciences in scientific organizations of the Russian Federation ("Prospect")
, it is necessary to obtain the consent of Moscow University to submit an application to the RFBR. To do this, it is necessary to draw up an Application for a young scientist, coordinate it with the head (deputy head for scientific work) of the structural unit in which the project is planned to be implemented, and then submit it to the Department of Scientific Policy and Organization of Scientific Research (GZ MGU, room 1010).
Attention! To the winners of the RFBR competitions "Aspirant" and "Perspektiva", who did not receive the consent of MSU when submitting an application, in signing an agreement between the RFBR and MSU may be denied.
IV. Procedure for signing reports on RFBR grants
Information about the project must be entered into the IAS "Nauka-MGU" ("True") before submitting the report for signature to the Vice-Rector.
Reports are drawn up by the Project Manager in the manner and terms established by the Fund.
To obtain correct information when completing Appendix 4 (Information on payments made by the organization on behalf of the project manager), you must contact the financial services of the unit. Print form Appendix 4 is drawn up in 3 copies: the 1st copy is provided to the RFBR as part of the general grant report, the 2nd copy is to be kept by the project manager for 3 years after the end of the project, the 3rd copy is to be kept at Moscow State University.
Appendix 4 is signed by the Deputy Chief Accountant of Moscow State University E.N. Zagretskaya and vice-rector - head of UNPioni.
To obtain the signatures of the Deputy Chief Accountant of Moscow State University and the Vice-Rector, Appendix 4 must have visas (with a decryption of the signature):
- project manager;
- chief accountant of the subdivision (for subdivisions serviced by the Central Bank of Moscow State University - an authorized employee of the Central Accounting Department of Moscow State University (educational building 1, room 330, office hours: Mon - Thu from 14:00 to 17:00);
- head (deputy head for scientific work) of the unit.
Documents for the signature of the Deputy Chief Accountant of Moscow State University are accepted at the Central Accounting Department of Moscow State University (1 educational building, room 348, office hours: Mon - Thu from 14:00 to 17:00).
For the Vice-Rector's signature, simultaneously with Appendix 4, provide the Project Data Control Sheet printed from the IAS "Science-MGU" ("True") (Decree No. 108 of 06/13/2017).
Documents for the vice-rector's signature are accepted at UNPIONI.
General provisions.
When transferring to the Foundation materials containing data that may become subject to copyright, including when submitting applications and reports on projects and other related documents, the project manager submitting the materials must ensure that during their creation the copyrights and other rights of third parties were not violated and there is the consent of the copyright holders for their submission to the Foundation and their use by the Foundation for conducting an examination and for publishing the results of the study.
All types of support for fundamental scientific research are carried out by the Foundation on a competitive basis, regardless of age, academic title, academic degree or position held by a scientist, as well as departmental affiliation scientific organization with which the scientist has an employment relationship.
A scientist can participate as a leader in each type of competition in several areas of competitive activity. For example, to be the head of one project “a” and one project “r_a” at the same time (see Table 1).
These restrictions do not apply to competitions of the “g” type.
A scientist can also participate as a performer in each type of competition in several areas of competitive activity. For example, to be the executor of one project "a" and one project "r_a" at the same time. Participation as an executor in a project managed by an administratively subordinate person is prohibited.
The condition for granting financial support by the Foundation is the obligation of scientists to make the results of research into the public domain by publishing them without fail, including necessarily in Russian publications. When publishing any scientific work created as a result of research within the framework of a project financed by the Foundation, the authors are required to refer to the received grant, indicating its number. A prerequisite is also the consent of the authors to the publication by the Foundation of annotations on the supported project and scientific reports (in print and electronic form).
Funds allocated by the Foundation are used in accordance with the approved "List of types of expenses for the implementation of RFBR projects", which is an annex to the agreement "Fund - Head - Organization" and posted on the RFBR website.
The following are not allowed to the competition:
- projects that are not designed according to the rules;
– projects for the publication of scientific papers without a manuscript or trial translation;
– drafts submitted by fax, by e-mail or on electronic media;
- projects received by the Fund after the announced deadline.
Also, research projects are not allowed to the competition, the name and content of which completely coincide with the name and content of any planned topic carried out in the organization and financed from the federal budget (responsibility for compliance with this condition rests with the project manager). In case of project support, it is necessary to obtain a registration number at the Center information technologies and systems of executive authorities (CITiS).
It is forbidden to submit the same initiative project simultaneously to various RFBR competitions (for example, to "a" and "m_a"). A project supported by any competition is prohibited from submitting to any competitions in the future.
Materials submitted for the competition are not returned (except for manuscripts, which the authors must pick up from the RFBR within three months after the results of the competition of projects for publishing scientific papers are approved). Substitutions of pages and changes in the text of the submitted project are not allowed.
Applications may be printed on both sides.
The Fund notifies the project manager about receiving a printed copy of the project, about not being admitted to the competition and about the results of the competition through the Grant-Express system (on the page "Your projects" in the "Status" field).
Expertise. All applications admitted to the competition undergo a multi-stage independent examination. Information about the content of the projects and about passing the examination is strictly confidential. In accordance with the rules of the Foundation, experts and employees do not have the right to disclose it.
Conditions for the implementation of supported projects. The project is financed through the organization specified by the project manager (F). This should be an organization - the place of work of the head (P) or the organization in which work is carried out on the project (K). Funding through other organizations is not allowed. The amount and terms of financing are communicated to the heads of projects and organizations (in the package of documents attached to the agreement "Fund - Head - Organization").
In the event of circumstances that prevent the project manager from performing his functions, the Fund considers the feasibility and conditions for continuing financing of work on this project. The decision to replace the project manager is made by the Bureau of the Council of the Fund on the basis of the conclusion of the relevant expert council.
The project manager is obliged to immediately inform the Fund about changes in the conditions for the implementation of the project, including violations related to the expenditure of funds allocated by the Fund.
The change of the organization through which the financing of the project is carried out is possible on the proposal of the project manager in situations where: the management of the organization does not comply with the conditions of the Fund or hinders the implementation of the project; the project manager (or team) has changed jobs.
The relations of the parties are governed by the agreement "Fund - Head - Organization", which is legal document establishing the mutual responsibility of the parties for the entire period of the project.
In accordance with the agreement, the PROJECT MANAGER IS OBLIGED:
1. Strictly within the time limits specified by the Fund, draw up an estimate of the costs for the implementation of the project within the planned amount of financing and submit it for approval to the Fund.
2. Ensure the implementation of the project in accordance with the declared program and deadlines.
3. Ensure that the funds allocated for the project are used for the intended purpose, in strict accordance with the rules of the Fund and the approved cost estimate within the annual volume of project financing.
4. Strictly within the established deadlines, submit to the Foundation scientific and financial reports on the implementation of the project or its individual stages.
5. When publishing any scientific work created as a result of research within the framework of a project funded by the Foundation, refer to the received grant, indicating its number.
6. In case of impossibility to obtain the expected results and / or revealing the inexpediency (impossibility) of continuing the work, immediately inform the Fund about this and submit the final scientific and financial reports on the project.
7. Immediately inform the Fund in cases where the project manager is unable for any reason (long - more than three months - a business trip, serious illness, etc.) to perform his duties.
THE PROJECT MANAGER HAS THE RIGHT:
1. Spending the grant funds in accordance with the cost estimate approved by the Foundation and with normative documents RFBR.
2. Adjust the research program and cost estimate within the framework of the announced tasks and goals of the competitive project.
3. Correct the list of co-executing organizations.
4. Change the composition of the executors of the competitive project, notifying the Foundation in the report.
5. As a matter of priority, use the equipment purchased at the expense of the grant for the implementation of the project program during the entire period of work on the project.
6. Keep the received grant and the equipment, appliances and durables purchased with the FUND funds (including software and materials) in case of transfer to another place of work under the following conditions:
a) work on the declared and funded by the grant competitive project will be continued;
b) The FUND will be notified of the transfer to another place of work by an appropriate letter within a month from the moment of transfer;
c) the expert council in the relevant field of knowledge agrees with the change in the organization of project financing;
d) the rules defined for this case will be followed.
The head also undertakes to documentally inform the Fund about the results of the work on the project, which have signs of patentability, commercial use or defense (dual) use, within two months from the date of completion of the work on the project.
In the case of obtaining the results of scientific and technical activities (RSTD), the head is obliged, within the framework of the agreement "Fund - Head - Organization", to record these results in accordance with applicable law.
When submitting a project to the competition, the manager determines the deadline for its implementation, which cannot be subsequently extended. The decision to continue financing the work on the project for the next year (within the specified deadline) is made by the Fund on the basis of an expert review of annual scientific and financial statements. Timely submission of annual and final reports by the project manager (including in case of early completion of the project) - required condition Foundation. In case of a negative expert opinion on the report, the financing of the project may be terminated ahead of schedule on the basis of the decision of the Board of the Foundation on the proposal of the expert board. The decision of the Board of the Foundation is final. Claims based on the results of consideration of reports are not accepted.
Funding for scientific research in Russian academic institutions and universities is carried out mainly at the expense of funds distributed by scientific foundations or targeted programs on a competition basis. The main state scientific foundations that fund fundamental research in Russia are the Russian Science Foundation (RNF), the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR), the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation (RGHF), the Council for Grants of the President of the Russian Federation, and the Council for Grants of the Government of the Russian Federation for state support scientific research.
In order to receive a grant for a specific scientific project, it is required to submit an application to the fund, drawn up in accordance with the terms of the announced competition. Each application is first evaluated by experts, and then by the expert council of the fund, which makes a decision on the allocation of funding or on the refusal of support. This article provides general advice on preparing applications for grant competitions from Russian scientific foundations. These tips are based largely on personal experience and can serve as a starting point for getting to know key sources in the art of obtaining research funding. The above recommendations may be useful to a novice researcher who needs to independently prepare applications for grants from scientific foundations.
Fund selection
It is desirable to start preparing and submit applications for participation in competitions for research grants from scientific foundations already in your student years. Indeed, it is quite difficult to win a grant to support the research of an independent scientific group without experience in managing individual grants. Participate in research funding competitions for undergraduate and graduate students held at your university, city, region. The experience gained will gradually allow the preparation of high-quality and successful applications.
It is better to start with grant applications with a relatively small amount of funding. As a rule, in competitions with a small allocated amount of funds, it is simplified financial statements, so less effort will be required to manage the project. When preparing applications for small grant competitions, the main attention can be paid to the scientific component of the project.
Carefully read the terms of the programs of various public and private funds and choose the most suitable grant competition for your work. Choose reliable funds with a good reputation and an expert board, which includes leading scientists. It is necessary to clearly understand what projects the organizers of the competition plan to support: fundamental or applied, short-term or long-term, individual or collective. It is not necessary to take part in all available competitions - this will allow you to correctly allocate time between scientific work and the search for funding. At the same time, it is important to remember that it is incorrect to send the same application to several funds at the same time.
It is advisable to look at the lists of projects supported by the Foundation of past years, which will allow you to get an idea of the preferences of the expert council on research topics and the qualifications of project managers. In recent years, many foundations have published statistics on the percentage of rejected applications, areas of expertise, and the age of the leaders of supported projects. An analysis of this information can be helpful in deciding whether this competition is suitable for funding your research project.
Be sure to carefully study the expert's questionnaire and the criteria by which the application for a grant will be evaluated. Remember that an expert is usually a very busy person and will not have the opportunity to search / request additional information about the project and its performers. All information that meets the project evaluation criteria must be included in the application. If some criterion, for example, the prospects for the applied application of the results, for objective reasons, is not suitable for evaluating your project, try to explain this in the text of the application.
Name and abstract of the project
Annotation is summary applications. It should reflect all the components of the project: the relevance of the study, the purpose of the work, the main objectives of the study, the strategy and approaches used, the novelty of the expected results, their significance for this field of science and possible practical application. Tips for each section are provided below. When preparing an abstract, use generally accepted terminology, avoid using abbreviations and technical jargon.
TO common mistakes novice applicants can be attributed to the absence in the abstract of the formulation of the scientific problem being solved. Decide what type of research you plan to do: filling gaps in the existing body of scientific data, resolving existing contradictions, or breakthrough research on the research front.
Useful when preparing annotations concrete examples in which one can find successful formulations and expressions, but which, of course, cannot be completely copied. Examples of abstracts of supported applications for participation in competitions for research grants can be found on the websites of some major scientific foundations, such as the Russian Science Foundation: http://grant.rscf.ru/searchproj#
Keywords should be relevant to the topic of the study, as they are often used to select the experts who will evaluate the application, and the section of the expert council, which will select the best projects.
The name of the project should not be too scientific and may even be original, emphasizing the relevance of your ideas. At the same time, the title should not be too broad and general. When formulating the topic, try not to be verbose. To compile the first version of the name, it is recommended to use keywords project.
Goals and objectives of the project
The scientific goal of the project must be formulated immediately and very clearly. Of course, the planned study should be very high level. At the same time, even an original and interesting scientific idea does not always find support among experts. Therefore, the main goal of the research in the grant application must be, on the one hand, relevant and, on the other hand, achievable. In other words, it is important to strike a balance between the value of research for a given field of science and the risk of project failure.
After the formulation of the global goal of the study, the tasks of the project are given separately, the solution of which is necessary to achieve the goal. Specific tasks should be aimed not just at collecting and analyzing new data, but at testing hypotheses, elucidating mechanisms, or creating new theories. The hypotheses put forward must be testable and well-founded. The formulation of the purpose and objectives of the study is in principle similar to their formulation in a master's or candidate's dissertation. Students and graduate students can be recommended to pre-familiarize themselves with the manuals for preparing dissertations for defense.
Research plan
The research plan is perhaps the most important part of the proposal. Take sufficient time to prepare this section. A carefully thought-out research plan, depending on the requirements of the tender documentation, should preferably be divided into stages, each of which should include specific steps or actions. The project execution plan should be logically built and clearly structured and should strictly correspond to the tasks set. Justify the need for each planned series of experiments. Explain what are the advantages of the experimental scheme you propose or the model you are developing. The planned study should be of high quality, that is, it should involve the use of all necessary controls and adequate methods for analyzing the results. It is important to note that the project plan should allow assessing the feasibility of individual stages of the study.
It is necessary to provide additional scenarios for the implementation of the project. For example, indicate possible alternative approaches in the event that the main approach cannot be implemented for objective reasons. It is desirable to plan the use of several complementary strategies to solve the tasks. In addition, you can mention which ways the project will be implemented if one of the tested hypotheses is refuted. Thus, you can minimize the vulnerabilities of the application.
If this is your first time applying for a stand-alone independent project as a research team leader, try to make it clear in the text how your project differs from those of the team leader you previously worked on. As one of the weaknesses of the projects of novice researchers, experts sometimes point out that “the project is a continuation of the work of a large team of scientists” or “it is difficult to understand whether the declared project leader will be its real leader.” The experience of researchers from different countries shows that it is quite difficult to get the support of the first major project in the event that the head of the application did not change his place of work after receiving a degree.
The section "Methods and Approaches" should contain information about the strategy and approaches to conducting the study. This section should preferably be divided into subsections with separate subheadings. The grant application does not require detailed protocols and descriptions of the selected methods. However, it is important not only to list the methods that are planned to be used to implement your ideas, but also to demonstrate their adequacy for solving the tasks. Try to give Special attention substantiation of the effectiveness of the chosen methods and approaches, involving literature data. List new methods or approaches you are developing that are often evaluated separately by experts. If you plan to conduct part of the study in collaboration with other scientific teams, it is advisable to indicate which experiments will be carried out jointly.
Literature review
The section "Literature Review" should acquaint the expert with the current state of the chosen field of research and at the same time demonstrate the completeness of the applicant's knowledge of the literature data on the subject being developed. This section is often written after the main study plan has been prepared. At the beginning of the section, it is desirable to reflect the view of the problem being solved from the side of the entire field of science. Clearly state only the main information that allows you to bring the reader to the need to solve this problem. Do not go into private details, remember that the text should be easy to read. Show a critical attitude to the literature data, outline the options for interpreting the available information by different scientific schools. This section may include a list of cited literature, including sources in highly rated peer-reviewed journals. In some cases, quotations from leading experts in the field are welcome.
In conclusion of this section, it is necessary to briefly state the main conclusion from the analysis of the literature data, substantiating the relevance of the chosen direction of research (for example, “filling gaps” or resolving existing contradictions) and its novelty.
Expected results
In the “Expected results” section, it is worth listing both the specific scientific results that will be obtained during the implementation of the project, and their possible application. Consider in advance whether the study will test any hypotheses, create new theories and draw certain conclusions. The achievement of the expected results should be verifiable if the project is supported, so it is desirable to formulate them as separate statements. State your own limitations in the applicability and interpretation of the expected results. It is also important to briefly discuss what long-term prospects the completion of your planned research will bring. As practical application the results of fundamental research can indicate their use in the educational process.
Many funds in one of the sections of the application ask for the so-called expected project performance indicators (or reporting indicators). Be careful when filling out these tables. Expectations should not be exaggerated, especially the number of dissertations defended and the number of publications in journals indexed in scientometric databases. If the project is supported, the supervisor will be responsible for meeting these indicators. If the indicators specified in the application are not met, the fund at any stage may stop financing the project and put the name of the leader on the so-called “black list”, preventing him from taking part in the fund’s competitions for several years. It is important to earn and maintain the reputation of a reliable grant holder that fulfills its obligations.
Available backlog
In the "Available backlog" section of the application, in addition to the preliminary results obtained or the developed tools, it is worthwhile to separately indicate information indicating the achievability of the expected results. This may be information about the qualifications of the manager and executors, the amount of research performed earlier by the scientific group, the available publications on the project topic, the availability of unique conditions or installations, international cooperation.
Attach copies of the most significant publications that you have related to the research topic. The expert will be able to get acquainted with them, which will make it possible to convince him that the qualifications of the project executors are sufficient to solve the tasks. The scientific productivity of the project manager is the main criterion for assessing his qualifications.
Take the opportunity to add additional information about the scientific achievements of the project leader and executors to the text of the application. Specify for each of the participants a list of awards, diplomas for scientific reports at conferences, certificates of completion of advanced training courses, participation in scientific schools, including those with personal grant support, information about the management of theses and the success of students.
Project management
In a number of competitions, the “level of project management” is designated as one of the essential criteria for evaluating an application. In this case, pay special attention to study planning. List milestones and deadlines individual works, draw up a detailed project schedule, a procurement plan, the timing of business trips and expeditions. Specify the responsibilities and employment of all project performers.
Budgeting is an important step in preparing an application for a grant competition. Make a list of all planned costs, including salaries for project implementers, purchase of equipment and materials, expenses for expeditions and business trips to participate in conferences, payments for third-party services, as well as overhead costs for the organization for technical support of the project. When preparing the cost estimate, follow the instructions and recommendations of the Fund as specified in the tender documentation, and do not overstate the amount of funding requested. For each type of cost, please provide a detailed justification that will allow the assessors to verify that the project manager knows what the grant money will be spent on. Check the cost of equipment and Supplies, as well as what purchases the fund allows (for example, some funds do not allow the grant funds to be spent on the purchase of office equipment and computers).
Describe in detail at which site the research is planned to be carried out. It is worth pointing out that the work will be carried out using the equipment of the resource centers of the university or institute. It is advisable to mention whether the material and technical base at your disposal is sufficient to carry out the project.
Final stage of application preparation
Check how relevant and logically structured planned research.
Take great attention filing an application. Clearly formulate your thoughts, structure the text of the application, break it into subsections, paragraphs, etc. Check the design of references to the cited literature.
Ask your colleagues, including experts in another field, to read the content of the project and provide their comments (so-called "internal review"). The opinion of colleagues will help you identify weak sides application before it falls into the hands of experts. Therefore, it is advisable to plan your time in this way in order to prepare the first version of the application in advance. Even if the deadline for writing an application is very short, it is worth postponing the text for a few days, so that you can then look at it with a fresh look.
Carefully check the correctness of all documents before sending the application to the Fund (both in electronic and paper versions). Often, the absence of one signature or certificate can serve as a reason for rejecting an application for technical reasons. Some funds accept applications online; in this case, it is necessary to clarify whether it is required to attach a scanned version of the signed documents.
If the project was not supported
The share of supported projects depends on the fund's initial requirements for the manager and the team of performers and on the amount of allocated funding. Your project may be among the unsupported. Try to use this opportunity to improve in the area of "grant writing". A prepared application and a carefully planned study is an important result of your work, which can be used in the future.
If the foundation refuses to support your project, it is imperative to request expert reviews, as well as the results of a technical review. Objective attitude to expert feedback - a great opportunity to improve both your skills in preparing proposals and your research plan. After carefully studying the feedback of experts, you need to decide whether it is worth improving the application in order to resubmit it to the competition. It is advisable to ask for expert feedback even if your project has been supported. As a rule, the expert opinion reflects the strengths and weaknesses of the project, so familiarity with it will allow you to adjust the research plan.
In some cases, expert opinions on the same project may be directly opposite. If you believe that the expert's review is unprofessional or in violation of ethical standards, it is worth contacting the fund after a certain time with objections to the expert's conclusions. This will not affect the results of the completed competition in relation to the application submitted by you, but will improve the quality of the examination in the fund in the future. In response to expert opinions, give in detail the discrepancies and "arguments against", but in no case discuss the personality and professionalism of the expert.
And if your project was supported and you won a grant, then you can be congratulated! Remember that you will need to set aside time to conclude a contract or agreement for research funding.
McInnes R., Andrews B., Rachubinski R. Guidebook For New Principal Investigators. Advice on Applying for a Grant, Writing Papers, Setting up a Research Team and Managing Your Time. 2005:
1.2.1. Cookies support
Cookies are used to track sessions when working with the subsystem. Accordingly, the "Allow Cookies" option must be enabled in your browser. As a rule, this option is set in browsers by default.
1.2.2. SSL protocol support
Since the work with the server takes place over the secure SSL protocol, your browser must have SSL support enabled. For both browsers, this option is set by default.
1.2.3. Font settings.
For the system to work, it is necessary that the browser used correctly reproduce Russified fonts. In particular, it is important that the Russian text is displayed correctly in all form elements.
1.2.4. Screen size.
The recommended monitor screen size when working with the system is at least 600x800.
For questions related to setting up your browser to work with the system, you can contact: [email protected]
By selecting the menu item "Your projects" on the left of your personal page, you will be taken to a page with a list of all RFBR projects in which you participated as a leader or executor. If there are still unsigned or unregistered RFBR applications with your participation, prepared through the "Intra-Grant" system, they will also be shown at the end of this list.
For each project, its number, name, start year - end year, project status and the degree of your participation (leader or performer) are given. The "Project status" field can take the following values:
| "finished" | - the project has been supported and its term has already ended; |
| "supported" | - the project is supported and continues at the present time; |
| "not supported" | - an application was submitted, but the project was not supported; |
| "application" | - the application has been registered with the RFBR, but there is no decision on financing or rejection yet; |
| "new application, signed" | - a new application has been prepared and signed by the project manager, but has not yet been registered with the RFBR; |
| "new application, not signed" | - the application has been created, but not yet signed by the project manager (and, possibly, not yet completely filled out). |
To start working with a specific project or application, you must first select the appropriate row in the table.
Button assignment:
| "Create" | - creation of a new application; |
| "Application" | - for new unsigned bids - go to the list of bid forms with the ability to fill in and edit them; for everyone else - viewing in a new window information from the application forms of the project; |
| "Reports" | - only for supported projects - go to the list of reports for this project (for unfinished projects - with the ability to create a new report); |
| "Financing" | - only for supported projects - information on project financing; |
| "Exit" | - return to the personal page. |
You can view the content of the application forms by clicking on the "Application" button on the page with a list of your projects. This opens a new window containing on the left side a list of forms related to this species competition, and on the right side - the content of a specific form selected in the list on the left.
For convenience, not only numbers are given, but also the names of the form fields. For forms that allow multiple instances (for example, information about performers or organizations), first a general list is displayed, from which you can already view detailed information for each object.
At the end of the list of forms on the left there is a link that allows you to display all the forms at once in a separate window in a form ready for printing or saving to a file.
To create a new application, you must click on the "Create" button on the page with a list of your projects.
You will be prompted to select a list of types of competitions for which currently time applications are accepted. By selecting the type of competition, you will be taken to a page with a list of forms required when submitting an application for this type of competition.
When creating a new application, the system automatically inserts your personal data into Form 2 and assigns you the status of "Project Manager". The application must be filled out only from the personal card of the head. When filling out an application from the performer's personal card, it will not be possible to sign the application.
Similarly, the application automatically includes data about the organization in which you work, with the status "Place of work of the project manager." When editing an application, you can change the status, for example, give your organization the status of "Organization of project financing".
In the list of new application forms, for each form, the following information: form code (form number from the competition announcement), form name, comment and form status. The commentary provides additional information, in particular on the mandatory completion of specific forms, or in which cases the form must be submitted.
The "Status" field can take the following values:
For forms that allow multiple instances (for example, information about project contributors), the "Status" field contains information about the number of forms of this type created and their general status (for example, "all checked" or "not all checked").
To switch to the editing mode of a specific form, click on its name in the list of forms. This will open a window containing all the required fields of this form (some of them may not be required).
After filling out the form, click the "Check" button at the end of the page. You can also exit without saving changes by clicking the "Exit" button, or save the form without validation as it is in this moment located by clicking the "Save" button.
After clicking the "Check" button, a formal check is made for the completeness and correctness of filling in the form fields. If errors are found, it opens additional window with a list of found errors and an indication of the names of the fields in which errors were made. For fast transition to these fields in the form editing window, you can simply click on the field name in the additional window.
After correcting the errors, click the "Check" button again. Repeat these operations until there are no errors in filling out the form. After successfully passing the formal check, you will again be taken to the page with a list of application forms and you can continue working with other forms. In this case, the checked form receives the status "Checked".
The order in which the forms are filled out does not matter. In addition, you can pause and log out of the system at any time by selecting the "End session" item in the menu on the left. Later you can log in again and continue working.
When filling out forms containing large text fields, you can copy the text prepared in advance into these fields from a text editor (for example, Microsoft Word, etc.) via the clipboard. If you fill in such fields manually, we recommend that you periodically save the edited form by clicking on the "Save" button at the bottom of the page.
When working with forms that allow multiple instances, you first go to a page containing a list of instances of forms of this type (for example, the list of Forms 2 for executors and project managers). Using the "Create", "Edit" and "Delete" buttons on this page, you can respectively create a new blank copy of the form, edit or delete it.
You can also use the "Copy" button to open in an additional window a list of your colleagues who participated in your previous projects. By clicking on the name of the person you want to include in the new application, you will automatically create a new copy of the form, already filled out by him personal information. Similarly, you can add organizations in Form 3, but you can choose from the full list of organizations registered in the database.
If for any reason you change your mind about submitting a new application for registration, you can delete it by clicking on the "Delete" button on the page containing the list of application forms.
After all the forms are filled out and passed the verification, i.e. have the status "Verified", you can sign the application. To do this, click on the "Sign" button on the page with the list of required forms. At the same time, your application is subjected to a final check, and if no errors are found, it receives the status "Signed". If errors are found, an additional window will open with a list of errors found and the names of the forms in which errors were made. To quickly switch to form editing, you can simply click on the form name in the additional window.
After signing, the application is submitted for registration to the RFBR scientific department corresponding to the field of knowledge and type of competition specified in your application.
Once the application is signed, you will no longer be able to make changes to the application forms. If, nevertheless, such a need arose, it is necessary to contact the relevant scientific department of the RFBR. If the application has not yet been registered, then a department employee can remove the "Signed" status from the application.
In addition, the status "Signed" can be removed by an employee scientific department RFBR, if it finds that the application lacks some essential information. In this case, you will receive an e-mail with a request to finalize the application, and the application will again appear in the list of your projects with the status "Not signed".
After your application is successfully registered, its status in the list of your projects will change (instead of "New application" will appear "Application"). After that, you need to print out the application and the title page, sign them and send them to the RFBR within 5 days. To print all application forms, click on the "Application" button in the list of your projects, and then in the lower part of the left frame of the window that opens, click on the "All forms" item. From the window that opens, you can print or save as a file full text your application. The title page of the application is printed in the same way.
Please also note that after registration, your application will have a number that is already indicated on the printed copies of your application. You can also refer to it when contacting RFBR.
To register a report on the RFBR grant, you need to go to the list of project reports by clicking on the "Reports" button on the page with a list of your projects. If reports on this project are currently being accepted, then at the bottom of the page you will find the "Create" button. By clicking on it, you will go to the list of reporting forms required by the RFBR for submitting reports on this type of competition in this year.
In the future, your actions for filling out the forms, checking them and signing the report are similar to your actions when working with applications.
If your report contains graphs, formulas, figures, tables, photographs and other elements necessary for an adequate presentation of the results obtained during the project, you can prepare an additional file in RTF format (for example, using Microsoft Word) or PDF (for example, using Adobe Acrobat Exchange). This file must include the following information:
- project number;
- Project name;
- Name of the project manager;
- a brief annotation in Russian (in accordance with Form 501);
- a brief annotation in English (in accordance with Form 502);
- detailed scientific report (in accordance with Form 503).
You may also include a list of scientific publications produced as part of the project work.
To send this file, select the line "Full-text scientific report in PDF or RTF format" in the list of reporting forms. On the page that opens, click on the "Browse.." button next to the "File location" field and find the desired file on your computer. Then click the "Submit" button at the end of the page. After that, you must wait for the system to confirm that the download was successful. This may take some time depending on your file size and connection speed.
You can only attach one file to a project. If the file has already been uploaded, you can replace it by uploading a new file.
After a successful download, you can view the file for verification by clicking on the "View" button on the same page.
The report can be printed at any time, including before signing or registering the report. To do this, use the "Print" button in the list of project reports. When you click on it, two windows open, one of which displays all the completed forms for the report, and the other - the finished cover page. It is necessary to send to the RFBR the forms printed out after the signing of the report (they must be labeled "Signed"), in two copies.
Before sending the printed version to the RFBR, all the necessary signatures (of the project manager, its participants, the organization's chief accountant) and seals must be affixed on the title page and after the appropriate forms.
During the examination of grant applications to Russian foundations for the support of fundamental science, I drew attention to the repeated mistakes in the preparation of such projects, which often lead to their loss in the competition. Prepared by me own experience small explanations, of course, will not generate new scientific ideas, but they will help to put them in the form that the fund experts will better perceive.
It so happened that over the past 2-3 years I have reviewed about one hundred and fifty applications for grants from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and the Russian Science Foundation - the two main Russian foundations for supporting fundamental research in the field of natural sciences. For the RFBR, while working on scientific councils for some competitions, I also reviewed the abstracts of more than 300 applications for grants in fundamental medicine. The fund system is not without flaws, however, if you work in Russia, in the state scientific institution, receiving a grant from these funds - almost the only way gain relative independence and conduct research that you yourself have conceived.
Why am I preparing this text? Despite numerous clarifications by the participants in the process, applications submitted by young (and not very young) researchers contain recurring errors that force experts to lower their scores for certain characteristics of applications. As a result, potential winners with sufficiently bright ideas, but insufficiently developed applications, lose the competition to simpler, sometimes trivial in thought, but correctly designed projects.
In this article, I will share my experience in reviewing applications in the biological and medical sciences. I hope my suggestions will help researchers improve their applications and compete more successfully on the grant battlefield. I note that I speak informally, without regard to the position of other reviewers and representatives of foundations. I myself am not overly successful in winning grants - almost a shoemaker without boots - nevertheless, I will share my feelings from the other side of this rather sluggish grant river.
How grants are evaluated
First, the conditions of the competition are determined. They include thematic, financial (that is, the amount of money for the project) and sometimes age restrictions, requirements for the composition of teams, and the like. In international projects, requirements for a foreign team are added. Now money for them is issued "bilaterally" - the relevant parts of the joint application are independently financed by Russian and foreign funds.
Before the deadline, projects enter the established online application system, and their paper versions are sent to the funds. At the first stage, a very small part of the applications are withdrawn by formal sign- for example, due to errors in paperwork. Then, a council appointed by the foundation for a specific competition or an initiative group separated from it begins to select experts to evaluate applications. Experts are selected semi-automatically from the list of candidates by thematic areas (there are special classifiers with codes) and by keywords indicated by the authors of the application. Potential reviewers - there are usually two to five of them for each application, depending on the competition - are sent a request for access to materials in a special examination system. If the expert agrees to evaluate the project, he must do so within a certain time. The examination is paid, but rather modestly, so for those who do it, it is akin to a social burden.
For each application, the expert fills out a questionnaire developed by the foundation, which gives the sum of points, and at the end writes a review provided to the authors of the application, and also evaluates the project as a whole, approximately on a school four-point scale.
When all the projects submitted for the competition have been reviewed, the above-mentioned - usually thematic, that is, only in biology, chemistry, etc. - council is assembled for the final decision. Its members tend to act as the most active experts themselves. Since there are usually many applications, and there is only one decisive meeting, the council usually focuses on a pre-assessed passing score obtained by averaging the results of the examination. The passing score is obviously determined by the size of the grant and the total budget that the foundation is willing to spend on this competition. Advice, in fact, is necessary to consider difficult cases (for example, when experts' assessments differ greatly) and then it is likely to identify a conflict of interest. According to competitions, a small part of applications with a “semi-passing” score is usually formed, among which the best ones are collectively selected at the council and also supported. My practice shows that in 90% of cases, expert assessments converge very closely. The remaining cases just require the attention of the council members in order to decide in real time what to do with them.
Is it worth submitting?
A grant application is a lot of work, comparable to preparing a good publication. If you fail, your chances are reduced. I recently submitted an application together with partners from the States and was amazed at how detailed and thorough they prepare a litho review, and what quality the drawings provide.
Therefore, before starting to prepare a project, it would be nice to find in And an overview of the whole project, an accurate idea of what you want to do during the project, and, of course, the time to write it. Write about what you understand and know - otherwise, the experts will convict you of inaccuracies and lower your points. Sometimes researchers underestimate expertise, having become accustomed, for example, to working in departmental programs, where often for success it is necessary (as a rule, artificially!) to increase the significance of the project, directly promising the speedy implementation of the results. In case of slyness, you will most likely be exposed, which will be notified to you in the review.
Of course, in a scientific search, you cannot be sure what result you will get in the end. But it is necessary to foresee it at least hypothetically for the success of the project.
Therefore, apply on the topic in which you understand better than others, do not dive into other people's, albeit fashionable, areas. After all, even if you win a grant, it will be very difficult to fulfill it, re-acquainting yourself with a topic.
Dashing trouble beginning: abstract
An abstract, an abstract, an abstract, if you like, is what the people responsible for appointing experts read, and with the help of information from the annotation, these same experts are selected. Thematic headings are also important - that is, to which specific field of science your project belongs - as well as keywords. In some grant systems, they automatically determine the repertoire of possible reviewers. Things are in a rush, and if the abstract is not clear, it can get to the experts in the related field. The latter are not always fully oriented in the "foreign" topic, they are able not to notice the merits of the project and underestimate its points. And in general they will be angry because they do not understand everything. Therefore, it is very important to carefully consider these formalities, to correctly assign keywords. In the abstract of the project, you need to write about what you want to do, and leave one phrase at the beginning of the prerequisites for the work. Otherwise, what is written in the next section will turn out.
"Cancer is a terrible disease"
There are moments in the life of scientists when they need to convince officials of something. And officials, basically, understand only something simple or socially useful. You write that the study of zinc finger protein No. 127 will cure all patients and solve health problems for the next hundred years, and you have a chance. Many researchers, having talked with departmental programs, directly transfer their experience from them and fill in more than half of the application with arguments about the importance and necessity of the entire area. Nevertheless, the examination is carried out not by officials, but by active researchers. And if you start your text with "cancer is a terrible disease," they get angry. Respect expertise. Do not explain how often a disease occurs in a population, how to treat it, etc., if you want to study the phosphorylation of some abstract kinases in one cell line.
Even a little embellishment of the relevance of the work will not add credit points to the project's piggy bank. In addition, the abstract significance of the work does not need to fill most of the annotation. Often I had to read an abstract in which only the last phrase - as a conclusion from the previous one - related to what the authors still want to do. The beginning and the middle were devoted to how it is necessary, useful and important. Better not - there is a special place in the application, which is roughly called "the state of affairs in this area." True, it also needs to be supplied with information from which the essence of your project directly follows. If you want to study the components of an important molecular cascade associated with the development of tumors, then you need to write what is known about this cascade, and not about cancer in general, its epidemiology and social significance.
"ABCD/E-regions of the gene xyZ flanked by sites modified by the FegH protein"
The reverse situation happens - the authors of the application immediately begin to write specialized text, abundantly supplying it with abbreviations and anglicisms, rather reminiscent of scientific jargon. However, the readable, coherent text makes the application much easier to work with. Dealing with the intricacies of thought, when complex sentences make up entire paragraphs, is difficult even for a specialist in your field. The specifics should not overshadow the general idea that you reflect in the application. The severity of perception can cause criticism and a decrease in the rating of the work.
Novelty in science - not everything is clear
Grant application forms contain sections where you need to describe the scientific novelty of the research. Install it, even in modern science, pretty hard. Smaller projects often add to existing knowledge, sometimes replicating in design early research in the field. There is no need to be embarrassed about this - today the results of experiments in almost all areas of the natural sciences must undergo additional confirmation in independent laboratories. This is especially true for medicine. Repetition of the same analyzes on different populations and groups of patients is a normal practice of evidence-based medicine. When describing the background of your research and its novelty, this should not be hidden. Let an expert evaluate your knowledge. This is better than trying to show that you are the first in everything, and there is a desert around you.
Nobel Prize for half a million rubles
Often one comes across well-written and planned proposals, but completely impossible, if you compare the amount of work and the amount of money given out. Many grants are very modest, for example, the mass RFBR competition with the letter “a” gives out 700 thousand rubles each this year. Of course, this is very small, but the upper limit of one grant is usually known in advance. Applications are being submitted where the cost of one reagent is several times higher than the upper limit of funding! This is quite severely penalized during evaluation, even if a project that is excellent in all other respects has been written. After all, you can’t do research for the Nobel Prize for half a million rubles! It is also not worth mechanically transferring a lost application to another competition if the amount of funding for grants varies greatly between competitions. This will be noticed by the expert and will reduce the points.
Another similar error in job descriptions is a non-specific description of the scope of work. For example, people write that plasma samples from patients with such and such a disease will be compared with samples from healthy people, but they do not indicate how many patients they will involve in the study. This is a trick, because when you do not specify anything exactly, bribes are smooth from you. Nevertheless, the expert will not approve such a work plan. Because 10 thousand patients is an article in a conditional Nature, and 5 people is already a question for the project.
What should a newbie do?
When studying the application, the backlog that its authors have is evaluated. Does this mean that getting a grant for new topic, on which this researcher has not worked before, is it impossible? Of course it isn't. Of course, it will be more difficult, because points will be reduced for a small backlog. But if the rest of the application is good, chances are definitely there. In grant policy, as in many other areas, the principle of "money to money" applies. That is, if the team is successful, it has a great backlog and a lot of grants on this topic, it is easier for it to get the next ones. It is important for beginning researchers to know if they can get their first grant without publishing in track record. Let's just say it's more difficult. And sometimes it is expressly prohibited by the terms of the competition. If they had an internship in a research team, whether it was a term paper or a diploma, that ended with a joint article with their bosses, they are considered to be more likely to do their project well. Therefore, experts like the presence of good publications even in the first grant application.
| Fund | Contest | Grant size, mln ₽ per year | Basic requirements for a leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Russian Science Foundation | "Youth" competitions initiative research competition | 1,5–2 | PhD, no more than 33 years old at the time of the application deadline, 3 publications in refereed journals library systems Scopus or Web of Science. |
| Russian Science Foundation | "Youth" competitions of the Presidential program research projects- competition of scientific groups led by young scientists | 3–5 | Candidate's or doctoral degree, no more than 35 years old at the time of the application deadline, 5 publications in journals refereed by Scopus or Web of Science. |
| Russian Foundation for Basic Research | Competition of the mall "My first grant" | 0,5 | Maximum age 35 years old at the end calendar year filing an application |
| Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences | Molecular and Cell Biology and Postgenomic Technologies | 1,4–2,8 | The leader must work in the Russian Academy of Sciences and have a decent publication activity, since applications are evaluated mainly by the list of articles. Another requirement is the creation of its own scientific group. |
I read everything, now I will win a grant?
Like any competition, the struggle for grants is in a sense a lottery. The share of the won grants from the number of applications fluctuates in the competitions known to me from 5 to 20%. This means that very good applications often do not pass the filter. Experts are people too, and they can subjectively relate to certain areas within their area of specialization. There are often hidden conflicts of interest. It is important not to give up and submit the project to all available competitions, to which the application you created is suitable, taking into account the comments of the examination. And if, God forbid, you find incompetence or bias in the review of the project, do not hesitate to inform the foundations about it. It is impossible for us to appeal to revise the results of the competition, but to complain about bad job an expert is needed. This can be noted in the relevant scientific councils and take action: for example, remove this expert from the list for future competitions.
