Research funding

A: Yes. We recognise that effective, impactful, research in Digital Health regularly involves multidisciplinary collaboration. You should therefore ensure that the project team includes the appropriate skillsets to deliver the research.

A: Yes, however the Hub has a stated mission to bring partners together, and this is an assessment criterion for this call, so a project not involving collaboration between organisations may be less competitive than others.

A: Yes, indeed many engineers and computer scientists publish in those venues. Wherever published, the publications themselves should be describing new findings in engineering and computer science, rather than the straightforward application of well-known techniques. Publications may also be describing insights beyond computer science and engineering.  

A: Yes, and indeed there is a long tradition of qualitative research within health, social sciences, engineering, design (HCI) and computer science.

A: if your project involves work with human research subjects (whether patients, students, members of the public, professionals, other research, via social media, face-to-face or online) then it will require ethical review either by the lead institution or by an NHS organisation. The proposal should set out plans for ethical review and explain how this is accommodated in the timeline.  Where the proposed project will be operating under an existing ethical permission, the reference number and review body should be stated in those plans.

A: all projects are required to generate publishable new knowledge, so commercialisation cannot be a sufficient or primary goal in itself, although moving an idea towards successful commercialisation can certainly be one of the objectives.  The Hub also has an entrepreneurial fellowship scheme which may be of interest.

A: Yes, projects including NHS partners will likely be very competitive. However NHS organisations cannot lead (see above). Projects can certainly address the priorities of NHS partners and they can be a central part of the leadership team for the bid, including co-leading in decision-making. EPSRC rules do allow the costs of NHS organisations to be included in the bid costing, and it will be the responsibility of the lead organisation to ensure that the requested funding passes to NHS partners, as agreed. A letter of support is required as part of the application describing the nature of the involvement and any costs sought, waived or contributed.

A: Yes, however charities cannot lead (see above). Projects can certainly address the priorities of charity partners and they can be a central part of the leadership team for the bid, including co-leading in project decision-making. Due to EPSRC funding rules, companies and charities must:

• Declare themselves as a project partner, submitting a letter of support explicitly describing any in-kind (e.g. staff time for advisory or research participation, access to data or facilities) or cash contribution to the project. All such contributions must be itemized and approximately costed within the letter. Project partners cannot receive funds from Hub beyond expenses of participating in the research, such as travel to research meetings.

OR

• Declare themselves a subcontractor, in other words a third party individual who is not employed as staff on the grant, or a third party organisation, who is subcontracted by the host organisation to deliver a specific piece of work. As guidance, any such subcontract should be less than 40% of the value of the total funding requested. The subcontract will be subject to the procurement rules of the Lead Institution, including compliance with any relevant Subsidy Control legislation, and so should be discussed with the lead institution before submission. The reason for the subcontract should be clearly described and justified in the proposal so that it can be peer-reviewed. If the Subcontractor is contributing time or other in-kind support beyond the work in the subcontract, this should be described clearly in a letter to accompany the proposal, so that it can be peer-reviewed.

Charity organisations can also receive research outputs and arising IP from the projects, such as licenses for software and for necessary background IP – the lead institution is encouraged to make those available to charity partners in due course at minimal or zero cost. A letter of support is required as part of the application describing the nature of the involvement.

A: Yes, however they cannot lead (see above). Projects can certainly address the priorities of companies and future plans for products and services. Companies can be a central part of the leadership team for the bid, including co-leading in project decision-making. Due to EPSRC funding rules, companies can either:

• Declare themselves as a project partner, submitting a letter of support explicitly describing any in-kind (e.g. staff time for advisory or research participation, access to data or facilities) or cash contribution to the project. All such contributions must be itemized and approximately costed within the letter. Project partners cannot receive funds from Hub beyond expenses of participating in the research, such as travel to research meetings.

OR

• Declare themselves a subcontractor, in other words a third party individual who is not employed as staff on the grant, or a third party organisation, who is subcontracted by the host organisation to deliver a specific piece of work. As guidance, any such subcontract should be less than 40% of the value of the total funding requested. The subcontract will be subject to the procurement rules of the Lead Institution, including compliance with any relevant Subsidy Control legislation, and so should be discussed with the lead institution before submission. The reason for the subcontract should be clearly described and justified in the proposal so that it can be peer-reviewed. If the Subcontractor is contributing time or other in-kind support beyond the work in the subcontract, this should be described clearly in a letter to accompany the proposal, so that it can be peer-reviewed.

The Hub encourages appropriate involvement of industry in the projects through one of the models above – therefore the details of the proposed arrangements should be detailed in the application and will be assessed as part of peer review. For the avoidance of doubt, the relationship with the industry partner is the responsibility of the lead institution, including compliance with UK Subsidy Control rules and internal/external procurement rules.

A: Companies are very likely to be important to achieve impact and benefit to the public/patients from the research. Regardless of the company’s role in the research project, they can receive research outputs and arising IP from the projects, such as licenses for software and for necessary background IP – the lead institution is encouraged to make those available to industry partners in due course so that impact is achieved. Although the expectation is that all research results are published, companies can request a short delay in order to seek protection for IP. We encourage that conversation to happen between the company and the lead institution at an early stage.

A: No (see eligibility above).

A: Yes, provided they meet the other eligibility criteria outlined above.

A: Yes, provided they meet the other eligibility criteria outlined above.

A: Yes. EPSRC rules allow for the reimbursement of necessary expenses of attending meetings.

A: As described above, Hub projects are required to produce publishable new knowledge in engineering and physical sciences (including computer science). It may be difficult for a purely evaluation project to achieve these outputs, however if the evaluation methodology involves novelty and rigour (e.g. could be publishable in, say, a HCI venue) then this may be possible.

A: As described above, Hub projects are required to produce publishable new knowledge in engineering and physical sciences (including computer science). It will be difficult for a commercialization project to achieve that, since the knowledge generated is likely to be proprietary rather than publishable. However, regulation is itself a research field, and some of the challenges around the regulatory approval of new technology (such as AI) could indeed create publishable insights – it is up to the proposal to explain that potential.

A: Yes, NHS can claim estates and overheads using dispensation rates. If the NHS Trust does not have agreed rates for Estates and Indirect Costs, the dispensation rates should be used; these are published periodically on the UKRI Funding Assurance Programme webpage. These can only be claimed for the research component of the proposal.

A: Yes. Please send the following information to leap-dh-hub@bristol.ac.uk:

• Your name and the organisation that you work for
• A summary of your proposal
• Details about any partners that you’ve already identified
• Information about the support/contacts you are looking for (please be as specific as possible)

We will do our best to match you with a suitable contact.

If you are interested in offering support to projects, please get in touch with details about the type expertise that you/your organisation are able to provide.