Rules and guidelines 2011
Rules and guidelines for the grant year 2011
I. Foreword
The Icelandic Research Fund (IRF) was – as everything in Iceland – heavily affected by the 2008 financial crash. Still, the government decided when passing the state budget for 2010 not to reduce the allocations to the principal competitive funds. The IRF received 815 MISK for the year 2010, the exact amount the Fund had been allocated in the state budget for the year 2009. This indicates a vision and goes to show that the government is prioritising when is comes to the difficult task of reducing the state budget deficit. Therefore the low success rate in the January 2010 IRF announcement (ca 15%) surely raised some eyebrows. But one has to keep in mind that the IRF has to meet its obligations regarding projects funded in 2008 and 2009 which were entering the 2nd and 3rd year in 2010 respectively. Circumstances were utterly different when the IRF Board made its decision on funding in early 2008 and in early 2009 the Board was careful when it came to funding new projects by not stretching to the uppermost limit of the IRF’s financial capabilities. The result is that if the IRF receives the same amount on the state budget for the year 2011 as if did in 2009 and 2010 (815 MISK) the level of funding for new projects should be similar as in 2010 (ca 270 MISK). It goes without saying that these are only speculations and we shall have to wait for the state budget for 2011 to be more precise. It may also be added that the amount itself is only one indicator. Even though the size of the IRF has doubled in the period 2004-2010 the real value of the krona has been substantially reduced, running costs are higher and facilities more expensive. All this makes the running of research projects more difficult.
Iceland still faces economic difficulties and the challenge to reduce the state budget deficit by painful cuts and downsize in almost all areas. It should therefore be an absolute priority on behalf of the scientific community to stand guard around the IRF and to support its increasingly vital role. This would be in line with the one of the notions in the newly adopted Science and Technology Policy Council (STPC) policy, namely that a bigger portion of R&D public expenditure should be awarded though the competitive funds.
It is perfectly understandable in light of the current economic situation that questions regarding the role and purpose of the IRF – the principal competitive fund in Iceland – are asked. The IRF supports – under Art. 2 of the Public Support for Scientific Research Act (No. 3/2003) – scientific research in Iceland on the grounds of general priorities of the STPC and a professional review of all new proposals, including a review of the scientific quality of proposals, participants and facilities. This means – in other words – that the IRF is an open competitive fund which awards grants based on the quality of proposals and the IRF Board has the legal obligation to follow the review.
Expert Panels, appointed by the Science Committee of the STPC, review all new proposals. Please note that the Expert Panels are responsible for the final review and ranking of each proposal (external reviewers are therefore only consulted and their review is not final). The names and affiliation of IRF’s Expert Panel members are public and can be found on the RANNIS web site.
The traditional deadline for proposals – 1 October – has now been moved to 1 June. The IRF Board has decided that the external review will be done abroad and therefore all proposals and appendices should be in English. This is done to strengthen the review process and in light of the small size of the Icelandic science community and possible conflicts of interest. The IRF has been gradually moving the external review abroad and generally speaking proposals from Icelandic scientists have been reviewed favourably. This goes to show the high level of research done in Iceland.
We need to create opportunities for young scientists who wish to establish themselves in scientific research in Iceland. To that effect the IRF Board has decided to change the rules regarding Postdoctoral Grants. These grants are still intended for scientists who have completed their PhD (doctoral degrees) in the past 5 years but as of now eligible cost includes more than just salaries. This means that Postdoctoral Grants are now fully comparable to Project Grants awarded by the IRF in regards to eligible cost.
The IRF Board has also decided to give proposers the opportunity to mark proposals as multi-disciplinary. Proposers may opt to suggest more than one Expert Panel on the proposal form or to leave the field blank. Such proposals will be screened by the Expert Panel chairs who will decide in which Expert Panel these proposals will be reviewed and ranked. This applies only to multi-disciplinary proposals and the final ranking is within one of the four IRF Expert Panels even though members from different Expert Panels might be consulted during the review process.
Finally, the IRF Board has made some minor changes, i.e.:
- Preparatory Grants are no longer awarded.
- Expenses due to dissemination are now an eligible cost in projects (from 2011). PI‘s in projects funded up to 2010 can still apply for a Dissemination Grant.
- Travel expenses due to conferences are only applicable on the 2nd and 3rd project year and therefore not eligible during the 1st project year. There is also a limit to the amount that can be applied for due to conferences.
- Each master’s degree student is funded for a maximum period of 12 months even though the total duration of a project might exceed these limitations.
Proposers are asked to consult the Rules and guidelines for the grant year 2011 when preparing a proposal and appendices (i.e. in terms to deadline, eligibility, amounts, length limitations (appendices) etc.). Incomplete proposals and proposals that deviate in any way from the rules will be rejected without review.
Prof. Dr. Guðrún Nordal, Chairman
Chairman of the Board of the Icelandic Research Fund
II. The Board of the Icelandic Research Fund
The Board of the Icelandic Research Fund (IRF) is appointed by the Minister of Education, Science and Culture for a period of three years following nominations by the Science Committee of the Science and Technology Policy Council. The Chairman of the Science Committee is also the Chairman of the Board. From 2009 the IRF Board has consisted of the following members:
| Full members | Deputy members |
| Prof. Dr. Guðrún Nordal, The Arni Magnusson Institute, Chairman | Prof. Dr. Unnur Dís Skaptadóttir, University of Iceland |
| Prof. Dr. Hannes Jónsson, University of Iceland | Prof. Dr. Magnús Már Halldórsson, Reykjavik University |
| Prof. Dr. Áslaug Helgadóttir, The Agricultural University of Iceland | Prof. Dr. Áslaug Geirsdóttir, University of Iceland |
| Dr. Þórunn Rafnar, deCODE Genetics | Dr. Einar Mäntyla, Orf Genetics |
| Prof. Dr. Vilmundur Guðnason, Icelandic Heart Association | Prof. Dr. Þorvaldur Ingvarsson, University of Akureyri |
Under Art. 3 of the Public Support for Scientific Research Act, No. 3/2003, the Fund’s Board issues rules and guidelines regarding proposals, the review process and funding policy. The rules are stated in the following chapters along with a general guideline for proposal preparation and the IRF’s funding policy which has been approved by the Science Committee of the Science and Technology Policy Council.
The IRF is managed by RANNIS. General question regarding the Fund will be answered by Magnús Lyngdal Magnússon, Deputy Director and the IRF Boards’ secretary (magnus@rannis.is). Specific questions regarding individual Expert Panels and disciplines are handled by Program Officers (see Chapter X).
Board meetings are held regularly, normally on the first Monday of each month except during June, July and August. A formal letter to the Board should be sent to the following address at least a week before a scheduled Board meeting if it is to be included on the agenda:
The Icelandic Research Fund
Prof. Dr. Guðrún Nordal, chairman
c/o Magnús Lyngdal Magnússon
Laugavegur 13
101 Reykjavík
Please note that proposers should under no circumstances contact either Board members or Expert Panel members with matters regarding proposals under review. Any issues regarding proposals under review are handled by RANNIS. Failure to comply with these requirements could eliminate the application from consideration by review panels.
A statistical report on the IRF funding 2004-2010 has been prepared by RANNIS and can be downloaded from here (only available in Icelandic).
III. Proposal deadlines and types of grants
The IRF allocates three types of grants with the proposal deadline 1 June 2010:
In addition, the IRF awards a special Patent proposal Grants and Dissemination Grants with the proposal deadline 1 November 2010, 1 April 2011 and 1 November 2011. The maximum amount for each grant is ISK 500.000. These grants are only awarded for dissemination of results or patent proposals from projects funded by the IRF up to 2010. A third type of grants, Grants for preparation of international grant proposals (i.e. FP7 proposals), is funded by the IRF but managed by the International Division at RANNIS. There is an open deadline and proposals may be submitted at any time until further noticed. The maximum amount for each grant is ISK 500.000 and the total amount awarded each year is ISK 10 million.
Specific forms are issued for each grant type and required appendices (Grants of Excellence, Project Grants and Postdoctoral Grants). Proposal forms can be downloaded from here.
IV. Eligibility rules for proposals
The role of the IRF is to enhance scientific research in Iceland. For this purpose the IRF awards funding to research projects led by individuals, research teams, universities, research institutes, and companies.
Principal Investigators (PI’s) must have completed research based studies at a recognized university and have experience in running research projects. If a proposal is based on a formal research study, i.e. doctoral thesis, the supervisor must be listed as the PI and not the student himself.
The same individual may apply for any number of grants as a PI. However, the IRF will only fund the same project once.
V. Grants of Excellence
Grants of Excellence are awarded to large scale projects with the aim to carry Icelandic research to the international forefront. The PI and co-proposers shall have a recognized track record in their respective research fields along with an experience in running large scale research projects. Only projects with a clear set of objectives and well-defined milestones are considered for funding and the proposed deliverables and impact must surely be well defined.
The following items are among the criteria focused on when proposals for Grants of Excellence are reviewed. These items must therefore be clearly addressed in the proposal:
- The PI shall be a scientist with a recognized track record, leadership qualities and experience in running research projects.
- Co-operation of a highly qualified team of scientists.
- A contribution of master’s and doctoral students.
- Co-operation with foreign research teams and scientists.
- Matching contributions from institutions and/or companies participating in the project.
Grants of Excellence are funded for up to 36 months. The maximum grant level is ISK 75 million for a 36 months project, ISK 50 million for a 24 month project, and ISK 25 million for a 12 months project. The grant from the IRF can fund up to 85% of the total project cost less the cost for overhead and facilities. Please note that overhead and facilities are not considered as matching contributions to the project cost.
Grants of Excellence can serve as matching contributions or additional financing for large projects supported by foreign competition funds.
Projections of maximum grants from the IRF depend on the appropriations to the Fund in 2011. The IRF reserves the right to review the rules on funding levels should changes be made to these plans.
VI. Project Grants
Project Grants are funded for up to 36 months. The maximum grant level is ISK 20 million for a 36 months project, ISK 13 million for a 24 month project, and ISK 6.5 million for a 12 months project. A fairly even distribution is expected from one year to the next. The grant provided by the IRF amounts to a total of 85% of the total project cost less the cost for overhead and facilities. Please note that overhead and facilities are not considered as matching contributions to the project cost.
Each project shall have clear objectives and well-defined milestones. The projected cost should be justified; the expenditure of the grant defined, and it should be stated who will carry out each part of the project. A detailed budget and cost justification is required, clearly explaining all parts of the project, their individual cost and financing. The proposal shall clearly describe the proposed deliverables and impact of the project.
Projections of maximum grants from the IRF depend on the appropriations to the Fund in 2011. The IRF reserves the right to review the rules on funding levels should changes be made to these plans.
VII. Postdoctoral Grants
Postdoctoral Grants are intended for scientists who have completed their PhD (doctoral degrees) in the past 5 years and wish to establish themselves in scientific research in Iceland.
Postdoctoral Grants are funded for up to 36 months. The maximum grant level is ISK 20 million for a 36 months project, ISK 13 million for a 24 month project, and ISK 6.5 million for a 12 months project. A fairly even distribution is expected from one year to the next and the level of salaries for the postdoctoral researcher pr. year is 4.44 million ISK. Matching contributions are not required when applying for a Postdoctoral Grants. Please note that overhead and facilities are not considered as matching contributions to the project cost.
Postdoctoral grantees who were awarded Postdoctoral Grants in 2009 and 2010 are permitted to apply for a Project Grant during the second and third grant year. However, the IRF will not pay any cost already covered by the Postdoctoral Grant.
The proposer for a Postdoctoral Grant must submit, along with his/her proposal, a letter of support, on a specific form (Appendix E), from his/her prospective host institution regarding salaries, facilities, rights and professional environment, the expected co-operation and other relevant matters. The contribution of the host institute is taken into account in the review process and the stated support becomes a part of the eventual grant agreement. The letter of support should be signed by a legally authorised representative of the host institute.
A request by a grantee for transfer between institutions shall be submitted to the IRF, the continuation of the grant being subject to its approval.
Projections of maximum grants from the IRF depend on the appropriations to the Fund in 2011. The IRF reserves the right to review the rules on funding levels should changes be made to these plans.
VIII. Eligible cost
a) Salaries and related costs
The proposers shall take into account general agreements and institutional agreements in the calculation of salaries. Salaries include related costs. The rate for contracted work cannot be used as a reference when calculating salaries. The following table shows the maximum salaries (including related expenses) per month and the total number of months per person approved by the IRF as project cost for 2011:
| Level | Max. per month | Max. number of months per person |
| Senior personnel 1 (e.g. professor) | ISK 530,000 | Up to 36 months |
| Senior personnel 2 (e.g. associate or assistant professor) | ISK 425,000 | Up to 36 months |
| Postdoctoral researcher | ISK 370,000 | Up to 36 months |
| Doctoral student | ISK 265,000 | Up to 36 months |
| Researcher | ISK 265,000 | Up to 36 months |
| Master’s degree student | ISK 210,000 | Up to 12 months |
Each master’s degree student is funded for a maximum period of 12 months even though the total duration of a project might exceed these limitations.
Staff doing research and being dependent on project income may apply for their own salaries to the IRF.
IRF awards may not be used to augment the total salary or salary those who are simultaneously receiving full pay for other work.
b.1) Operational expenses
This item shall consist of the sum of all the necessary supplies for the project with the exception of items coming under overhead or facilities. Operational expenses and its relation to the proposed activities must be justified in detail (Appendix C). Any unjustified operational expenses will be rejected.
b.2) Initial expenses
Expenses of up to ISK 500.000 for the purchase of instruments and equipment may be entered as operational expenses for each 12 months (ISK 1 million for 24 months and ISK 1.5 million for 36 months). Proposals for more expensive instruments and equipment shall be submitted to the Equipment Fund. Calls for Equipment Fund proposals are announced 6 weeks before the deadline. Initial expenses and its relation to the proposed activities must be justified in detail (Appendix C). Any unjustified operational expenses will be rejected.
c) Travel expenses
This item consists of the sum total of travel and subsistence expenses necessary for the continuation of the project. Please note that travel expenses due to conferences are only applicable on the 2nd and 3rd project year and therefore not eligible during the 1st project year. The following table shows the maximum travel expenses due to conferences (per person) approved by the IRF in 2011:
| Destination | Max. per person | Max. number conferences per year |
| Europe | 200,000 | 1 |
| N-America (USA/Canada) | 250,000 | 1 |
| Asia | 250,000 | 1 |
Travel expenses and its relation to the proposed activities must be justified in detail (Appendix C). Any unjustified travel cost will be rejected.
d) Contracted service
This item contains work which is not carried out by the participants in the project while being necessary for its progress. Contracted service and its relation to the proposed activities must be justified in detail (Appendix C). Any unjustified cost due to contracted services will be rejected.
e) Dissemination cost
Expenses of up to ISK 500.000 for dissemination (e.g. printing cost) may be entered as operational expenses on the final project year. Dissemination cost and its relation to the proposed activities must be justified in detail (Appendix C). Any unjustified dissemination cost will be rejected.
f) Overhead and facilities
The IRF neither funds overhead nor facilities or any surcharge on salaries beyond related expenses (see further the IRF funding policy). It is no longer permitted to assign to the project any costs for Overhead or facilities are not accepted as matching funds.
The IRF reserves the right to review the rules on eligible cost and to call for any additional explanation from proposers regarding cost justification before deciding on funding.
→Go to top
IX. Other
The IRF can, on the basis of the review process, decide to support only a part of the work packages described in a given proposal. The IRF has the authority to seek other financing for specific work packages or for the project as a whole.
X. Peer review and evaluation process
Expert Panels, each consisting of seven individuals, with extensive research experience, review all new proposals for grants from the IRF and submit to the Board of the IRF a report on each proposal (the appointment to the Expert Panels is explained on the RANNÍS home page). The Science Committee of the Science and Technology Policy Council appoints Expert Panels for the period 2009-2011. The fields are as follows:
| Expert Panel | Program Officer (RANNIS) |
| Engineering, technical science and physical sciences | Sigurður Björnsson (sigurdur@rannis.is) |
| Natural science and environmental science | N.N. |
| Health science and life sciences | Lýður Skúli Erlendsson (lydur@rannis.is) |
| Social sciences and humanities | Guðný Hallgrímsdóttir (gudny@rannis.is) |
These four principal fields include numerous professional categories of science and technology, listed at the end of this document (see Chapter XIV).
At least two experts outside the Expert Panels review each proposal. The Expert Panels then review all the proposals, establish a ranking list based on the expert evaluations, and finalise each proposal with a written report.
The Expert Panels divide the proposals into five categories:
| I. Excellent |
| II. Very good |
| III. Good |
| IV. Fair |
| V. Proposals containing serious procedural errors and proposals outside the range of responsibilities of the IRF |
- The chairmen of the Expert Panels meet to discuss any matters of contention which may have arisen, before they finalise their reports to the Board of the IRF.
- In addition to the review submitted by the Expert Panels, the IRF Board must take into consideration the funding policy approved by the STPC, in their deliberations.
- Before the IRF Board makes final decisions on any funding it will discuss the proposed funding decision in a meeting with the chairmen of the Expert Panels.
- Under Art. 4 of the Act No. 3/2003 the funding decisions of the IRF Board is not subject to administrative complaints.
- When the IRF Board has decided on funding the proposers will receive a reply and a copy of the report prepared by the relevant Expert Panel.
XI. Distribution of payments and progress reports
Grants are provided for up to 36 months providing there is satisfactory progress in the projects, and subject to appropriations to the Fund. The IRF enters its first grant agreement with the grantee within four months from the funding decision, and continuation is dependent on the progress of the project.
a) Annual reports
By January 10 each year, an annual report shall be submitted describing the progress of the project during the previous year. It shall give an account of all important changes in the project and confirm that the research plan has been complied with. Furthermore, a cost estimate for the following grant year shall be submitted. The annual reports are review by the staff at RANNÍS and they make recommendations on continued support to the IRF Board. The IRF Board and the staff at RANNÍS have the authority to request, if necessary, further information from the grantees upon the review of the annual reports. The Expert Panels will review annual reports if the RANNÍS staff or the IRF Board considers this necessary.
The first payment of each year (40%) is made upon the signing of the grant agreement, the second payment (40%) is made on 1 September, and the final payment (20%) of each year is made when the annual report, i.e. the report for the grant year in question, has been approved. When the annual report has been approved, next year’s grant agreement will be sent to the PI’s. The IRF Board reserves the right to agree to another division of payments in special circumstances (e.g. in the event of large projects). The grantees may also request another division of payments.
b) Final reports
Upon the conclusion of a project the PI’s shall submit a final report explaining the work undertaken in the project, its final results and conclusions. The Expert Panels and the staff at RANNÍS will review the final reports. The final payment (20% of the final year) shall be made at the close of the review, unless serious reservations have been made regarding the report. The review of the final report will be taken into consideration if the PI applies for a grant from the IRF for new projects.
XII. Proposals – general instructions
Please note that specific proposal forms are needed for each type of grant as seen below:
| 1. Proposal - Grant of Excellence 2011. |
| 2. Proposal - Project Grant 2011. |
| 3. Proposal - Postdoctoral Grant 2011. |
All proposals and supporting documents should be in English to ensure that the proposals may be submitted for evaluation abroad. Exemptions are granted when publications in the field are exclusively in Icelandic. In such cases the proposer should seek instructions from RANNÍS.
Proposals and supporting documents should be submitted to RANNIS in two steps:
- Firstly, in a single hard copy with supporting documents (original with signatures) by no later than 16:00 hours Tuesday 1 June 2010. If the proposal and supporting documents are mailed to RANNIS the post stamp shall be no later than 1 June 2010. Address: RANNIS, Laugavegur 13, 101 Reykjavík. Envelopes must be marked clearly: „Icelandic Research Fund - Proposal“.
- Secondly, the proposal with supporting documents is to be sent to the following e-mail address: umsoknir@rannis.is. The proposal with supporting documents should be saved under the PI’s name (name_principal investigator.doc/xls/pdf) and please write in the e-mail subject line: The Icelandic Research Fund: Proposal – principal investigators name. Please note that proposal must be sent by e-mail no later than 16:00 hours Tuesday 1 June 2010. Proposal submitted later will be rejected (the timing of the e-mail is checked).
Incomplete proposals will be rejected. All proposals should be submitted with the following appendices:
| Appendix A: Detailed project description |
| Appendix B: Curriculum vitae for principal investigator and co-proposers |
| Appendix C: Detailed budget and justification of cost |
| Appendix D: A price quote (if equipment cost is applied for/see initial costs) |
| Appendix E: Declaration from the host institution (Postdoctoral Grant only) |
Specific forms for appendices A, B, C and E can be downloaded from here. Proposers using LATEX or similar software can prepare their own forms for appendices A and B but should note that exactly the same rules applies in regards to length, font, spacing etc. Proposals disregarding these rules will be rejected.
Please note that no other appendices should accompany the proposal.
Proposal form instructions:
1. Principal investigator: Name of the individual responsible for the proposal and the execution of the project. Include a postal address that RANNÍS and the Fund should use for communications with the PI.
2. Project: The name of the project in Icelandic and English should not exceed 150 characters. Include the name of the Expert Panel. The scientific category should be consistent with the accompanying list of scientific categories of the Expert Panels listed at the end of this document. Both the number and designation of the scientific category should be stated. Please note that choosing a specific Expert Panel is not necessary if the proposal is multi-disciplinary. Proposers may opt to leave the field blank or suggest more than one Expert Panel. Such proposals will be screened by the Expert Panel chairs who will decide in which Expert Panel these proposals will be reviewed and ranked. This applies only to multi-disciplinary proposals and the final ranking is within one of the four IRF Expert Panels even though members from different Expert Panels might be consulted during the review process.
3. Research facility: Please state the name and address of the legal representative of the institution where the research will be conducted. For Postdoctoral Grant proposals the host institution and its legal representative should be listed.
4. Budget overview: Please state the amount (in ISK thousands) requested in the grant proposal to the IRF, in addition to other financing of the project. It is important that all amounts are consistent with item 11 (item 10 in the proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant).
5-6. Abstract in Icelandic and English: A general description of the project in Icelandic and English. Please include a brief description of the objectives, execution and value of the project. This description will be made public and shall not exceed 1,500 characters.
7. Co-proposers: Please state the names of all the proposers, other than the principal investigator, who will receive salaries or other remuneration if the grant is funded. Include also anyone who will provide funding, facilities, equipment, etc., to the project. Please note that the names of master’s degree and doctoral students should be stated in item 8 (this item is excluded in the proposal for Postdoctoral Grants).
8. Participation of master’s degree or doctoral students: Please name the master’s degree and doctoral projects that will be carried out in connection with the project (item 7 in the proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant).
9. Project accounting: (Item 8 in the proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant): Please name the person/company responsible for the project accounting.
10. Other projects in which the principal investigator participates: (Item 9 in Postdoctoral Grant proposal): If the principal investigator participates in other research projects (domestic or foreign) this should be stated here, including his/her work contribution to the projects each year. There is no objection to the principal investigator taking part in more than one project.
11. Budget plan for the project period: (Item 10 in the proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant): The proposers are required to fill in two or three simple budget tables (A, B and C).
Consistency between all the tables is important, and between them and item 4. In item 11A (10A in a proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant) the proposers are asked to explain the part of the project costs that they are applying for to the IRF, any matching contributions, and the total cost of the project. In general, the amount requested from the IRF may not exceed 85% of the total cost of the project. When a proposal is made for a Postdoctoral Grant there is no requirement made for any additional funding.
Detailed budget and justification of cost for the entire project period must be submitted on a specific form (Appendix C) which can be downloaded from the RANNÍS web site. Further information on the handling of the costs is provided in the IRF’s grant policy (Chapter XIII).
A. Budget table (table in the proposal form): Please explain all expenses for the project for the entire project period, equal to the amount applied for to the IRF and matching funds (other funding). The item wages (wages and wage-related expenses) applied for to the Fund need to be in accordance with the table in item B, and the matching funds shall be in accordance with the table in item C.
B. Expected breakdown of salaries (table in the proposal form): Please state the names of those who are to receive wages in the project, on the one hand from the grant made by the IRF, and, on the other, from other sources. This should apply to all those who are to receive wages, students and assistants, in addition to specialists. The information should be as specific as possible. If it is still not known which individuals are to receive wages (e.g. if no research students have been engaged) this should also be mentioned. It is important that this table is consistent with item 8.
C. Other or own financing of the project (table in the proposal form): Please explain the matching contributions, i.e. all financing other than financing by the IRF. This means grants that have already been acquired (upper part of the table), grants that are being applied for or will be applied for (lower part of the table). The table shall also state any contributions to the project by universities, institutions or companies.
12. (Item 11 in the proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant) List of suggested reviewers or non preferred reviewers (optional): Proposers may include a list of suggested reviewers (outside of Iceland) that they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal. Proposers also may suggest persons they would prefer not review the proposal, indicating why. These suggestions are optional but helpful for Expert Panel members when it comes to selecting qualified external reviewers. The suggestions will be considered by the relevant Expert Panel when reviewers are selected and may or may not be used.
13. (Item 12 in the proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant) Attached documents: The necessary supporting documents are as follows:
Appendix A: Detailed project description (specific form)
The project description should not exceed 15 pages in addition to front page, guidelines and bibliography (1.5 line spacing, 12 point Times/Times New Roman, or similar). Failure to comply with the page limitations specified here or any of the other formatting requirements will result in the proposal being returned without review. The project description shall explain the following and be divided into the following sections:
a. State of the art and proficiency.
b. Objectives of the project and originality.
c. Methodology, work plan and timescale.
d. Co-operation (domestic/foreign).
e. Contribution of doctoral and master’s degree students to the project.
f. Proposed deliverables and impact.
g. Proposed publication of results.
The proposers make the obvious demand that all those reviewing the proposal are experts in the field of science under which the proposal falls. In return, one of the prime premises for a high-quality review is that the project has been described in detail so that the review can be made on the basis of the information provided in the proposal. A high-quality project description will facilitate the professional review of the proposal. The following points should be kept in mind:
- It is imperative that the project has well-defined objectives and has been divided into well-defined work packages.
- Each work package of the project should be described individually, their respective connection explained, as applicable, and the time necessary for each to be estimated.
- The main milestones in the project planning and schedule that mark the boundary between the stages in the project shall be described. In the event of a two or a three-year project, such milestones shall be defined and described for the end of the first, second and third grant year.
- The research methods used should be explained, and the reason for their use in each instance. The methodology for the gathering of information (and its scope) and the analysis of the data should be available.
- Any co-operation within the project should be explained, both between the different scientists and researchers, and whether there is active co-operation between universities, institutions and companies. International co-operation in the project should be especially explained.
- Information on which parts of the project comprise doctoral or master’s degree projects, if applicable, and at which school (or department) the students are studying, and what the students’ contribution in the project entails.
- Explanations and arguments should be given for the expected benefit and utilization of the results of the project. The benefit could be knowledge-related, environmental, economic, social, etc. The returns of the projects would be measurable “units” resulting from the project. Examples of returns are: published scientific articles, university diplomas, software, databases, prototypes, production methods, new products, patents, models, research methods, confirmed scientific theories, etc.
- Furthermore, it should be explained how the results would be promoted, as well as their publications in professional journals, reports, conferences, etc., and whether, and then how, the proprietary rights to the results would be protected.
The IRF would like to advise the proposers to acquire the necessary permits from the Data Protection Authority, the National Bioethics Committee and/or the Animal Testing Committee, as applicable.
Appendix B: Curriculum vitae (specific form)
The curriculum vitae for the principal investigator and co-proposers shall not exceed four pages. Each CV should describe their studies and careers, in addition to a list of publications during the past 5-10 years.
Appendix C: Detailed budget and justification of costs for the duration of the project (specific form)
All expenses and the financing of the project should be explained in detail. This report should be consistent with item 11 in the proposal (item 10 in the proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant). The Fund may request the annual accounts of an institution or company should this be deemed necessary. All parts of the work, their costs and financing should be clearly explained.
Appendix D
A price quote from the supplier/agent must be attached when applying for cost of instruments and equipment.
Appendix E: Declaration from the host institution (Postdoctoral Grants only) (specific form)
A proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant should be accompanied by a declaration of the host institution on a specific form (Appendix E). The declaration should explain the contribution of the host institution as regards wages, facilities, rights and professional environment, expected co-operation and other relevant items. The contribution of the host institution is taken into consideration in the appraisal of the proposal, and the declaration will become part of the eventual grant agreement. This declaration should be signed by a legal representative of the host institution.
14. (Item 13 in the proposal for a Postdoctoral Grant) Signatures: The principal investigator/proposer and all the other co-proposers shall sign this along with the person responsible for the research facilities or host institution. By his/her signature the principal investigator/proposer confirms that all the information in the proposal is accurate and that nothing significant has been left out. By their signatures all the other participants confirm their participation and that of the universities, institutions or companies for which they are responsible fully consistent with the proposal and the supporting documents, including the financing of the project.
XIV. Funding policy for the Icelandic Research Fund
Approved by the Science Committee of the Science and Technology Policy Council (STPC) in April 2010 for publication in its entirety with the Fund’s rules on allocation.
The Icelandic Research Fund supports both basic research and applied research, making clear demands of scientific progress, publication and delivery of scientific conclusions. The main criteria being the publication of results and the likelihood that results will lead to the registration of patents or intellectual property rights. Research projects will be supported based on their scientific quality, the qualifications of the applicants and the research facilities, and the likelihood that the results will lead to publications, as well as their value and utilization for Icelandic society. This will ensure that comparable criteria will be used in the evaluation of grant applications, whether for basic or applied research. With reference to quality there is an emphasis on possible returns and cultural and societal innovation in Iceland.
The role of the Science Committee regarding the IRF’s grant policy is explained in Art. 8 of the Public Support for Scientific Research Act, No. 3/2003, stating:
“The Science Committee of the Science and Technology Policy Council shall define the policy of the Icelandic Research Fund and Equipment Fund on allocations. The Board of the Icelandic Research Fund shall publish rules on applications, the method of processing and allocation of funds no later than six weeks prior to the deadline for application. They must specify the application criteria and the priorities of the Science and Technology Policy Council.”
STCP’s policy 2010-2012
The Icelandic Research Fund is one of the most powerful public tools available to strengthen the infrastructure of the research community by providing grants to research projects on the basis of applications. In regards to competitive funds the STCP’s policy 2010-2012 states: „Competitive funding, based on a high level quality review, and a close cooperation between universities, research institutions and companies are a premises for a strong research an innovation community. ... The competitive funds need to work closer together in regards to specific projects. The aim with competitive funding is to increase returns, strengthen the culture and develop a better society.“
In its policy the STPC also emphasizes that:
- The public competitive funds should use comparable criteria when evaluating project costs and the allocation of grants should be decided on the basis of the total cost of the project.
- Public R&D funding should be based on quality and impact and the review process and funding decisions should be open and transparent.
- The role of each competitive fund and the R&D system should be taken into account when reviewing proposals.
- The IRF should focus on supporting young scientist with handsome grants. The aim is to build and develop a scientific research in Iceland.
- Results, which are financed by the competitive funds, should be made public and made available to everybody unless otherwise agreed.
The IRF provides grants according to law and the general priorities of the STPC. The Science Committee emphasizes that in the review of proposals the following points should carry weight:
- Research projects should be supported according to their merit based on scientific value, the qualifications of the applicants and research facilities and the probability that the project will produce measurable results and benefits.
- Projects which meet quality criteria and are carried out in an active, professional and financial co-operation of companies, universities and institutions should, other things being equal, be given priority for grants from competition funds.
- Results, which are financed by grants from the IRF, should be made public and made available to everybody unless otherwise agreed.
- The allocation of grants from the IRF should be decided on the basis of the total cost of the project.
- The IRF should take into account the circumstances of the applicants, e.g. independently working researchers, researchers working within universities, research institutions or companies.
- There should be a focus on young scientists.
- There should be a focus on the procedure for the review of multi-disciplinary proposals.
XIV. Scientific categories of the IRF’s Expert Panels
| EXPERT COUNCIL: ENGINEERING, TECHNICAL SCIENCES AND SCIENCES | ||
| SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FIELD | MAIN CAT. | |
| 1 ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY | 10 | Engineering and technology, general |
| 11 | Construction Engineering (Construction and Structural Technology) | |
| 12 | Mechanical Engineering (Mechanical and Metal Techniques) | |
| 13 | Electrical Engineering (Electrical, Electronic and Communications Techniques and Automation) | |
| 14 | Chemical Engineering (Production and Processing Techniques, not Food Techniques) | |
| 15 | Food Engineering (Food Techniques) | |
| 16 | Fish Processing Technology | |
| 17 | Industrial, Systems and Operations Engineering (Management, Control, Optimization) | |
| 18 | Surveying and Architecture | |
| 19 | Information Technology | |
| 2 MATHEMATICS, COMPUTER SCIENCES | 20 | Mathematics, General Computer Science |
| 21 | Mathematics, Calculation Science | |
| 22 | Systems Analysis, Computer Science | |
| 3 PHYSICS, CHEMISTRY | 30 | Physics and Chemistry, general |
| 31 | Physics | |
| 32 | Chemistry | |
| 33 | Astronomy, Aeronomy | |
| EXPERT COUNCIL: NATURAL SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE | ||
| SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FIELD | MAIN CAT. | |
| 4 ENVIRONMENTAL & EARTH SCIENCE | 40 | Environmental and Earth Science, general |
| 41 | Geography, Land Formation | |
| 42 | Geology | |
| 43 | Geochemistry | |
| 44 | Geophysics | |
| 45 | Meteorology, Aeronomy | |
| 46 | Oceanography | |
| 47 | Hydrology, Groundwater Science | |
| 48 | Soil Science | |
| 49 | Environmental Science | |
| 5 NATURAL SCIENCES AND BIOLOGY | 50 | Natural Science, Biology, general |
| 51 | Biology | |
| 52 | Botany | |
| 53 | Bacteriology | |
| 54 | Zoology | |
| 55 | Ecology | |
| 56 | Biochemistry, Biophysics | |
| 57 | Limnology, Marine Biology | |
| 6 FISHING & AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE | 60 | Fishing and Agricultural science, general |
| 61 | Agronomy | |
| 62 | Animal Husbandry | |
| 63 | Forestry | |
| 64 | Horticulture | |
| 65 | Fishing | |
| 66 | Fish Farming | |
| 69 | Food Product Testing | |
| EXPERT COUNCIL: HEALTH SCIENCES AND LIFE SCIENCES | ||
| SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FIELD | MAIN CAT. | |
| 7 MEDICINE | 70 | Medicine, general |
| 71 | Anatomy | |
| 72 | Biophysics, Biochemistry | |
| 73 | Microbiology, Immunology | |
| 74 | Pathology | |
| 75 | Pharmacology, Toxicology | |
| 76 | Clinical Medicine | |
| 77 | Dentistry | |
| 78 | Nursing, Physiotherapy | |
| 79 | Biotechnology | |
| 67 | Veterinary Treatment | |
| EXPERT COUNTIL: SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES | ||
| SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FIELD | MAIN CAT. | |
| 8 SOCIAL SCIENCE | 80 | Social Science, general |
| 81 | Geography, Anthropology, Ethnology | |
| 82 | Sociology, Political Science | |
| 83 | Information Technology | |
| 84 | Economics, Business Administration | |
| 85 | Law | |
| 86 | Pedagogy, Psychology | |
| 9 HUMANITIES | 90 | Humanities, general |
| 91 | Philosophy | |
| 92 | Literary Studies | |
| 93 | Linguistics | |
| 94 | History | |
| 95 | Archaeology | |
| 96 | Theology | |
| 97 | Art History |
Leit
English
Samskipti
Rannsóknamiðstöð Íslands - Rannís • Laugavegi 13 • 101 Reykjavík • Sími 515 5800 • Fax 552 9814 • kt. 531094-2129 • rannis@rannis.is
