Project Grants

Colt Foundation Grants

Our Aims

The Colt Foundation aims particularly to support research projects concerning the health, safety, comfort and well-being of people at work, and the impacts of industrial activities and pollutants on the health of the public more widely. The Trustees have occasionally supported projects that fall outside these areas, but they are very much the exception.

Applications

The Trustees meet twice a year to consider applications for project grants from research teams based at UK universities. Applications must be received approximately 12 weeks before a meeting so that reviews can be obtained from external assessors in advance of the meeting.

Dates of forthcoming Trustees’ meetings, and deadlines for submission of proposals to be considered at those meetings can be found in our diary of events. In addition, potential applicants can submit a single sheet lay summary at any time during the year, to get advice on whether the work that they propose falls within the remit of the Foundation, and whether it could be worth proceeding to a full application.

The Trustees are particularly keen to fund research that can lead directly or indirectly to benefits for health through changes in clinical or employment practices, or in public health policy.

Guidance and Format For Applications

Guidance for applicants

In selecting projects for funding, the Foundation requires applicants to state clearly the research question(s) they will address, detail how they plan to answer the research question(s) and explain what difference the findings might make to practice, to policy, or to priorities for future research that has potential to influence practice or policy.
Proposed research must have the potential to advance knowledge usefully on measures to protect or improve health in relation to work and/or environmental impacts of industry.
Assisted by independent external peer-review, the Board assesses the potential for useful advances in knowledge against the cost of a project.
Applicants should be mindful that some of the Board members are non-medical, and the lay summary of the proposed project must be clear.
The Foundation is pleased to support systematic reviews which address explicit research questions with a potential for useful impact (see above). To help in their assessment, proposals for systematic reviews should include the findings from a preliminary scoping of the relevant literature to ensure that sufficient material will be available for impact.
The Foundation does not fund preliminary systematic reviews as an integral part of primary research projects. Our view is that applicants should be familiar with the relevant background literature before planning primary research, and should be able to summarise that literature in their proposal. Without such a summary, the Board cannot form a view on the potential value of the proposed primary research.
Personal and public involvement in research (PPI). The Foundation recognises the value that PPI can bring to the formulation of research questions, ensuring the acceptability of research methods, and helping to spread knowledge of research outputs. However, if PPI is needed to decide on a study question, that input must have been obtained before the proposal is submitted.

Pre-full submission
Before making a full submission, you are required to provide a brief (not more than one-page) summary of your proposal which answers the following questions:

What is/are your research question(s)?
How will you address it/them?
What difference might the findings make to practice, to policy, or to priorities for future research that has potential to influence practice or policy?
The approximate total financial support that is being requested from the Foundation.

You are recommended to submit a draft of this summary at least 6 weeks before the deadline for submitting the full proposal so that we can advise you whether your project is within remit for funding and whether the proposal is likely to be competitive.

Format for applications
We do not rigidly specify the format of project grant applications. However, they should clearly set out:

What question(s) the research will address
Why it will be useful to answer the study question(s) (what difference will it make, and how might it lead to health benefits, either in the shorter or longer term).
What data will be collected from where, and how.
How those data will be analysed to answer the study question(s).
Evidence that the study will be of adequate size to address the study question(s) meaningfully
Any ethical considerations that must be addressed when conducting the research, and how they will be addressed.
Where and how the findings of the research will be published.
A planned timeline for the work.
The financial support that is requested – in total, and broken down under major cost headings – with justification for the resources that are sought.

In addition, all applications should include a lay summary. This is essential since some of the Trustees do not have a medical or scientific background, and the summary may help them in choosing between the different applications that are under consideration.

Applications are not expected to exceed 3,000 words, excluding references, the lay summary and justification of resources. Brief CV’s, not exceeding two sides of A4 paper, should be attached for each of the major applicants.

All applications must be emailed to tash@coltfoundation.org.uk and submitted as one microsoft word document, not multiple .pdf files, including CV’s and letters of support.

Application Notes

Applications involving research on people and/or human tissues must be approved by an ethics committee.

The Foundation monitors its research projects through annual review meetings, and the trustees may appoint an external assessor to advise on project progress. Grants are not made to the general funds of other charities, or directly to individuals, or to projects based outside the UK (although projects may entail collection of data in other countries).

Project grant costs

The Colt Foundation will only support the directly incurred costs of research and do not pay indirect or directly allocated costs, these are primarily the responsibility of the university. As universities cost research according to full economic cost (FEC). This identifies directly incurred costs, directly allocated costs and indirect costs.

Acceptable

Directly incurred costs

The direct costs of research include:

Research staff (eg research assistant salaries, junior researchers at postdoctoral level). If we are paying the salaries of staff working part-time we would require confirmation that their total FTE doesn’t exceed 100% (eg if a researcher is already employed on a 75% contract, the maximum we would pay under a grant would be 25% FTE)
Consumables and other costs directly attributable to the project
Cost of equipment specific to the needs of the project
Travel and subsistence.

Not acceptable

Directly allocated costs

These are shared costs based on estimates and do not represent actual costs on a project-by-project basis. They may include:

Research investigators: the proportion of time spent by the principal investigator and co-investigators on a research project.
The cost of shared resources such as clerical and administrative staff, nurses, lab technicians, supervisors and collaborators who are already employed. Equipment not specific to the research such as lab supplies and equipment is classed as directly allocated costs
Estates: the space used by researchers.

Indirect costs

These costs are necessary for underpinning research but cannot be allocated to individual projects. They usually cover computing and information support, central services, general maintenance, lighting, heating and other infrastructure costs.