Information about http://www.nrf.ac.za/doc/bsrp_sep2008.pdf
Blue Skies Research…
Tags: blue skies, contact person, development directorate, document version, dr andrew, email, executive summary, framework document, knowledge fields, modus operandi, nrf, participation, table of contents,Pages: 11
Language: english
Created: Tue Sep 2 11:28:07 2008
Display cached document
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Blue Skies Research Programme
Managed by the Knowledge Fields Development Directorate of the NRF
Contact person: Dr Andrew Kaniki, Tel : 012 481 4260, Email : andrew@nrf.ac.za
Framework Document
Version 1.0
1 August 2008
Page 1 of 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................. 3
2. STRATEGIC CONTEXT .............................................................................................................. 3
3. PROGRAMME TITLE AND DESCRIPTION ........................................................................... 4
4. OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................. 4
5. MODUS OPERANDI ..................................................................................................................... 5
5.1. WHO MAY APPLY FOR FUNDING? .................................................................................... 5
5.2. RULES OF PARTICIPATION ................................................................................................. 5
5.3. WHAT CAN BE FUNDED? ...................................................................................................... 6
5.4. WHERE TO APPLY? ................................................................................................................ 8
5.5. TIMELINES ................................................................................................................................ 8
6. FINANCIAL CONTROL & REPORTING ................................................................................. 8
7. ASSESSMENT AND DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES................................................... 9
7.1. ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSALS............................................................................................. 9
7.2. PROPOSAL GRADING .......................................................................................................... 10
7.3. FUNDING-DECISION PROCESS ......................................................................................... 10
8. FEEDBACK AND APPEALS ..................................................................................................... 11
Page 2 of 11
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Blue Skies Research Programme is a highly competitive programme and provides the space for
novel fundamental enquiry, curiosity-driven and basic research in order to increase the knowledge
base. Since 2001 the National Research Foundation (NRF) has used the focus area programme
(FAP) as the framework for supporting research and capacity development initiatives. Over the years
and following the review of the FAP framework, it has become clear that the South African research
landscape requires both strategically-driven research and fundamental research in order to contribute
to national priorities and compete internationally. This programme aims to bring about new and
unpredictable scientific/technological/scholarly discoveries the kinds that form the basis of new
industries, markets and broader social innovations of the future
(http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ideas/home_en.html). The objective is to ensure that the science system in
the country maintains sufficient diversity in the research landscape and skills base and does not
become over focused in areas of perceived strategic advantage. The emphasis is therefore to ensure
a balance in the focus and diversity of our science system.
2. STRATEGIC CONTEXT
Soon after its founding, the NRF took a strategic decision to organise its support and promotion of
research in terms of nationally relevant focus areas. The Focus Area Programme (FAP) represented a
significant attempt by the NRF to steer the research funding away from the traditional comfort zone of
self-initiated research, important as that zone may have been throughout the history of science until
the late nineteen eighties. The FAP approach was partially in line with the strategies of other
comparable national funding agencies across the world, notable African examples being Egypt and
Tunisia. In contrast to a `traditional' non-directed self-initiated support and promotion strategy, a focus
area strategy has to be reviewed more regularly. This is due to various reasons. Principal among
these are:
· many researchers are not favourably disposed to this kind of steering by funding agencies;
· the corporate and national imperatives of ascertaining whether the strategic objectives
underpinning it are being met; and
· because national and international priorities with which the support and promotion strategy is
intended to be aligned - change at an accelerated pace.
It was therefore imperative for the NRF to bring about strategic change. In 2007 the NRF instituted the
review of the FAP framework. The overriding conclusion of the review was that the development and
implementation of the FAP framework:
· came at the right time;
· has been partially successful;
· the rationale behind it and the model underpinning it remains valid; and
· a focussed research programme should be continued even if in an amended form.
The review recommended that provision should be made for a programme dedicated to promoting
discipline-oriented research, without it becoming a "soft" option for research which is neither
scientifically nor socially relevant. This is in line with the NRF mandate which states in part that the
object of the NRF is to promote and support research... in all fields of science and technology,
including indigenous knowledge...It also resonates with Balaram's view that If basic science is not
Page 3 of 11
nurtured in academic institutions, there is little hope that good applied or "applicable science" will
emerge in the future".1
3. PROGRAMME TITLE AND DESCRIPTION
The Blue Skies Research Programme is a highly competitive programme, which provides space for
novel fundamental enquiry, curiosity-driven and basic research in order to increase the knowledge
base. Curiosity-driven research or basic research encompasses fundamental scientific phenomena for
the sake of pushing the knowledge frontiers rather than for applicability to particular problems. This
implies:
"Exploratory research in any field where the primary requirement is the freedom to challenge
scientific/scholarly understanding. The research should offer the prospect to change the way we think
about an important subject" (Braben: http://www.frontier.co.uk/ventureresearch/talk.html).
Some features of the programme:
· Exploratory research that challenges the boundaries of the discipline or academy, rather than for
applicability to particular problems (McCullough: 1992)2
· Research that deepens our understanding of the world and sustains long-term economic growth
and novelty (Braben:2002)3
4. OBJECTIVES
· To provide the space for basic research to push the frontiers of knowledge and to encourage
novelty in scientific and scholarly endeavours
· To generate and retain a cadre of critical and free thinkers
· To promote and restore diversity in research, that may have the potential for high impact within the
discipline or academy
· To bring about new and unpredictable scientific/technological/scholarly discoveries the kind that
form the basis of new industries, markets and broader social innovations of the future
(http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ideas/home_en.html).
1
Balaram, p. (1999): Editorial Current Science vol.76, no.1 10 (January) pp.5-6
2
McCullough, J (1992): Evaluating grants programs for basic scientific research: difficult measurements,
few techniques and slow progress American Journal of Evaluation vol. 13, no. 95 pp.95-101
3
Braben, W.D (2002) Blue skies research and the global economy Physica A 314 pp. 768-773
Page 4 of 11
5. MODUS OPERANDI
5.1. WHO MAY APPLY FOR FUNDING?
· Full time employees at an NRF recognized research institution4 in South Africa.
· Part-time employees on contract at an NRF recognized research institution in South Africa,
but on condition that the appointment is for (at least) the duration of the project applied for
in the submission. The length of the contract should be stated in the application form.
Salaries must be paid by the research institution and the primary employment of the
individual concerned must be at that institution. A contract researcher appointed at a
university or university of technology on behalf of a third party to fulfill a very specific
function for the latter does not qualify for support.
· Rated and unrated researchers are eligible to submit applications. Successful applicants
will be eligible for initial funding for up to three years. Any extension beyond the three years
will be dependent on the outputs in research and research capacity development such as
graduated students, published papers and available budget. Candidates, who wish to apply
for any new project funding will have to submit a new proposal.
· Retired researchers provided that:
o there must be demonstration of institutional support in the form of an employment
contract, office space, administrative support, access to research equipment and
space.
o the researcher must have a good past and current track record in the successful
training of research students; and especially women and black students.
o the institution ensures that a minimum of reasonable time is spent at the facility for
the purpose of research and research capacity development.
5.2. RULES OF PARTICIPATION
· The principal investigator (i.e. the applicant) must be an active researcher who takes
intellectual responsibility for the project, its conception, any strategic decisions called for in
its pursuit, and the communication of results. The principal investigator must have the
capacity to make a serious commitment to the project and cannot assume the role of a
supplier of resources for work that will largely be placed in the hands of others. He/she will
also take responsibility for the management and administration of resources allocated to
the proposal.
· A principal investigator should not submit a research proposal on behalf of a student where
the student in the main will be carrying out the research
· The research team may also include:
CO-INVESTIGATORS
4
Recognized research institution is one that meets all the following minimum requirements:
o any institution that conducts basic or applied research,
o of a pre-competitive nature,
o for the benefit of the long-term knowledge base,
o whilst being committed to human resource capacity development, including a commitment to equity and redress
Page 5 of 11
A co-investigator is an active researcher who provides significant commitment, intellectual
input and the relevant expertise into the design of the research proposal and will be involved in
all or at least some well-defined research activities within the scope of the proposal. Please
note that:
· Co-investigators who are employed as permanent/contract research staff members at
recognized research institutions in South Africa may receive NRF funds from the grant if
the team's application is successful.
· Post-doctoral fellows, students and technical and support staff should NOT be listed as co-
investigators.
RESEARCH ASSOCIATES/COLLABORATORS
· These are individuals or groups who are anticipated to make a relatively small but
meaningful contribution to the research endeavours outlined in the proposal, but who have
not actively participated in the design. Depending on their contribution, they may or may
not require funding requested within the proposal. These can include, for example,
researchers nationally and internationally in higher education institutions, museums, NGOs,
industry, and science councils who may provide for example, samples or specific technical
advice/input.
5.3. WHAT CAN BE FUNDED?
5.3.1. GRANT HOLDER-LINKED STUDENT SUPPORT
The distribution for these bursaries is targeted at the ratio:
o Final year Undergraduate and Honours/BTech student assistantships: 100% SA
citizens with a minimum ratio5 of 1:1 for Black6 and White participants
o Masters bursaries: 90% to South Africans and 10% to candidates from other African
countries
o Doctoral bursaries: 80:15:5, SA: Other African: Rest of the World
o Postdoctoral bursaries: Open to all who undertake research in South Africa.
Values of Student Assistantships
o Final year undergraduate (Full-time) R8 000 pa
o Honours / BTech (Full-time) R15 000 pa
Values of Bursaries & Fellowships
o Masters degree (Full-time) R30 000 pa
o Masters degree (Part-time) R10 000 pa
o Doctoral degree (Full-time) R45 000 pa
o Doctoral degree (Part-time) R12 000 pa
o Postdoctoral (pro rata per month) R80 000 pa
5
With the emphasis on Black students
6
The classification "Black" is a generic term which refers to all individuals previously disadvantaged by the pre-1994
dispensation
Page 6 of 11
5.3.2. RESEARCH-RELATED OPERATING COSTS
These costs include materials and supplies, travel (including conferences) and
subsistence, equipment and research/technical/ad hoc assistance and sabbaticals to
other research organizations and institutions of higher learning may be included within
the context of the project proposals, student top-ups. These costs should be justified
and commensurate with the planned outputs, as they will be assessed on the criteria
provided in the framework/guide. The amount awarded within this framework can be
used at the discretion of the applicant.
General guidelines
Materials and Supplies
Generally, the NRF does not provide financial support for:
· Basic office equipment including computers and consumables unless the computer
is required for the research itself or the applicant/team member is based at a
museum.
· Basic office stationery, photocopying costs, printing costs unless these items form
part of the research tools or the applicant/team member is based at a museum.
· Journal publication costs, journal subscription costs, book costs unless the
applicant/team member is based at a museum.
· Telephone, fax and internet costs unless the applicant/team member is based at a
museum.
Travel and subsistence
· International conference attendance: Generally the NRF restricts this amount to
R50,000 per application per year for a team proposal i.e. for principal investigators,
co-investigators (local only) and local post-graduate students. This amount may be
reduced proportionately if there is no team member and/or post-graduate student
involvement.
· International visits: These will be considered on a case by case basis. Such visits
must be integral to the research plan and strong motivations should accompany
these requests. Realistic funding allocations will be based on the requested
activities. Both incoming and outgoing visits will be considered depending on the
availability of funding.
· Local conference attendance: Generally the NRF restricts expenditure against this
item to R4000 per person (all costs). Support for local conference attendance could
be requested for all listed co-investigators and post-graduate students. The
applicant should motivate for:
o The benefits to attend more than one local conference per annum if so
requested
o the number of people that should be funded to attend local conferences.
· Local travel: The NRF does not stipulate any rate for mileage as this will depend on
the research institutions' rate which varies per institution. Applicants are requested
to provide details of this rate as well as the estimated distance to be travelled within
the given year.
· Local accommodation costs should not exceed R500 per night per person.
Page 7 of 11
Research / Technical / Ad hoc Assistants
· The NRF does not pay for any salaries.
· Requests for research/technical/ad hoc assistance should be treated with caution.
Generally the NRF would encourage applicants to engage students to undertake
the research rather than employing research consultants. This guideline however
does not apply when specific and/or highly specialized research/technical expertise
is required. This should be CLEARLY motivated for in the proposal.
· Administrative assistance does not qualify as technical assistance.
5.3.3. STAFF DEVELOPMENT GRANTS
Grant-holders may apply for Staff Development grants for South African staff members
at their own and other institutions, who are not grant-holders in their own right. These
staff members must be registered for Masters or Doctoral degrees, supervised by the
grant-holder or a team member and must be directly involved in the NRF approved
project. These grants can be used to contribute towards the operating costs for
research undertaken at the supervisor's facility, as well as the cost of travel and
accommodation to enable staff members to meet with (co)supervisors. Grants usually
range between R15 000 and R30 000 depending on the nature of the research and the
proximity of the student in relation to the supervisor. Grant-holders themselves are not
eligible for Staff Development Grants. The maximum period of support is three years for
a Masters degree and five years for a Doctorate.
5.3.4. FUNDING TO CATER FOR DISABILITIES
Additional funding support to cater for disability will only be allocated to people with
disabilities as specified in the Code of Good Practice on Employment of People with
Disabilities as in the Employment Equity Act No 55 of 1998.
5.4. WHERE TO APPLY?
All applications must be submitted online at http://nrfonline.nrf.ac.za. Please select the
Knowledge Fields Development (KFD) Call (Blue Skies Research).
5.5. TIMELINES
Call opens: 01 September 2008
Call closes: 31 October 2008
Outcome and awards: February/March 2009
6. FINANCIAL CONTROL & REPORTING
These grants are to be used for research purposes under the auspices of the NRF standard grant and
finance policies. The money is released on acceptance of the conditions of grant both by the applicant
Page 8 of 11
and his/her employing institution. The funds will be awarded against a number of items such as
equipment, running costs, travel costs, student bursaries, etc. Bursaries are awarded as per the NRF
rules. Annual Progress Reports, submitted before the end of March of the following year, are a
prerequisite for the release of the subsequent year's funding. Failure to submit the Annual Progress
Reports will result in the cancellation of the project. These grants will fall under the NRF audit
requirements of beneficiary institutions.
7. ASSESSMENT AND DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES
7.1. ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSALS
All proposals will be assessed in a twotiered process:
· a postal peer-review process where proposals will be sent to four to six reviewers with the
intention to receive three review reports per proposal. The postal peer reviewers will be
specialist within the ambit of the respective proposals.
· an assessment panel process where the specialist reviewers' recommendations will be
considered. The panel shall provide motivations for shifts in the raw ranking that may be
different from that of the specialist reviewers. The panel will also be asked to make funding
recommendations to the NRF.
The postal peer reviewers and panel members will assess the proposals and make
recommendations to the NRF using the following criteria:
NRF Scorecard for the Assessment of Proposals
Blue Skies Research Programme
Name of Reviewer
Criteria Sub-Criteria Details Score Weight Weighted
/4 (Total score
= (Total =
100%) 4)
Track record Past students M and D degrees 3% 0.00
of applicant (graduated)
Past research Publications, patents, designs, performances etc 4% 0.00
Current M and D degrees 3% 0.00
students
(registered)
Proposal Scientific * Is it focused on new ground? 60% 0.00
novelty* and ** Reflect on the proposed methodological avenues
feasibility** (if that the applicant wants to explore.
appropriate)
Alignment Does the proposal meet the objectives of the 0%
with programme
programme
Equity & Of applicant Black, female, young (five years after obtaining a 15% 0.00
redress PhD).
or disabled
Page 9 of 11
Of students M and D degrees 5% 0.00
supervised
Collaboration With other This will include collaborations at both an international 2% 0.00
individuals and national level. Are the roles of these collaborators
(Do they add clearly indicated in the proposal?
value?)
Within a team Are the roles of these team members clearly indicated 2% 0.00
(Is it in the proposal?
appropriate?)
Impacts Expected Scientific products e.g. publications. 2% 0.00
research
outputs
Impact on New and unpredictable 2% 0.00
society scientific/technological/scholarly discoveries
Plans for If relevant, are the proposed plans appropriate? 1% 0.00
digital data
storage,
usage &/or
dissemination
Other Ethical If relevant, have ethical considerations being 1% 0.00
research addressed?7
Totals 100% 0.00
7.2. PROPOSAL GRADING
Each criterion (where applicable) is graded on a sliding scale of 1-4 where 1= Poor and 4 =
Excellent. If the criterion is not applicable to a proposal, the weighting of the criterion will equal
zero. The score of each criterion for each proposal will be contextualised to accommodate
variability in knowledge fields, institutional capacity etc.
7.3. FUNDING-DECISION PROCESS
In general, the NRF's funding decisions are informed by the review panels' accumulative
grading of each assessed application as per the above assessment criteria.
The final funding decisions and level of funding are subject to the budget available to the
specific programme.
7
Ethical considerations and clearances for grant proposals are the responsibility of the research institute and/or institution of
the applicant. Where such ethical considerations and clearances are required, grant applicants will be expected to submit to
the NRF signed statements and/or copies of clearance certificates before any grants funds are released.
Page 10 of 11
8. FEEDBACK AND APPEALS
In principle, feedback on the assessment of the proposal is regarded as a crucial value-adding
function of the NRF. In a limited number of cases, feedback from either the reviewers and/or panel
members who evaluated your proposal will be sent. These selected comments will be provided to give
insight into some of the peer thinking that informed the grant decision-making process, and to give
constructive support to applicants. In general, no feedback will be sent where the assessment was
positive unless specific conditions are attached to the funding. All appeals must be processed via the
relevant research office according to the NRF's requirements.
Page 11 of 11