PHR commissioned funding opportunities
The PHR commissioned workstream has three funding rounds, with approximately 12 separate call topics each year.
The following funding opportunities are available:
- Application process
- Tips for success in applying (pdf, 91.14 KB)
- Full proposal guidance notes (pdf, 669.22 KB)
- Resources for researchers
- Word version of the Outline Standard Application Form (doc, 319.5 KB)*
- Word version of the Full Standard Application Form (doc, 504.5 KB)
- MRC Public Health Intervention Development Scheme (PHIND)
*Please note: This document is to be used as a guide and to assist with completion of the on-line application form only, for example to see how many characters are accepted in each section and how the printed complete form is laid out will look. Please do not try to use this as an application form, you must apply using the online form available through the links available when calls are open. You should also refer to the application form guidance notes which can be found next to the ‘Apply Now’ button.
All primary research projects are expected to establish a programme appointed Study/Trial Steering Committee and it is important that you read the TSC/SSC Guidance (pdf, 203.37 KB) before completing your application. Costs incurred by this committee should be included in the budget as appropriate.
Proposals received by 1pm on the 5 December 2016 will be assessed at the Research Funding Board in February 2017 (outline applications) and June 2017 (full applications).
Proposals received by 1pm on the 15 August 2016 will be assessed at the Research Funding Board in October 2016 (outline applications) and February 2017 (full applications).
Please note that if a very high response is received, some outline applications may not be taken forward for further assessment if they are deemed to be non-competitive and/or it may be necessary to defer some outline applications until a later date. 'Non-Competitive' means that a proposal is not of a sufficiently high standard to be taken forward for further assessment in comparison with other proposals received and funded by the PHR Programme because it has little or no realistic prospect of funding. This may be because of scientific quality, cost, scale/duration, or the makeup of the project team.