Grant making process
Once you’ve submitted your grant application to us, we need time to consider it. All prospective grants are examined for eligibility, suitability, quality and rigour before being considered, to encourage high-quality projects and activities.
After receiving your grant application, we will first acknowledge receipt of it by email.
If you don’t receive an acknowledgement email, please contact our grants management team.
The grants management team will then perform a number of internal administrative checks on all applications, including but not limited to checking:
- that the applicant is eligible for the grant they have applied to;
- that the application has appropriate sign-off from the host institution;
- that the request is within remit of the charity;
- that the application is within the scope of criteria for the grant applied to;
- that the application form has been completed correctly and in full.
If any discrepancies arise at this stage, the grants management team will liaise with the applicant(s) directly.
External peer review
Where relevant, applicants will be asked to nominate peer reviewers, external to their organisation, as part of their submission.
Applicants can also submit the names of a reasonable number of people who should be restricted from reviewing the application due to direct competition or bias. All these suggestions will be taken into consideration when deciding suitable candidates for peer review.
A normal minimum of two peer reviews will be required for applications under £500,000, and three peer reviews required for applications over £500,000.
Responding to reviewer comments
At the Chair of the Scientific Advisory Panel’s discretion (grant programme type and time available permitting) the anonymised comments from external reviewers will be given to applicants to comment on minor points prior to the application being considered by the Scientific Advisory Panel.
The availability of reviewer comments is also dependent on the reviewers granting permission for their anonymised comments to be provided to the applicant.
Our Scientific Advisory Panel
Funding recommendations around the research projects that Moorfields Eye Charity fund are made by our Scientific Advisory Panel to our Grants Committee - a subcommittee of our Board of Trustees.
Scientific Advisory Panel members
- Professor Miles Stanford (Guy’s and St Thomas’)
- Dr Julie Albon (Cardiff University)
- Professor Matthew Campbell (Trinity College Dublin)
- Professor Chris Dickinson (Manchester University)
- Professor Irene Gottlob (Leicester University)
- Professor Breandán Kennedy (University College Dublin)
- Professor Luminita Paraoan (University of Liverpool)
- Professor Michel Paques (Institut de la Vision, Paris)
- Professor Enrica Strettoi (Institute of Neuroscience, Pisa)
- Professor Robin Walker (Royal Holloway)
- Professor Chris Watkins (Royal Holloway)
While membership of our Scientific Advisory Panel is available to the public, applicants or other individuals are not permitted to contact or discuss in person any current, future or possible grant application, the decision making process or funding outcomes.
Any queries, comments or feedback must be directed to our Grants and Research Team.
Criteria for selection
Each application will be judged, as appropriate for the grant type, against a number of criteria including but not limited to the following:
- excellence of the science;
- fit to research strategy;
- innovation potential and ability to develop new and emerging areas;
- calibre and skills of the investigator(s) and any collaborators, including track record (research publications and evidence of research grant income);
- demonstration of real partnership or collaboration with industry or academia;
- potential to use an award to leverage further funding for the next stage of development;
- if applicable, ability to translate the research into patient benefit within five years;
- impact on diseases/issues treated at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology;
- value for money.
All funding recommendations made by the Scientific Advisory Panel are discussed and require ratification by the Grants Committee. The decision of the trustees is final.
In the event that your application is unsuccessful, re-submissions will not be permitted unless specially invited by the Board of Trustees.