Assessment process
Stage one: intent to submit
In order to submit a full proposal to this opportunity, an intent to submit must be completed.
This stage is not assessed. The remit of the proposed work will be determined at the full proposal stage.
For this stage, we will use the information to plan peer review of the full proposals and understand demand. The questions involved in this survey relate to the involved:
- investigators
- costs
- partners involved
- objectives for the research.
In the event of this funding opportunity being substantially oversubscribed as to be unmanageable, EPSRC reserves the right to modify the full proposal assessment process.
Stage two: full proposal
Full proposals will undergo postal peer review by community members with appropriate expertise.
There will then be the opportunity for applicants to reply to comments made. The reviews, and response from applicants will then be assessed at a panel of generalists and prioritised for funding, which will inform funding decisions.
Standard assessment criteria
Quality (primary)
The research excellence, making reference to:
- the novelty, relationship to the context, timeliness and relevance to identified stakeholders
- the ambition, adventure, transformative aspects or potential outcomes
- the suitability of the proposed methodology and the appropriateness of the approach to achieving impact.
National importance (secondary major)
How the research:
- contributes to, or helps maintain the health of other disciplines
- contributes to addressing key UK societal challenges or contributes to future UK economic success and development of emerging industry(s)
- meets national needs by establishing or maintaining a unique world-leading activity
- complements other UK research funded in the area, including any relationship to the EPSRC portfolio.
Applicant and partnerships (secondary)
The ability to deliver the proposed project, making reference to:
- appropriateness of the track record of the applicant or applicants
- balance of skills of the project team, including collaborators.
Resources and management (secondary)
The effectiveness of the proposed planning and management and whether the requested resources are appropriate and have been fully justified, making reference to:
- any equipment requested, or the viability of the arrangements described to access equipment needed for this project, and particularly on any university or third-party contribution
- any resources requested for activities to either increase impact, for public engagement or to support responsible innovation.
Specific criteria for this funding opportunity
Fit with the opportunity
The proposal contributes to the problems of grid scale energy storage in the UK, with reference to:
- ambition and adventure: would the outcomes of the proposal have a significant impact on larger scale storage of energy
- the suitability of the proposed methodology and the appropriateness of the approach to achieving impact in this area.
Feedback
The intent to submit is not assessed and so there will be no feedback.
Feedback on full proposals will be provided in the form of reviewer comments, plus information on the panel provided on grants on the web.
No formal feedback will be provided from the panel, as the panel will act as a jury to make an assessment based on the reviews and responses for the proposals and will not re-assess the proposals.
Nominating reviewers
As part of the application process you will be invited to nominate up to three potential reviewers who you feel have the expertise to assess your proposal. Please ensure that any nominations meet the EPSRC policy on conflicts of interest.
For more information about the reviewer selection process please see the related content links.
Guidance for reviewers
Read information about the EPSRC peer review process and guidance for reviewers.
Read guidance for reviewing standard grants (EPSRC).
