Structure of research plan and progress description: Follow-up call for consortia in Academy Programme Health from Science (TERVA)

The research plan must be no more than 15 pages and include a description of the progress made in the project. The font is Times New Roman (font size 12 pt, line spacing 1,15 and margins 20 mm). All bibliographic references must be added directly into the text: (Author(s) Year) or [number]. You cannot use footnotes. The bibliography (no more than 2 pages) does not count towards the length of the research plan.

You cannot submit the research plan as an appendix.

Read the call text carefully before you start writing the research plan.

Fill in the sections of the research plan where applicable and according the practices of your own discipline.

Please note the following guidelines specific to this call:

• This is a follow-up call targeted at consortia that have been funded under the programme. The progress of the ongoing project and the research plan for the extension period shall be described together.
• As described in the original programme memorandum, the aim of the Health from Science Academy Programme is to encourage Finnish researchers to seek bold, new research initiatives that can solve health issues related to major public health diseases. Apart from promoting science renewal and long-term impact through the justifiable risks contained in the research projects, the programme also aims at fostering new kinds of collaborations with foundations that support research into major public health diseases.
• Applicants are encouraged to consider how the research plan has developed during the funding period compared to the original research plan. In this follow-up call, it is particularly important that the research plan and the progress description for the first funding period support each other. We recommend that the researchers use the results achieved so far as a justification for the approach chosen for the extension period.
• It is important to highlight in the research plan how the chosen approach has contributed to managing the risks of the project.
• By submitting an application, the applicant authorises the Academy of Finland to deliver the original research plan and review report to the reviewers.

See the How-to guides for the online services on our website for the technical process.

1. Progress, aim and objectives of the project

1.1 The significance of the project in relation to current knowledge and the research-based starting points based on the progress made

• Research premise, aims and objectives of the project
• Progress of the project during the first programme period, main findings or results so far; the most important publications are entered separately at the beginning of the bibliography
• How the project has developed compared to the original plan
• Realisation and management of the risks contained in the original research plan
• How the project is linked to previous international or national research (state of the art)

1.2 Research questions and/or hypotheses

• Justify if research questions and/or hypotheses have changed from the original research plan.

1.3 Expected research results and their anticipated scientific impact, potential for scientific breakthroughs and for promoting scientific renewal

• Impact within the scientific community
• Project’s novelty or added value for science

1.4 Special call objective

• Justify how the project will address the call objectives and questions.

2. Implementation

2.1 Work plan and schedule

• Detailed description of the research carried out in the project (insofar as these are not described in section 1.1)
• Description of research tasks, their implementation and interconnections
• If necessary, description of responsibilities for and management of research tasks
• Schedule for project implementation: research tasks and work packages, distribution of personnel resources, and project milestones and deliverables

2.2 Research data and material, methods, and research environment

• Research data to be used, justifications and information on data collection/acquisition and use, taking into account issues such as intellectual property rights
• Research methods and how they will contribute to answering the research questions or confirming the hypotheses, or how they will support the chosen approach
• Description of local, national and/or international research environment including research infrastructures. Enter the infrastructures to be used also on the tab ‘Affiliations’ in the online services.

2.3 Risk assessment and alternative implementation strategies

• Critical points for success, probability of risks and alternative implementation strategies (insofar as these are not described in section 1.1)
• If new risks have emerged, compare the current situation with the risk assessment of the original research plan.

2.4 Added value of consortium

• Description of the value that working as a consortium will add compared to traditional forms of research collaboration
• Read more in the consortium application guidelines.
• If the composition of the consortium has changed compared to the original research plan, describe and justify the change in this section.

3. Research team and collaborators

3.1 Project personnel and their relevant merits

• Names and/or level of education of the project’s researchers, if known
• Tasks, roles and key merits of the project PI and the project’s researchers
• Description of how researcher training will be organised and research careers promoted

3.2 Collaborators and their key merits in terms of the project

• National and international collaborators of key significance to project implementation as well as their merits
• Justifications for choice of collaborators

4. Responsible science

4.1 Research ethics

• Information on ethical issues (e.g. ethical governance procedures, informed consent, anonymity of subjects and withdrawal from research) that concern the chosen topic, methods and data
• Information on research permits granted or pending
• Read more in the ethical guidelines.

4.2 Promoting open science

• Publication plan that supports the principles of open science (Academy-funded projects are required to commit to open access publishing)
• Data management plan (as a separate appendix) that supports reuse of data
• Read more in the open science guidelines.

4.3 Promoting equality and non-discrimination

• Information on how the project will promote equality and non-discrimination within itself or in society at large
• Read more in the equality and non-discrimination guidelines.

5. Societal effects and impact

5.1 Effects and impact beyond academia

• Brief description of the appeal, utilisation potential and application areas of the research results beyond the scientific community
• For instance, provide a self-assessment of the expected societal impact of the research in the long or short term. Impact beyond academia may come in many different forms depending on the research field and the project. For example, science is a source of wealth and prosperity, but it also improves our understanding of the world and enhances the level of civilisation, supports the development of good practices and informs decision-making.
• Read more about the broader impact of research on our website under Research impact.

5.2 Considering principles of sustainable development

• Brief description of how the project promotes one or more of the eight goals for sustainable development: equal prospects for wellbeing, a participatory society for citizens, sustainable employment, sustainable society and local communities, a carbon-neutral society, a resource-wise economy, lifestyles respectful of the carrying capacity of nature and decision-making respectful of nature
• Read more in the sustainability guidelines.

6. Bibliography

• List of all the sources used in the research plan.
• The reference list (no more than 2 pages) does not count towards the length of the research plan.
• Please note that the text type, font size, and line spacing of the reference list are the same as elsewhere in the research plan.