Long-term review

Beyond standard response mode funding, charities may choose to fund long-term research projects and/or a specific institute, centre, or location to support infrastructure, personnel, or multiple research projects to deliver on the charity’s mission. It is important that this funding is still allocated and reviewed/audited in line with AMRC’s principles of expert review. 

Even if awarded in open competition in the first instance, decisions should be revisited over time to review and confirm this investment continues to support high quality research and is the most effective use of charity funds. 

Therefore, if a charity is funding, for a period of longer than five years, through a single award:

• a project
• an institute, centre or location
• an individual or team

Expert review must be carried out over the ‘long-term’. This includes charities whose mission or constitution defines that they fund in a specific location. We advise our members to use this flow-chart to establish whether these requirements apply to you. 

This ‘long-term’ review must be undertaken by a panel or committee of experts (defined on our expert review page) at a sensible mid-point of the funding period, no longer than six years after funding was awarded, whichever is sooner. Where relevant this funding must also be reviewed every five years thereafter.

This review should assess:

• the ongoing quality of the funded research

and

• whether the direction of this investment still represents good strategic use of your funding.

This page brings together all our requirements on funding over the long-term. Guidance on applying our principles to long-term funding can be found on the principle pages and is also summarised below. 

Applying the principles to long-term review 

In addition to the principles which the charity must apply, the following describes steps that charities can carry out in the context of long-term review. 

• When reviewing long-term investments, the review committee should not include experts that are connected the programme of work being assessed. If geographically bound, members should be from outside the institution to ensure independent, impartial advice. 

• When undertaking regular review of the long-term funding at the institute or location, a site-visit and meeting with the institute director and senior staff by at least a sub-set of the long-term review committee is strongly encouraged. 

• If the charity put out a call for applications within a centre or location, ensure that all eligible researchers are aware of the call for applications.  

• For site and long-term reviews, ensure the timeframes of review are made clear to the researchers and reviewers well in advance.  

• Ensure the findings of the review are fed back to the institute/programme/project in an accurate and timely manner. 

• Have systems to ensure that the findings and recommendations are checked and have been acted upon. 

• Have procedures for managing negative reviews, including potential disinvestment of funding, should it be recommended. 

• Request regular progress reports from the funding recipient. These should be available to the long-term review committee for their review. 

Back to Principles of Expert Review