Category / REF Subjects

NIHR Grant Applications Seminar ONLINE – 7th July 2022

  

Dear colleagues

– Do you have a great idea for research in health, social care or public health?
– Are you planning to submit a grant application to NIHR?

Our popular seminar continues online and will take place on Thursday 7th July 2022 from 10.00am – 12.30pm.

The seminar provides an overview of NIHR funding opportunities and research programme remits, requirements and application processes. We will give you top tips for your application and answer specific questions with experienced RDS South West advisers.

We also have a limited number of 20-minute 1-to-1 appointments available after the seminar should you wish to discuss your proposed study with an RDS adviser.

Find out more and book a place.

Your local branch of the NIHR RDS (Research Design Service) is based within the BU Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)

We can help with your application. We advise on all aspects of developing an application and can review application drafts as well as put them to a mock funding panel (run by RDS South West) known as Project Review Committee, which is a fantastic opportunity for researchers to obtain a critical review of a proposed grant application before this is sent to a funding body.

Contact us as early as possible to benefit fully from the advice

Feel free to call us on 01202 961939 or send us an email.

Independent review of children’s social care: the Government’s plans

The Minister for Children and Families, Will Quince, delivered an oral statement to the Commons earlier regarding the publication of the independent review of children’s social care, outlining the Government’s initial and long-term plans. Please see below for a summary of the key exchanges. Summary provided by Dods.

Will Quince, Minister for Children and Families:

  • Said he looked forward to working with the sector, those with firsthand experience, and colleagues across the House, to inform an ambitious and etailed govt response and implementation strategy to be published before end of 2022
  • He said he had three main priorities:
    • Improve the child protection system
    • Support families to care for their children
    • To ensure there are the right places for children in the right places
  • To respond without delay, the Government are establishing a National Implementation Board of people of experience of leading transformational change
  • The Board will also consist of people with experience of the care system
  • Too many vulnerable children have been let down by the system but the Government is striving to change this
  • In April, the Government backed the Supporting Families Programme with £695m for 3,000 of the most vulnerable families – he welcomed reviews recognition of this programme
  • The Government will work with the sector to develop a nation children’s social care framework and will set out more detail on this later this year
  • The Minister said he supported the principle of the review’s proposed early career framework
  • He said they would set out “robust plans” to refocus the support social workers receive early on, with a particular focus on child protection
  • They would take action to take forward the review’s three data and digital priority areas, ensuring Las and partners were in “driving seat of reform”
  • Following review’s recommendation for a data and tech taskforce, the Government will introduce a new digital and data solutions fund to help local authorities improve delivery for children and families through technology – more detail will follow later this year on joining up data across the public sector
  • The Government will prioritise working with local authorities to recruit more foster carers, which will include pathfinder local recruitment campaigns that build towards a national programme
  • The Government will focus on providing more support through the application process, to improve conversion rate from expression of interest, to approved foster carers
  • Quince said he would return to the House on this date next year to update Parliament on progress made with regards to the review
  • As an initial response to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) report into the children’s social care market, the Minister said he had asked the DfE to conduct research into the children’s homes workforce
  • He announced that, on Thursday, the Child Safeguarding Practice Review panel would set out lessons learned from the deaths of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes and Star Hobson, and that the Education Secretary would outline the Government’s response in an oral statement to the House

Helen Hayes, Shadow Minister for Children and Families:

  • She welcomed the reviews conclusion that a total rest of the system was needed, and said its conclusion was a “terrible indictment of the extent to which this government has been failing children for more than a decade”
  • She highlighted a rise in the number of children in poverty, saying it was a causal factor underpinning the government’s failure
  • Hayes said the number of looked-after children had increased continually since 2010, as had the number of section 47 inquiries, while half of all children’s services departments had been rated ‘Inadequate’ of ‘Requiring improvement’
  • This was while staff turnover had increased, and outcomes for care leavers had been worsening – all while private providers made £300m in profits last year
  • She said the law recognised the age of 18 as the end of childhood, and it was therefore “shocking” that the Government had allowed children to be placed in unregister children’s homes and “other completely unsuitable accommodation” – she therefore welcomed the review’s conclusion that unregistered placements for 16 and 17 year olds must stop
  • She welcomed the focus on restoring early help to families, as well as the recommendations regarding further support for kinship carers
  • Hayes said that, while the Minister had re-announced a series of policies today, there was nothing here that would deliver the transformation in children’s social care that the review demanded
  • She asked the Minister if he would commit to a firm date for the publication of a comprehensive response to the review and a detailed implementation plan
  • She asked if he expected there would be a need for legislation, and how this squared with the absence of children’s social care in the Queen’s Speech
  • She asked how the announcement of early help investment would ensure that early help services were available in every area of the country so that every family who could be supported
  • She also asked what representations he was making to the Treasury in response to the review
  • Hayes asked if the Minister would commit to an end to profiteering in children’s social care
  • She also asked how he would ensure the voices of children were at the heart of children’s social care, and how he would guarantee the workforce were fully engaged and involved as reforms were implemented
  • Finally, she asked how he would ensure that, as reforms were implemented, the framework of accountability for decisions made by the state about the care of children, would be strengthened

Minister Quince:

  • The Minister reiterated that he wanted to take as much of a cross-party approach to this reform as possible
  • He said they had to be honest that, despite years of real-terms increase in social care, too many children were still being let down
  • On implementation, he said he and the Education Secretary were determined that this wouldn’t be “just another report”, which was why he was establishing an implementation board, with the view of delivering a plan by the end of this year
  • He said he hoped that, with this excellent review, they had a roadmap and an opportunity to ensure cases of abuse and neglect were “as rare as they are trgic”

Robert Halfon (Con, Harlow), chair of the Education Committee:

  • Halfon described it as a “visionary” report, saying that it was a family/community-upwards approach, rather than a top-down
  • He said he hoped the Government would be bold on the funding issues raised, and also the proposal on the private company windfall tax
  • He asked what the Government were doing to ensure children in care were being placed in ‘Good’ or ‘Outstanding’ schools and were receiving the right targeted catch-up tuition, and mentoring support, to help catch up on lost learning and leave care into a good job

Minister Quince:

  • The Minister confirmed their plan was to be “bold and ambitious”
  • Their intention was to set out an immediate response today, and then publish a full response and implementation plan by the end of the year
  • He said Halfon was right that the results of children in care and care leavers were unacceptable, and that this review was about improving the life chances of some of the most vulnerable children in the country

Tim Loughton (Con, East Worthing and Shoreham), co-vice chair of the APPG for Looked After Children and Care Leavers and former children’s minister:

  • Loughton noted a review was only as good as its delivery, and asked why this one would be different to the previous “once-in-a-generation reforms” that hadn’t fixed these issues
  • He also asked the Minister how the proposed Family Help programme would interact with the Family Hubs programme and the Best Start in Life programme

Minister Quince:

  • The Minister said he was right that they had to ensure that the implementation of this review was different to what had gone before – and noted the SEND review of 2014 as an example of a bold and ambitious plan, where the implementation did not match
  • This was why he wouldn’t be diving straight into the 80+ recommendations, and instead had opted to set out an initial plan and then engage on the bigger conclusions so that they could get this right

Emma Hardy (Lab, Kingston upon Hull West), vice-chair of University APPG:

  • Hardy urged the Minister to look particularly at what happened to care leavers when they reached 18, saying that the support immediately fell away, and asked the Minister to consider this when formulating the government response to the review

Minister Quince:

  • The Minister said she was right and that he would be looking carefully at the recommendations
  • He also said it was important they didn’t see this as a DfE-only issues – that there was a role for every government department, local authority, and even business, to play

Jess Phillips, Shadow Minister for Safeguarding:

  • Phillips offered her guidance and experience in the development of the response, particular so the government ensured that violence against women and girls (VAWG) specialist were included
  • She urged the Minister to stop the placement of 16 and 17 year olds in unregulated settings today

Minister Quince:

  • The Minister said she was right to reference victims of domestic abuse, and assured her he was committed to working across government and public services in their response and wider support
  • On the point of regulation, he said the government had £142m earmarked to support the regulation of settings to 17 and 18 year olds

Andrew Gwynne (Lab, Denton and Reddish), chair of the Kinship Care APPG:

  • Gwynne asked if the Minister would commit to delivering on the proposals in the review to unlock family networks, including family group decision-making, as well as the package of support for kinship carers

Minister Quince:

  • The Minister said they would look very closely at the recommendations regarding kinship care and special guardians

Munira Wilson, Liberal Democrat Education Spokesperson:

  • Wilson said kinship carers received no financial support unless they registered as foster parents, but that this process denied them parental responsibility for the child – so she asked again if the Government would accept the review’s recommendations for kinship carers to get the same financial support as foster carers

Minister Quince:

  • The Minister said they would look carefully at all the recommendations and, while he agreed with her, he wouldn’t been drawn on committing or dismissing the report’s recommendations at this point in time

REF 2021 staff engagement sessions – find out more about our submission and strategy

Do you want to find out more about our REF 2021 submission and how we did? Or do you have burning questions to ask about research assessment and future strategies?

We’re holding two online sessions for BU staff to find out more about REF 2021.

As well as an overview of the REF and BU’s submission and results, you’ll also be able to hear from some of our Unit of Assessment (UOA) leads about their areas and future research and impact strategies. There will also be the opportunity to ask questions.

The sessions are open to all staff and will take place over Zoom on:

  • Monday 6 June – 12 – 1pm
  • Wednesday 8 June – 12.30 – 1.30pm

Book your place via Eventbrite:  https://ref2021ses.eventbrite.co.uk

Congratulations to Dr. Rachel Arnold on her latest paper

Congratulations to Dr. Rachel Arnold in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH) on the publication today of her  paper ‘Why use Appreciative Inquiry? Lessons learned during COVID-19 in a UK maternity service‘ [1].  This methodological paper is co-authored with Dr. Clare Gordon who holds a has joint clinical academic post at UCLan and Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, with a focus on developing clinically focused stroke research, education and improvement. Clare is also a former BU Ph.D. student.  Further co-authors from CMMPH are Professors Sue Way and Edwin van Teijlingen.  The final co-author, Dr. Preeti Mahato, finished her post in CMMPH two days ago to start her Lectureship in Global Health at Royal Holloway (part of the University of London).

The paper highlights that selecting the most appropriate research method is an important decision in any study. It affects the type of study questions that can be answered. In addition, the research method will have an impact on the participants – how much of their time it takes, whether the questions seem important to them and whether there is any benefit in taking part. This is especially important when conducting research with staff in health services. This article is a reflection on the process of using Appreciative Inquiry (AI) in a study that explored staff well-being in a UK maternity unit. The authors  discuss our experience of using AI,the strengths and limitations of this approach, and conclude with points to consider if you are thinking about using AI. Although a study team was actively involved in decisions, this paper is largely based on reflections by dr. Arnold, the researcher conducting the field work in the maternity services.

 

Reference:

Arnold, R., Gordon, C., van Teijlingen, E., Way, S., Mahato, P. (2022). Why use Appreciative Inquiry? Lessons learned during COVID-19 in a UK maternity service. European Journal of Midwifery, 6(May), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.18332/ejm/147444

Two new academic papers on COVID-19 research

This month CMMPH has two new research papers focusing on COVID-19.   The first one published in World Medical & Health Policy reports on a quantitative study of the availability of hand-washing facilities in households across Nepal [1].  This study used secondary data from Nepal Demographic Health Survey (NDHS) 2016 to assess the association between households’ wealth status to handwashing stations. The findings reported a statistically significant association between age of the household head, residence place, ecological zone, province, wealth status, having of mosquito net, having a radio, and TV at respondents’ household to fixed hand-washing stations at their households.

The second paper published three days ago in Vaccines is a qualitative study of of interviews with Nepali immigrants living in the UK and their attitudes towards COVD-19 vaccination [2].  Vaccination saves lives and can be an effective strategy for preventing the spread of the COVID-19, but negative attitudes towards vaccines lead to vaccine hesitancy. This study aimed to explore the factors influencing the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in the Nepali community in the UK. This study found that attitudes towards COVID-19 are generally positive. Nine overlapping themes around barriers to COVID-19 vaccination were identified: (a) rumours and mis/disinformation; (b) prefer home remedies and yoga; (c) religion restriction; (d) concern towards vaccine eligibility; (e) difficulty with online vaccine booking system; (f) doubts of vaccine effectiveness after changing the second dose timeline; (g) lack of confidence in the vaccine; (h) past bad experience with the influenza vaccine; and (i) worried about side-effects. Understanding barriers to the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine can help in the design of better targeted interventions. Public health messages including favourable policy should be tailored to address those barriers and make this vaccination programme more viable and acceptable to the ethnic minority communities in the UK.   This Vaccine paper includes two FHSS Visiting Faculty as co-authors: Prof. Padam Simkhada and Dr. Bibha Simkhada.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

 

 

 

 

 

References:

  1. Sharma, M., Adhikari, R., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Handwashing station in Nepal: Role of wealth status in establishing a handwashing station, World Medical & Health Policy Accepted
  2. Simkhada, P., Tamang, P., Timilsina, L., Simkhada, B., Bissell, P., van Teijlingen, E., Sah, S.K., Wasti, S.P. (2022) Factors Influencing COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake among Nepali in the UK: A Qualitative Study, Vaccine 10(5), 780;https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10050780

REF 2021 – the results are in!

The wait is over and the REF 2021 results have now been published.

We’re delighted to reveal that 94% of our research has been found to be internationally-recognised or above, with 19% found to be world-leading in quality.

95.7% of our research was found to be delivering considerable impact or above, with 31.5% achieving an outstanding impact score.

This means that we have held and improved upon our position from REF 2014 while dramatically increasing the size of our submission. We submitted more than three times the number of staff than in REF 2014, and by maintaining quality, we have shown how the breadth and depth of our research portfolio has grown.

Highlights include:

  • UOAs 14 (Geography and Environmental Studies), 15 (Archaeology), 18 (Law), and 34 (Communications, Cultural and Media Studies) all scored 100% 4*+3* for impact
  • UOAs 15 (Archaeology) and 32 (Art and Design: History, Practice and Theory) scored 100% 4*+3* for environment
  • UOA 24 (Sport and Exercise Sciences, Leisure and Tourism) scored 80% 4*+3* for outputs
  • UOA 34 (Communications, Cultural and Media Studies) is in Q1 for impact

Equality and diversity were key drivers in developing our submission, and we took a collaborative approach with a broad range of academic and professional staff working together to make our submission as inclusive as possible.

In total, we submitted 1,209 research outputs and 47 impact case studies across 13 Units of Assessment (up from eight UOAs in REF 2014) – which represents a huge amount of time, work, and energy from colleagues across the university.

A huge thank you to everyone who supported the REF 2021 in some way – this is a moment to reflect and feel proud of everything we have achieved.

More information about our submission can be found the BU website and the full REF 2021 results are available on the REF website.

 

Sexual Violence Staff and Student Conference at BU

Sexual Violence Student Conference: Legislation, Policy and Opinion

On 27 April staff and students from across BU came together in the new Bournemouth Gateway Building to share research and ideas on the topic of sexual violence.  The event was organised by Jane Healy, a criminologist in the Department of Social Sciences and Social Work in FHSS, in collaboration with Jamie Fletcher from Law, FMC, and Kari Davies from Psychology, FST.  The combination of social sciences, social work, psychology and law created a dynamic and exciting environment as students from all four disciplines were exposed to intriguing and engaging presentations on this broad topic.

From Law, second year student Teodora Nizirova, alongside lecturers Jamie Fletcher and Karolina Szopa, presented a fascinating paper on the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which at present distinguishes rape (as penile penetration) from sexual assault (which includes penetration from other sources). They proposed a gender-neutral definition of rape as an alternative to the current non-penile sexual assault charge, as a method of recognising the extent of the harm caused to those individuals who identify as non-binary or who are not in heteronormative relationships. Their presentation sparked a flourish of comments and debate from students and staff in attendance, and more about their proposal can be read here 

Jamie followed up by leading a discussion on R v Lawrence [2020] EWCA Crim 971, a recent case in the Court of Appeal, which held that lying about having a vasectomy did not negate consent in sexual intercourse, something which again produced much thought and debate from those in attendance.

Not to be outdone by the stimulating presentations from our Law Department, Psychology colleagues were quick to showcase the breadth of research they are currently undertaking on sexual violence. This included papers from Rachel Skinner, Psychology lecturer, on the relationships between rape myths and sexism/misogyny and an appeal from Rachel for those interested in this topic to collaborate with her on future work.  Two online papers swiftly followed: Ioana Crivatu, postdoctoral research assistant, presented on her qualitative study on group participation in sexual offences, and Ellie Reid, research assistant, shared findings on consistency and coincidence factors in sexual offences cases.  Kari Davies, lecturer in Psychology, concluded Psychology’s input by providing a whistle-stop tour of the variety of different work she and her colleagues are collaborating on, including BU’s contribution to “Project Bluestone” (which is a large project exploring rape and serious sexual offence investigations alongside colleagues from other institutions across the UK – more info here) as well as collaborative work on crime and policing in Switzerland with Maggie Hardiman.

Arguably saving the best for last (in my opinion), the Social Sciences and Social Work team finished off the afternoon with two and a bit papers from HSS.  BA Sociology student Sam Cheshire provided a confident and theoretically informed paper on his final year dissertation study, which involved interviewing survivors of domestic abuse and social services professionals. He emphasised the interlocations of power, violence and agency in his interpretation of the data, positioned within Foucauldian and neoliberalist concepts and structures. Orlanda Harvey, Lecturer in Social Work, then presented on her own project working with women survivors of domestic violence and highlighted the continuing taboo of disclosing sexual violence within relationships, providing strategies that she and Louise Oliver are using to engage with participants in a safe and supportive environment.

Finally, with only minutes remaining, Jane Healy concluded the afternoon with a very brief overview of her research into disabled women’s experiences of sexual violence, and shamelessly plugged her contribution to a book on “Misogyny as Hate Crime” which is available here (and will soon be available in the library collection).

The afternoon drew to a close with a rallying cry for more cross-faculty events for students and greater collaboration for staff on this topic.  The combination of distinct yet intersecting disciplinary work created an eclectic and refreshing mix of papers that provided much food for thought for staff and students alike. Students Teodora and Sam are to be particularly applauded for presenting for the first time to an audience of peers and academic staff.

Kari is keen to expand on collaborative expertise across BU in the fields of criminal justice, policing and sexual violence and is putting together a Sexual Violence working group. Please get in touch with her if you’d like to join.

Many thanks also to Kari for funding the tea and biscuits that kept us going through the afternoon! We are already looking forward to the next event.

Paramedic science book launch this Friday

Coming Friday the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences has the pleasure of hosting the official launch of a new Mental Health Care in Paramedic Practice written by BU’s Dr. Ursula Rolfe and Mr. David Partlow, Somerset County Council Adult Social Care Strategic Manager.  The launch will take place in the Bournemouth Gateway Building at noon on May 6th in room BGB 302.

Mental Health Care in Paramedic Practice is the first guide written specifically to support paramedics in understanding a range of different mental health conditions in their practice.  This new book provides essential information on recognising and managing a range of conditions.  It offers case studies written by paramedics with first-hand experience of managing mental health issues, and includes a section on legal changes and policy descriptions as well as on the importance of interprofessional working. One of the online reviewers declared that this is an important read for Emergency Medical Service staff.

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

Reference:

Rolfe, U., Partlow, D.  (eds.) (2022) Mental Health Care in Paramedic Practice, Class Publishing  [ISBN: 9781859599242]

Conversation article – Women’s football: record crowds and soaring popularity – here’s how to keep it that way

Dr Keith Parry writes for The Conversation about the increasing popularity of women’s football and how to ensure gains in women’s sport are not lost…

Women’s football: record crowds and soaring popularity – here’s how to keep it this way

Keith Parry, Bournemouth University

On Boxing Day 1920, a sell-out crowd of 53,000 watched a women’s football match at Liverpool’s Goodison Park, with others waiting outside. With more than 900,000 women working in munitions factories during the first world war, many factories set up women’s football teams to keep the new female workers healthy and safely occupied. At the time, women seemed to be breaking barriers in sport and society.

But it would be almost 100 years before similar numbers of spectators were seen again at women’s sports matches, and in 2022 crowds are now breaking world records. In March, for example, 91,553 people watched Barcelona play Real Madrid in the UEFA Women’s Champions League – the highest attended women’s football match of all time.

The reason why it took so long to get here is that after the first world war progress for women slowed, and even went backwards. By 1921 there were 150 women’s football teams, often playing to large crowds. But on December 5 1921, the English Football Association’s consultative committee effectively banned women’s football citing a threat to women’s health as medical experts claimed football could damage women’s ability to have children. This decision had worldwide implications and was typical of attitudes towards women’s sport for many decades.

Women’s professional sport is now seeing dramatic changes. England will host the 2022 Women’s Euros later this year, and tickets for the final sold out in less than an hour. There is clear demand from fans and not just for women’s football, but other professional women’s sports.

In 2021, 267,000 people attended the women’s matches in English cricket’s new domestic competition, The Hundred, making it the best attended women’s cricket event ever. A year before, another cricketing record was set with 86,174 spectators at the Women’s T20 World Cup final between Australia and India at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. Record crowds for professional women’s matches have also been seen recently in rugby union.

There is increasing investment in women’s sport and a rising number of professional athletic contracts for women. Clubs and organisations are finding that if people know about women’s sport they will attend games and watch it on television.

TV coverage is vital

In a sign that the times really may be changing, the current minister for sport, Nigel Huddleston, and the home secretary, Priti Patel, announced that they are minded to add the (FIFA) Women’s World Cup and the Women’s Euros (UEFA European Women’s Football Championship) to the list of protected sports events. Set out in the 1990s, these are the “crown jewels” of English sport, deemed to be of national importance when it comes to television coverage. The list has not included any women’s events until now, and the proposed change is crucial to keep women’s sport visible for as large an audience as possible.

Football has also seen considerable growth in participation. In 2020, 3.4 million women and girls played football in England and the world governing body FIFA aims to have 60 million playing by 2026.

The wider picture is perhaps less rosy. There are 516,600 more inactive women than men in England. Girls are less active than boys, even though their activity levels increased comparatively during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nonetheless, this pandemic-related increase also points to positive changes. During the lockdowns, there was a shift away from traditional team sports to fitness classes and walking, which have traditionally appealed more to women and girls. In a similar way Sport England’s This Girl Can campaign, which was relaunched in January 2020, aimed to break conventional ideas that physical activity and sport are unsuitable for women. Sport England’s evaluation states that 2.8 million women were more active due to the overall campaign.

With traditional masculine ideals slowly being replaced across society, these changes can also be seen in sport. Sport is also becoming more inclusive for minorities.

And, as happened around 100 years ago, women’s rights and equality in society and workplaces are improving. The #MeToo movement has brought sexual harassment to the forefront of public awareness and is gradually shifting workplace culture.

Threats ahead

However, this is not time for complacency. The pandemic has affected women more than men and in different ways, slowing progress. Greater domestic responsibilities impacted on women’s free time more than men, reducing time for physical activity. Similarly, funding cuts in sport may threaten the gains that have been made in women’s sport. And many males continue to hold unfounded, stereotypical views such as women in sport being more emotional than men.

Recently, my colleagues and I mapped out five actions needed to make sure that recent gains for women’s sport are not lost, see below. With changes in society, widespread support for gender equality, and the current popularity of women’s sport, now is the time to act on these changes to ensure that it is not another 100 years before we see the recent attendance records broken. Gender equality is a societal goal and it should be in sport too.

Roadmap for the success of women’s sportThe Conversation

Author provided

Keith Parry, Deputy Head Of Department in Department of Sport & Event Management, Bournemouth University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Book now! Spotlight on NIHR – Information Session – 27 April 2022

 

Bournemouth University and the NIHR Research Design Service South West are jointly hosting an online NIHR Information Session, on Wednesday 27th April at 10am.

This NIHR Information Session will provide an overview of the NIHR as a funder, the NIHR funding programmes with specific focus on Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB), Health and Social Care Delivery Research (HSDR), Invention for Innovation (i4i), and NIHR Fellowship opportunities.

The agenda is below.

10.00-10.15 Lisa Andrews, Research Facilitator, (Bournemouth University Research Development and Support) Introduction to the session

10.15-11.00 Professor Gordon Taylor, Director of the NIHR Research Design Service South West (RDS-SW)

Dr Sarah Thomas, Deputy Director of the Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit and NIHR RDS-SW Adviser Spotlight on the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) and overview of funding streams

11.00-11.30 Professor Gordon Taylor About the NIHR Fellowship Programmes

11.30-11.45 BREAK

11.45-12.10 Dr Jo Welsman, Patient and Public Involvement Lead, NIHR RDS-SW Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in research

12.10-12.30 Dr Lisa Austin, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Lead, NIHR RDS-SW Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) and the new EDI toolkit

12.30-1.00 PANEL Questions

This session will be online, via Zoom. A link to join the meeting will be sent to you after registration.

This session will online, via Zoom. Please register via Eventbrite here: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/300827682697

A link to join the meeting will be sent to you after registration.

This session is part of the Bournemouth University Research and Knowledge Exchange Development Framework.

Your local branch of the NIHR RDS (Research Design Service) is based within the BU Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)

We can help with your grant applications. We advise on all aspects of developing an application and can review application drafts as well as put them to a mock funding panel (run by RDS South West) known as Project Review Committee, which is a fantastic opportunity for researchers to obtain a critical review of a proposed grant application before this is sent to a funding body.

Contact us as early as possible to benefit fully from the advice

Feel free to call us on 01202 961939 or send us an email.