Justification of Resources Sample Clauses

Justification of Resources. Please provide a justification of all resources that are requested (UK and Brazilian). Closing date This is an open funding opportunity and applications can be submitted to the standard board deadlines. Assessment procedure All proposals for MRC grant funding are assessed through a two-stage process involving independent expert reviewers and the MRC research boards/panels. For each application, FAPESP will nominate at least one peer reviewer to provide a written assessment. Peer reviewers will use the criteria and procedures applicable to MRC. These comments will be formally incorporated in the MRC’s peer review processes. If applications are shortlisted to be assessed by the Research Board, FAPESP are invited to participate in the process either via correspondence or in person. Please note that the involvement of FAPESP in the review process requires that each application is shared with FAPESP officers. Applications received under the terms of this MoU will be subject to the same terms and conditions as all MRC Grants. Further information and guidance on submitting an application under this MoU to the MRC can be found on the MRC website: xxxxx://xxx.xxxx.xxx/funding/science-areas/international-and- global-health-research/subscriptions-partnerships/other-international-funding-activities/ Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) (xxx.xxxx.xxxx.xxx) NERC accepts proposals under the terms of this Agreement to its Discovery Science (Responsive Mode) Standard, New Investigator and Large Grant Schemes. Details of these schemes can be found at xxxxx://xxxx.xxxx.xxx/funding/available/researchgrants/ . The NERC Grants handbook (xxxxx://xxxx.xxxx.xxx/funding/application/howtoapply/forms/ ) provides further information on the Standard, New Investigator and Large Grant Schemes. It details the eligibility criteria, information on how to apply and terms and conditions of awards. There may also be the opportunity to apply for a joint NERC/FAPESP grant under specific Research Programme or International calls. These opportunities will be highlighted in the Announcement of Opportunity (AO) for the specific call. How to apply The UK proposal must be submitted electronically by the UK-based Principal Investigator’s Research Organisation to the NERC Standard, New Investigator or Large Grant scheme (or specific call, where applicable) via the Joint Electronic Submission (Je-S) System. Brazilian partners should contact FAPESP in advance to confirm their eligibility and submit...
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Justification of Resources. (maximum of two sides of A4)‌ A two-side A4 statement justifying that the resources requested are appropriate to undertake the research project. The justification of resources should explain why the resources requested are appropriate for the research proposed, taking into account the nature and complexity of the research proposal. It should not be simply a list of the resources required, as this is already given in the Je-S form. Where you do not provide explanation for an item that requires justification, it will be cut from any grant made. Proposals which include co-investigators from third sector organisations that are deemed not to engage in economic activity must provide evidence of this status within the Justification of Resources statement. Please refer to Je-S for further guidance. Data Management Plan (maximum of three sides of A4 per applicant) It is a requirement of the ESRC Research Data Policy that all applicants planning to generate data as part of their grant must include a Data Management Plan. The Data Management‌ Plan should be used as an opportunity to describe how the data, i.e. primary input into research and first-order results of that research, are going to be managed - starting from planning for research and through the life-cycle of the grant until data is accepted for archiving by the UK Data Service. The ESRC recognises the importance of research data quality and provenance. Research data generated by ESRC-funded research must be well-managed by the xxxxx xxxxxx during the grant period to enable their data to be exploited to the maximum potential for further research. For further guidance see the Je-S Helptext. CV (maximum of two sides of A4 per applicant)‌ A CV for each applicant and named research staff member must be included. This should include contact details, qualifications (including class and subject), academic and professional posts held since graduation, a list of the most relevant and recent publications, and a record of research funded by the ESRC and other bodies. This should not exceed two A4 sides. List of publications‌ The bibliography for references cited in the proposal only should be attached. Please note publications not cited in the proposal should not be added here. A list of the most relevant and recent publications by the applicant should be included in the applicant CV. Final/interim reports (maximum of three sides of A4)‌ All current grant holders must submit a progress report on their current awards w...
Sample 1Sample 2
Justification of Resources. Resources requested reflect C3T’s ambitious, interdisciplinary programme of UK and international research and engagement. They are supplemented by substantial institutional support (IS; underlined below) worth £979,815 (16% of fEC). For most items listed below, 80% is requested from ESRC while the remaining 20% will be provided by the participating research institutions. Exceptions where resources are requested at 100% cost are clearly indicated.
Sample 1
Justification of Resources. Research Staff One RA at each site. Xxxxxx’x (UB) background in developing a sound and complete reasoning system for spider diagrams is ideal for this project. Akehurst’s (UKC) background in tool building, modelling and meta-modelling is also well-suited. Support Support for the project will be provided by 10% of an administrator at UKC, 20% of an administrator at UB (an additional 10% as this is where overall management of the project will be), and 10% of a technician at each site. A charge for computing infrastructure for each RA has also been included. Travel We expect the project to be successful, and therefore to generate a significant number of papers. The travel budget reflects this. The cost of conference trips has been averaged out: worldwide trips usually cost more than £1500, and European trips a little less. A modest budget has been requested to support travel between the two sites, and with other sites (e.g. Edinburgh, York, KCL) in the UK. We have requested funds for two trips (1 per site) between the UK and Israel to support collaboration with Xx Xxx. We have costed these trips at the same rate as conferences. Equipment & Consumables • A laptop, with accompanying docking station and peripherals, for the RA at each site. Toshiba is standard issue at both sites. We consider laptops to be standard equipment for postdoc researchers, as their productivity benefits amply justify their relatively low cost. A docking station avoids the need to also purchase a separate desktop machine. • A contribution to the cost of laptops for the investigators, at rate of 1/3rd laptop (with accompanying peripherals) per investigator. It is now standard practice to partially fund equipment for investigators from research grants. • Software and computing supplies at rate of £1500 per machine, to include upgrades over the course of the project, and £500 for books at each site. • Computing infrastructure charge of £1500 per year per research assistant. As usual, costs of computing infrastructure for investigators is met by the institution concerned.
Sample 1

Related to Justification of Resources

  • Allocation of Resources So that the mutually agreed­upon objectives of the agreement can be adequately met, resources from the School Board and the DJJ will be allocated based on the previously identified roles and responsibilities of each agency. XXX agrees to the following:

  • Determination of Responsiveness 28.1 The Procuring Entity's determination of a Tender's responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the Tender itself, as defined in ITT28.2.

  • Use of Resources The resources and facilities of the Bank shall be used exclusively to implement the purpose and functions set forth, respectively, in Articles 1 and 2, and in accordance with sound banking principles.

  • Delegation of Responsibility Transmission Provider may use the services of subcontractors as it deems appropriate to perform its obligations under this LGIP. Transmission Provider shall remain primarily liable to Interconnection Customer for the performance of such subcontractors and compliance with its obligations of this LGIP. The subcontractor shall keep all information provided confidential and shall use such information solely for the performance of such obligation for which it was provided and no other purpose.

  • Allocation of Responsibility 6.1 For the purposes of this Schedule 8 responsibility for each minute of delay included in Minutes Delay, each Third Party Train Cancellation, each Diversion, each Failure to Stop and each Planned Service Cancellation shall be allocated according to the responsibility for the incident which caused such Minutes Delay, Third Party Train Cancellation, Diversion, Failure to Stop or Planned Service Cancellation as established in accordance with the following provisions of this paragraph 6.

  • Limitation of Responsibility Notwithstanding any other provisions ---------------------------- hereof, Committee Members shall be liable to the parties only for actions constituting bad faith, gross negligence or breach of an express provision of this Agreement (so long as such breach remains uncured after ten (10) days of receiving notice of the nature of such breach). In all other respects, Committee Members shall not be liable for negligence or mistakes of judgment.

  • Acceptance of Responsibility x. Defendant has clearly demonstrated a recognition and affirmative acceptance of personal responsibility for his criminal conduct. If the government does not receive additional evidence in conflict with this provision, and if defendant continues to accept responsibility for his actions within the meaning of Guideline § 3E1.1(a), including by furnishing the United States Attorney’s Office and the Probation Office with all requested financial information relevant to his ability to satisfy any fine or restitution that may be imposed in this case, a two-level reduction in the offense level is appropriate.

  • Notification of Results Within 10 days after satisfactory inspection and/or testing of Interconnection Facilities built by the Interconnection Customer (including, if applicable, inspection and/or testing after correction of defects or failures), the Interconnected Transmission Owner shall confirm in writing to the Interconnection Customer and Transmission Provider that the successfully inspected and tested facilities are acceptable for energization.

  • Performance of Services The Contractor is responsible for fully meeting all obligations set forth in the Contract and for providing Product in accordance with the Contract or any Authorized User Agreement.

  • Areas of Responsibility The lateral and vertical limits of the respective areas of responsibility are as follows:

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.