Verso em portugus

Guidelines for the Young Investigator Grant

Guidelines for the Young Investigator Grant

Grants and fellowships awarded in this program (FAPESP Virtual Library)

The purpose of the Young Investigator Grant in Emerging Research Institution (JP-FAPESP) is to stimulate the creation of a work opportunity, under internationally competitive conditions, for a young investigator or group of young investigators with international experience demonstrated in research after completing their doctorate. Proponents need to demonstrate post-doctoral achievements that indicate leadership capacity and great potential for creation of new research groups that act on modern themes and with a clear international insertion, subjects not yet covered by researchers in the State of So Paulo.

The proposals selected by the program, headed by early-career investigators, must present scientifically sound projects from which one can expect the creation of new nuclei of researchers in institutions that do not yet have a tradition in research or the creation of new lines of research in institutions that already have a consolidated research tradition.

Norms for fellowships granting as budget items

1) Purpose (Back)

The purpose of the Young Investigator Grant in Emerging Research Institution is to stimulate the creation of a work opportunity, under internationally competitive conditions, for young investigatoror group of young investigators with international experience demonstrated in research after completing their doctorate.Proponents need to demonstrate post-doctoral achievements that indicate leadership capacity and great potential for creation of new research groups that act on modern themes and with a clear international insertion, subjects not yet covered by researchers in the State of So Paulo.

Theproposals selected by the program, headed by early-career investigators, must present scientifically sound projects from which one can expect the creation of new nuclei of researchers in institutions that do not yet have a tradition in research or the creation of new lines of research in institutions that already have a consolidated research tradition.

The resources for the awarded proposals will be available in order to promptly guarantee the minimal conditions to the full and autonomous development of the project. Facilities in additional solicitations will be asserted to the research group, through the agility on the analysis of these additional solicitations, such as resources for visiting researchers or equipment repair and, in case of parity in merit analysis, priority to fellowship granting. The program also allows investment in research infrastructure of these emerging research Institutions, aiming to facilitate the development of the approved projects.

The Program supports research projects selected on a competitive basis. The applications shall be sent through a comparative analysis considering previous accomplishes of the Young Investigator, mainly concerning publications and other parameters that suggest his involvement in world-class researches and in relevant topics for his research field. The awarded grants must necessarily present a solid project of excellent quality and with a basis that demonstrates the capability of its execution under the conditions in which it is intended to be developed.

FAPESP demands in return that the Host Institution commits to the purpose of the Program by providing adequate working conditions for the awarded Young Investigator such as space, infrastructure, time dedicated to research, technical support and administrative staff and permission to recruit students to work on the project. During the review process, FAPESP willconsider both the institutional support and the human resources policies applied by the Institution and relevant for the program purposes.

2)Attributes of the Young Investigator Grant (Back)

2.1) Grantformat

a) The support is givenin the form of a Research Grant.

b) Young Investigators still not employed by the Host Institution may be granted a Young Investigator Fellowship.

b.1) The researcher that is awarded with a Young Investigator Fellowship must not be formally employed.

b.2) The Young Investigator Fellowship must be attached to an ongoing Young Investigator Grant and requires exclusive dedication to the research, except with FAPESP authorization and under the conditions described in the Regulation PRN 05/2012.

b.3) The Young Investigator may not receive, throughout the duration of the fellowship, another fellowship, salary or any kind of remuneration deriving from the exercise of activities of any nature, except under the conditions described in the Regulation PR – N 05/2012.

- To request authorization related to the before mentioned Regulation, it must be used the AUTHORIZATION REQUEST FORM FOR EXERCISING ACTIVITIES UNDER THE TERMS OF REGULATION PR N 05/2012, filled in and signed by the parties.

- Processes submitted in hard copy, must have the authorization request sent by mail, in person or through the “Converse com a FAPESP > Solicitaes”.

Processes submitted through SAGe, must have the authorization request attached to a Change Request (SM – Solicitao de Mudana), type "Other” that shall be prepared and sent to FAPESP.

b.4) If a Young Investigator Fellowship holder needs to move to the city where the Host Institution is located, funds for initial expenses (Settlement Aid) might be requested. The rules are available inwww.fapesp.br/7771.

b.5) Maternity/Paternity Leave: period of leaving without interruption of payment in case of advent of offspring (complete regulation available atwww.fapesp.br/8484).

b.6) If an Young Investigator Fellowship is granted, it must be requested in SAGe as grants awarded as budget items.

c) It is possible to apply for a grant without the support of a research institution. In these cases, if the reviews are positive, the Principal Investigator has 90 days to submit a letter of support from an interested Institution. Only then, FAPESP will proceed to the application final review.

d) The granted resources depend on the field of the research and the details of the approved project and the decision about the budget takes into consideration the operational conditions of the institutions. Researchers who intend to develop a project in less structured institution may request higher grants than if the research would be developed in a better equipped institution. In this way, FAPESP aims to create realistic and adequate conditions to the execution of the awarded project within the scope of the program.

2.2) Term of the Young Investigator Grant and the Young Investigator Fellowship

a) The Young Investigator Grant may last up to 60 months, with the possibility of a 12-month extension in exceptional conditions and justification approved by FAPESP.

b) The Young Investigator Fellowship, when awarded, may last up to 24 months, always beginning on the first day of each month with the possibility of a 24-month extension, as long as the Fellowship term does not exceed the Grant term (check item 12.1). The Young Investigator Fellowship shall not exceed 48 months.

b.1) In the calculation of the maximum period for a Young Investigator Fellowship, it shall be computed the period of FAPESP fellowships previously received in equivalent modality to Post-Doctoral, considering that the total sum shall not exceed 6 (six) years. In this case, the Host Institution shall make explicit the circumstances that allow the researcher affiliation to its permanent staff.

Regulationfor term alteration of Grantsand Fellowship(Regulation DC019, valid from November 1st, 2009, for concessions under the maximum established).

3) Conditions for applying (Back)

3.1) Submission dates

Applications may be submitted to FAPESP at any time throughout the year.

3.2) Definitions

a) The Principal Investigator (PI): the who is responsible for the preparation and submission of the grant proposal, as well as for the scientific and administrative coordination of the grant, if it is awarded by FAPESP. The Principal Investigator is always one of the Co-Principal Investigators of the project.

b) Co-Principal Investigators (Co-PI): are part of the team of researchers, indicated by the Principal Investigator, with an excellent research history and with essential and specific roles within the project. The Co-PIs need to be approved as such by FAPESP, and may benefit from the Fringe Benefits of a Grant.

b.1) In the Young Investigator Grant, the Principal Investigator is the only Co-Principal Investigator of the grant.

c) Associated Researchers (AR): part of the team of researchers, being indicated by the Principal Investigator to collaborate in the project; the indication must be approved by FAPESP.

d) Host Institution: institution in which the research will be led, and usually the place where the Principal Investigator is employed. The PI does not need to be hired by the Host Institution, but it is necessary to establish a formal association between both parties that establishes compliance with the terms of the grant; the terms of this formal association must satisfy FAPESP. The Host Institution must formally commit to provide the necessary support infrastructure to the project, which includes ensuring the safety and access to materials and equipment infrastructure to be used by the project and the management of any intellectual property that may result from it.

3.3) Principal Investigator requirements

a) To have a PhD or equivalent title.

b) To demonstrate successful experience as a researcher, after PhD, for at least 2 years, in a research group outside Brazil and internationally competitive.

b.1.) Exceptionally, at the discretion of FAPESP, it is possible to accept proponents with international experience of less than 2 years (but always more than 1 year) after the PhD as long as they demonstrate a good international collaboration network with excellent groups, as well as exceptional performance and potential leadership demonstrated during the international internship.

b.2.) Indicators that help assessing the quality of international experience in the elegibility step of assessment are: (1) the quantity and potential impact of publications resulting from post-doctoral research; (2) leadership role played in these publications; (3) number of papers presented at international conferences of the research area, especially those presented as "invited"; (4) number of lectures presented at the invitation of other research entities other than the Host Institution of the proposal in question, especially those in top-grade foreign entities; (5) other indicators (eg.: awards, participation in organizing committees, moderation of scientific sessions, round tables of outstanding international conferences, ownership of licensed patents).

c) To obtain the acceptance to his association to a research institution in the State of Sao Paulo.

c.1) FAPESP allows the submission of a project without any support of a research institution. In these cases, if the initial review is positive, the Principal Investigator has 90 days to submit a letter of support from an interested Institution. Only then, FAPESP will proceed to the application final review.

d) To have an outstanding research record.

4) Time frame for analysis (Back)

The expected average length of the review process for this type of Grant Is 75 days if there are no unusual incidents such as inquiries concerning the documentation provided, or problems with the reviewers.

a) This number represents an average. Therefore, this does not mean that applications that are submitted 75 days prior to the estimated start of the grant will be approved within this timeframe.

b) Applications for Young Investigator Grant will be sent to three or more reviewers. For this reason, the review process may take longer than expected.

c) Applications submitted between October and January may suffer an extra delay due to the summer holidays in Brazil, and FAPESP partial suspension of activities.

d) For each line of funding, a timeframe is defined to complete the review of submitted applications. FAPESP takes the responsibility for making every effort to observe this time limit. The Foundation cannot, however, guarantee that this condition will be always fulfilled, since FAPESP’s top priority is to ensure the quality of the review and selection process..

e) Peer reviews are the most important part of the review process. Since all applications are sent to be peer reviewed, it is not always possible, despite FAPESP efforts, to ensure that the reviews will be submitted within the regular review deadlines.

f) Furthermore, reviewers frequently ask for clarifications before submitting a final review and sometimes FAPESP itself may decide to send the application to additional reviewers if it considers that the submitted reviews were not enough to justify a final decision.

g) Regardless, experience shows that, in most cases, the average time frame to complete the evaluation process is met, as can be checked through consultation to the Timeframe Study/FAPESP, available on the FAPESP website at www.fapesp.br/estatisticas/analise

j) Considering the circumstances described above and in order to allow an appropriate planning, FAPESP strongly suggests Investigators to submit their proposals up to 12 months prior to the desired starting date.

5) Obligations and responsibilities (Back)

5.1) Obligations and responsibilities of the Principal Investigator

The responsibilities and obligations of the PI will be defined in the Fellowship or Grant Term. Among the main obligations are:

a) The Principal Investigator must, at the moment of submitting the application:

a.1) have no pending problems with FAPESP (i.e., have no pending progress or financial reports, nor pending reviews), for more than 60 days.

a.2) inform if the grant was submitted to other funding agencies and whether the applicant has other current grants.

b) After the grant’s approval, the Principal Investigator must comply, through the Grant or Fellowship Term signature, with the following terms:

b.1) To examine the Grant or Fellowship Term to make sure of all rights, responsibilities and obligations.

b.2) To make arrangements that will ensure the success of the proposed timetable.

b.3) To make reference to the corresponding FAPESP support in all types of divulgation (e.g., theses, dissertations, papers, books, conference abstracts, webpages and any other media and divulgation formats) that result, completely or partially, from the corresponding Grant Award. If there are fellowships associated with this Grant Term, any divulgations resulting thereof must also reference FAPESP support.

b.3.i) The Principal Investigator must ensure that the divulgation of all contents (including webpages), that result, completely or partially, from a Grant or Fellowship Award, and which is part of this Grant Term, must contain the following statement: "The opinions, hypothesis, conclusions or recommendations contained in this material are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect FAPESP opinion". Only peer reviewed scientific papers are not subject to this rule.

b.4) To inform FAPESP if the research project funded by the awarded grant has also been awarded funds from any other private or public funding body. In these cases, the Principal Investigator must be clear about the source of the funding in all mentioned presentations.

b.5) To consult with FAPESP before accepting any award from any funding body, whether public or private, to fund the same research project.

b.6) To take the necessary providences to ensure that, through the service offered by the Host Institution, the complete texts of articles or other scientific communication, resulting wholly or partly from the project funded by FAPESP, are made available in an institutional repository of scientific works and published in international journals, followed by the policy for making each journal available in open access, once the manuscripts are approved for publication or within a period compatible with the restrictions of each journal. The Policy for Open Access to Publications Resulting from FAPESP Grants and Fellowships is available at www.fapesp.br/12632.

b.7) To consult with FAPESP before committing to activities that will require the Principal Investigator’s absence from the Host Institution for more than 90 days.

b.8) To ensure the security of Intellectual Property that results from research supported by FAPESP.

b.9) To write reviews for FAPESP in his/her field of knowledge, committing to deadlines, and without any payment.

b.10) To ensure that the data produced by the project are appropriately managed.

5.2) Responsibilities and obligations of the Host Institution

a) The Host Institution must commit to offer: adequate conditions of space, infrastructure, time of dedication to research, technical and administrative support and the allowance to recruit students to work on the research as previously informed in writing by the Principal Investigator and attached to the Grant or Fellowship Term.

a.1) The Host Institution’s responsibilities will be formalized in the Grant or Fellowship Term, which must be signed by one of its Directors with authority for such purpose, by the Principal Investigator and by FAPESP.

b) In particular, the Host Institution must ensure that the Principal Investigator and his/her research group will be allowed to use all the facilities (laboratories, computer network, library, databases, etc.) and to have access to all kind of services (laboratory technicians, workshop technicians, administrative support, etc.) provided by the Institution and relevant to the grant execution.

b.1) In the case of project interruption or prevention due to noncompliance of the clauses a) and b), without previous FAPESP acknowledgement, the Host Institution assumes the reimbursement of FAPESP for all investment..

c) The Host Institution must have conditions to accept the requirements of FAPESP Acceptance of Cession of Use and/or Acceptance of Donation of equipment and permanent materials acquired with grant resources.

c.1) The Host Institution must also guarantee the Principal Investigator and the project team access to the equipment base and materials, the proper maintenance and insurance for these items throughout the grant and 10 years after its conclusion, except when agreed differently and authorized by FAPESP.

c.2) In the Young Investigator Grant, the donation process is formalized only after the conclusion of the Grant Term, never before it, according to resolution agreed by FAPESP Board of Trustee on March, 7th, 2006.

d) The Host Institution must endeavor the highest institutional effort to ensure and facilitate the access to materials funded by FAPESP to researchers both from the State of So Paulo and outside it, in order to conduct qualified research projects.

e) Being informed that noncompliance with the terms of the Grant or Fellowship Term might hinder the progress of future applications submitted to FAPESP by investigators from the Host Institution.

f) The Host Institution must immediately notify FAPESP if the Principal Investigator is absent or unable to work.

g) To provide a support service provided by the Institution's libraries, aimed at the management, orientation to researchers, indexing and availability at the institutional repository the complete texts of articles or other types of scientific communication, originated from research and projects partially or totally supported by FAPESP and published in international journals. The Policy for Open Access to Publications Resulting from FAPESP Grants and Fellowships is available at www.fapesp.br/12632.

6) Restrictions (Back)

a) It is strictly forbidden to the Principal Investigator:

a.1) to be the Principal Investigator of a Young Investigator Grant or of a Regular Research Project, in course or concluded.

a.2) to be or have been the Principal Investigator of a Thematic Research Project.

a.3) to incur in disbursements outside the period when the grant award is ongoing.

a.4) to change the approved grant (initial plan – including the Data Management Plan, timetable,etc.) or modify allocation resources without FAPESP approval, except on the cases pre-established on www.fapesp.br/8647.

a.5) to use FAPESP resources for purposes other than the approved ones.

a.6) to make financial investments with project resources.

a.7) to hire or repass grant resources to other individuals, for any given reasons:

a.7.i) To individuals who might be connected to the PI by means of matrimony, common-law marriage or kinship, in this case, ascendant, descendant or collateral up to the 4th degree.

a.7.ii) To legal entities that have as partners the grantee him/herself, his/her consort, relatives by kinship (in this case, ascendant, descendant or collateral up to the 4th degree).

Under no circumstances will it be possible to hire individuals or legal entities with whom the grantee has business, liabilities or credits, according to the text of Deliberation n 03/2012 from FAPESP Board of Trustees of September 27th, 2012.

7) Allowable items (Back)

The research project budget submitted to FAPESP shall be detailed and each item shall be specifically justified according to the objectives of the project.

Wages of any nature, third-party services other than those of technical and occasional nature, construction works, acquisition of printed materials, travel costs (except for field research and presentations in scientific conferences), administrative materials and services are not allowed.

Applicants are advised to read the Manual for Financial Report: www.fapesp.br/1416.

Allowed items include those described below.

7.1) Research project funding

a) Equipment acquired in Brazil or abroad;

b) Consumables acquired in Brazil or abroad;

c) Third-party services hired in Brazil or abroad: only short-term and specialized ones;

“When the request includes costs for payment of corporate services in the Host Institution, the justification for this service must be detailed in the project budget request, and include the decomposition of the service cost requested, in consumables, personnel and other costs. The cost of the requested service will be analyzed considering compatibility with other providers of similar services. All staff costs must be paid by the Host Institution.”

d) Transportation and per diems for activities directly related to the development of the proposed research, including expenses for bringing visiting investigators;

e) Fellowships: Payment of Technical Training, Scientific Initiation, Masters, Direct Doctorate, Scientific Journalism and Pedagogical Skills fellowships, according to FAPESP terms for each such fellowship modality;

e.1) For each Fellowship requested, a work plan up to two pages must be submitted along with the initial proposal. This work plan must include a Title, Summary and a brief plan description (long enough to be analyzed by the reviewers). The recipient of the fellowship does not need to be specified at the time of proposal submission. However, once the grant is approved, the Principal Investigator must publicize the position and organize a selective process based on academic merits.

e.2) Technical Training Fellowships: terms for the Technical Training fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/bolsas/tt.

e.3) Scientific Initiation Fellowships: terms for the Scientific Initiation fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/normasic.

e.3.i) The undergraduate student shall already have completed a sufficient number of courses relevant for the development of the research project.

e.4) The Scientific Initiation Fellowships may also be requested separately, related to Thematic Projects and Young Investigator Awards in specific calls, following traditional procedures from FAPESP Fellowship Program.

e.5) Masters Fellowships: terms for the Masters fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/8685.

e.5.i) The indicated student must have been accepted on the Graduate Program of the Institution that hosts the project.

e.6) Direct Doctoral Scholarships: terms of Direct Doctoral fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/5315

e.6.1) The indicated student must have been accepted on the Graduate Program of the Institution that hosts the project.

e.7) Scientific Journalism Fellowship (SJ): terms for Jos dos Reis Scientific Journalism Project Fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/9826

e.8) Pedagogical Skills Fellowship (PS): terms for Pedagogical Skills Fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/9827

7.2) Research Overhead

a) Research Overhead is composed of three types of quota:

a.1) Fringe Benefits granted to PI and Co-PIs

a.2) Research Overhead – Direct Research Infrastructure Costs

a.3) Institutional Infrastructure to Support Research

b) The description of the overheads, in this section, is informative but not normative. Detailed terms for using the research overhead are available in www.fapesp.br/rt

7.2.1) Fringe Benefitsgranted to PI

a) Fringe Benefits granted to the Principal Investigators of projects in the following granting lines: Thematic, Regular, Research on Public Policies, Research on Public Education Improvement and Young Investigator Award. Their purpose is to cover expenses of participation in scientific or technological meetings and in short-term research internships outside the State of So Paulo.

a.1) The Principal Investigator is the only Co-Principal Investigator in the Young Investigator Grant.

a.2) FAPESP will not grant multiple Fringe Benefits to the same person, even if this person is a PI in more than one project.

a.3) The amount awarded for Fringe Benefits may vary according to the funding line and is defined in the Grant Term.

b) The participation in scientific or technological meetings presupposes the presentation of a scientific paper related to the project.

b.1) Participation in events without presentation of papers may be sponsored only in exceptional circumstances, duly justified in the annual report and subject to merit review by FAPESP.

c) Research internships in institutions outside the State of So Paulo, shorter than 60 days may be funded if justified by project needs.

c.1) While the project is in course, the Principal Investigators cannot be absent from their Institutions for more than 90 consecutive days without previous authorization from FAPESP.

d) Fringe Benefits are automatically awarded. Therefore, Principal Investigators are prohibited from applying for Meeting in Brazil or Meeting Abroad Awards or, in ordinary circumstances, Research Fellowship Abroad.

d.1) In exceptional circumstances, researchers who are beneficiaries of Fringe Benefits may submit an application for Research Fellowship Abroad for an internship longer than one month which proves, at FAPESP discretion, to be essential for the satisfactory development of the project. In this case, the fellowship will cover living expenses during the period that exceeds one month; transportation and living expenses for one month shall be covered with Fringe Benefits granted to PI.

d.2) Associated Investigators, if any, may apply for Meeting in Brazil, Meeting Abroad or Research Fellowship Abroad linked to the Young Investigator Grant in which they take part. Their relation to the project shall be declared in a letter from the Principal Investigator of the Young Investigator Grant, indicating FAPESP’s file number and the title of the project.

e) When a project entitled to Fringe Benefits is extended, the corresponding Fringe Benefits will be automatically granted in an amount proportional to the number of months of the extension approved, and to the number of researchers in the project, that have been granted Fringe Benefits, as long as the total duration of the project, including its extension, does not exceed the maximum number of months established for each funding line ( Regular and Public Policies up to 24 months, Thematic and Young Investigator up to 60 months and Public Education up to 48 months).

e.1) If a project in a funding line entitled to Fringe Benefits has its duration extended beyond the maximum number of months established for this line, Fringe Benefits will not be granted.

f) The use of Fringe Benefitsshall observe the limits set by FAPESP daily allowances, living expenses and health insurance. Corresponding values can be viewed atwww.fapesp.br/1106.

g) In every Annual Scientific Progress Report and in the Final Scientific Report, the Principal Investigator shall itemize and justify, in a special section of the report, the allocation of resources from Fringe Benefits, which will be analyzed by reviewers as to their adequacy to the project needs.

g.1) This information is to be provided in the Scientific Progress Reports themselves, and is not to be confused with the Annual Financial Report, which shall also be submitted within the time limits established in the Grant or Fellowship Term.

7.2.2) Research Overhead – Direct Research Infrastructure Costs

The Direct Research Infrastructure Costs equals 15% of the total initial grant in Brazilian Reais. This amount may be spent in infrastructure items associated to the Research Grant, including those related to the appropriate management of the data produced by the project, and managed by the Principal Investigator.

7.2.3) Institutional Infrastructure to Support Research

The quota for Costs of Institutional Research Infrastructure equals 10% of the total grant. It must be spent in specific items discriminated in an "Annual Plan for Institutional Research Infrastructure ", which must be approved by the highest Council in the Institution. This quota will be conceded as part of the "Overhead to Support Institutional Research Infrastructure" – including those associated to the appropriate management of the data produced by the projects supported, in which all the quotas of the Direct Research Infrastructure Costs for the projects related to the approved projects of the Institution in the previous year will be pooled. This fund will be managed by the Head of the Institution or a person officially accredited by the Institution to do so. This will require opening a special FAPESP file, in cases in which the total amount of pooled resources is higher than R$ 15.000,00.

7.2.4) Other rules applicable toResearch Overhead

a) If a Young Investigator Grant involves several departments, the Research Overhead will be divided in the proportion suggested by the Principal Investigator responsible for the project.

b) The value of occasional supplementary grant amounts and additional resources for special support to the infrastructure of Young Investigator Grant projects will not be taken into account to calculate the Research Overhead.

c) As usual, due to FAPESP statutory restrictions, it is forbidden to allocate quotas for uses that, regardless of their merits, are not strictly related to research activities. In particular, the following items are not allowable:

c.1) Allocations whose justification is solely based on teaching and extension activities;

c.2) Administrative activities of any nature, including expenses to hire personnel;

c.3) Expenses to pay personnel;

c.4) Construction works that result in expansion of the constructed area.

7.3 Overhead for research infrastructure

a) In the initial application or on the occasion of submitting the first Scientific Progress Report, the Principal Investigator might request resources for small building renovations, whose goal is to guarantee the necessary infrastructure to conduct the project New constructions are prohibited. This request shall be justified in detail and shall be associated relevant matching contribution provided by the Host Institution.

b) Multiuser Equipment. Only in extraordinary conditions and very well justified FAPESP will accept requests for acquisition of large equipment of the Multiuser Equipment type (EMU, in Portuguese). After analyzing the justifications and having a recommendation for the concession of equipment considered as multiuser, the Principal Investigator will be instructed to open a new FAPESP process, in the EMU modality, for the implementation of the grant. The guidelines and procedures for this submission can be found at www.fapesp.br/11195.

7.4 Complementary Proposal

Complementary Proposals are those related to the objectives of a current Young Investigator Grant and whose review process is not the standard one, due to this association. Proposals that are complementary to the Young Investigator Grant project are called “Linked FAPESP files”. This concept is applied to Visiting Researcher Award, Publication Award, Participation in Scientific/Technological Meeting Award and to the requests of Research Fellowship Abroad, Scientific Initiation, Masters, Doctorate, Direct Doctorate and Post-Doctorate Fellowships.

IMPORTANT:

A complementary proposal linked to a Thematic Project, RIDC or Young Investigator Grant can be submitted only if the main grant has been awarded by FAPESP. If the proposal is approved, the corresponding Grant or Fellowship Term will be issued only after the signing of the Grant Term of the main award.

a) Complementary Proposal requests can only be in effect within the award period of the Young Investigator Grant to which they are related. This award period cannot be exceed by any means.

a.1) The length of the visit in a Visiting Researcher Award must not go beyond the end of the Young Investigator Grant to which it is linked.

a.2) The duration of a linked fellowship cannot go beyond the Grant to which it is linked. The adequacy of the dates will be analyzed by the Scientific Directorate considering items such as the nature of the work plan and the duration of the grant in relation to the duration of the fellowship.

a.2.i. If the overlapping is not considered appropriate, the fellowship request maybe reviewed but will not qualify as a Complementary Proposal.

b) Complementary Proposal requests shall necessarily be endorsed by the Principal Investigator of the Young Investigator Grant to which they are linked.

c) Requests submitted to FAPESP as “Complementary Proposal application” but that do not fit in the definition above will be processed as independent, not linked, requests.

d) Requests for Complementary Proposals for Visiting Researcher Award, Publication Award and Participation inScientific/Technological Meeting Award related to a Young Investigator Grant may not require external peer reviewing, being only analyzed by the AreaCoordinators.

e) Complementary Proposals for Masters, Doctorate, Direct Doctorate and Post-Doctorate Fellowships associated to a Young Investigator Grant will be given priority in their respective comparative analysis sessions, as long as they are considered to be on equal terms with the other proposals under comparative analysis as to academic requirements.

f) Complementary Proposal requests shall be submitted individually, in appropriate forms and supported by relevant documents, as described in the respective manuals. They shall also be supported by a summary of the corresponding Young Investigator Grant, an essential element for the analysis of the activity proposed, emphasizing the fact that the request is complementary to the Young Investigator Grant mentioning its FAPESP file number.

f.1) These requests will be treated as new FAPESP files, with their own Scientific and Financial Reports. The resources awarded will not be deducted from the grant amount of the Young Investigator Grant.

8) Proposal submission format (Back)

Applications must be submitted exclusively through the SAGE software.

The required documents for the application are:

a) Principal Investigator’s graduate transcripts, issued by the Institution. It must contain the names of the courses in full and eventual fails or withdrawals.

a.1) FAPESP will not accept graduate transcripts merely containing the final grade of concluded courses.

b) Principal Investigator’s Doctoral Certificate.

b.1) Once the proposal is approved, this document might be presented later, up to the confirmation of interest date.

c) Declaration of the beginning of the activities, signed by the awardee, informing FAPESP the date of the effective start of the fellowship holder activities in the Host Institution.

Attention: If the applicant is a foreigner, it is his responsibility, aiming the development of the activities, to check the documentation required for his entrance in Brazil with the Brazilian Consulate nearest to his residence.

d) Description of the research team:

d.1) In addition to the Principal Investigator, the team may include:

d.1.i) Investigators associated to the project;

d.1.ii) Graduate students;

d.1.iii) Interns;

d.1.iv) Technical support staff;

d.1.v) Administrative staff.

e) Abridged CVs for the Principal Investigator and each Associated Researchers (see abridged CV format instructions at www.fapesp.br/sumula).

f) Summary of results obtained previously in the scope of FAPESP Grants or Fellowships, listing projects titles and FAPESP file numbers (two pages maximum).

g) Work Plan for the requested Technical Training Fellowships: For each fellowship requested, a Work Plan with up to two pages, including Title of the Fellowship Project, Summary and Description of the Plan, shall be submitted with the initial proposal. It is not necessary to indicate the name of the student in the proposal. If the project is approved, the Principal Investigator shall arrange for a publicly announced selection process to select fellowship recipients.

h) Research project of up to 20 pages for items from 1 to 7, with line space 1,5 and font equivalent to Times New Roman 12. It is strongly suggested that the project be organized according to the guidelines to format Grants.

i) Document containing the Data Management Plan.

The “Data Management Plan” is a text of up to two pages that must answer two basic questions:

• Which data will be produced by the project; and

• How these data will be preserved and made available, considering ethical, legal, and confidentiality issues, among others.

Details in Plano de Gesto de Dados.

Additional documents for the proposal review

1) Justification for each one of the items requested in the budget.Three different budget (it is not necessary to submit invoices) for each one of the Equipment to be acquired in Brazil or abroad whose value is ten times higher the minimum wage in Brazil.

2) Description of the institutional support and available infrastructure (Appendix II of the Grant Contract).

a) Description of institutional support and available infrastructure to conduct the project, including

a.1) Academic, administrative and technical support services available at the Host Institution(s), personnel hired by the Host Institution(s) to support the project.

a.2) This document, which shall follow the guidelines in Appendix II of the Grant Term, shall be signed by the Principal Investigator and by the Host Institution representative with the authority to ensure that the terms presented in the Grant Term will be followed. The document must then be attached to the Grant Term, once the proposal is approved.

b) For proposals in which the Principal Investigator does not have an employment relationship with the Host Institution, a statement of non-employment relationship shall be submitted, establishing, among other items considered necessary by the Host Institution, that:

b.1) Any intellectual property developed during the term of the Principal Investigator in the Host Institution will remain with the Host Institution; and

b.2) Inventors will be entitled to a quota of the benefits resulting from licensing or commercialization of intellectual property, according to Host Institution rules and Act 10.973/2004.

3) Description of the scientific equipment base available at the Host institution(s).

FAPESP suggests that the Host Institutions maintain a prepared listing, updated annually, with the official institutional seal, to be provided to investigators.

A list of the equipment available at the host Institution(s) must be submitted, including equipment whose acquisition values have been equal to or higher than 20 thousand dollars, informing for each one of the items:

a) Type, manufacturer and model (e.g.: Oscilloscope Tektronix mod.7904);

b) Relevant features (ex.: 500MHz; 1mV; single beam);

c) Nature: domestic or imported material;

d) Acquisition year;

e) Acquisition price;

f) Person in charge of allowing access to the equipment at the institution.

Attention: From 01/11/2016 onwards, it is mandatory to attach a scanned copy of the Identifying Document of the Principal Investigator to the SAGe registration for submitting a proposal through this system. Access the menu "My Data> Change Registration" and attach the requested document in the "Identification Document" section in the Identification tab. This obligation applies to all Beneficiaries and Responsible for proposals for Grants and Fellowships.

9) Authorizations required by lawto issue a decision(Back)

The Principal Investigator and the Host Institution are responsible for requesting, obtaining, and getting all the legal authorizations required for the proper execution of the project. When so required, such authorizations must be issued by the control and auditing bodies relating to the nature of the research. The Grant Term will have a clause stipulating that the Principal Investigator and the Host Institution must have such permits to present to FAPESP whenever requested.

10) Intellectual Property issues (Back)

FAPESP rules regarding the intellectual property of results from Foundation-supported projects are described at www.fapesp.br/pi.

11) Review and selection of proposals (Back)

11.1) Review criteria

The review process has two phases: Eligibility and Merit Analysis.

11.1.1) Eligibility

In this step, the application is reviewed by the Area Coordinators and the Associate Coordinators under the point of view of adequacy of the applicant’s academic record towards the aims of the Program, especially considering item 3.3.

11.1.2) Merit Analysis

The eligible applications are submitted to merit analysis using external aid of experienced researchers in the field of the project. The items that guide these reviews are:

a) Regarding the Principal Investigator:

a.1) Quality and regularity of scientific and/or technological results. Important elements for this review include, among others: publications in periodicals with selective editorial policy; books or book chapters; patents in which the applicant appears as the inventor; other instruments of intellectual property; research results effectively transferred and adopted by companies or by the government; and any additional information relevant for the assessment of this item.

a.2) Proven experience as head of research projects related to the theme of the proposal under review.

a.3) When applicable, the results obtained in previous FAPESP-funded projects or projects funded by other agencies, including fellowships.

a.4) According to the program regulation, the applicant must be an early-career researcher, with a remarkable technical or scientific production for his career level. Particularly, the applicant must be fully able to independently coordinate research projects and implement new lines of research.

b) Regarding the Host Institution:

b.1) The institution research tradition.

b.2) If the project aims to establish a new line of research inside the institution (unit, department) with an established tradition in research.

b.3) Appropriate institutional and building infrastructure offered by the institution where the project will be developed.

b.4) The effects that the grant might bring to the institution. Notice that: 1) The purpose of the Young Investigator Grant is to enable the proper creation of job opportunities for highly qualified young investigator or group of highly qualified young investigators, preferably in emerging research institutions, favoring the creation of new groups and decentralization of the state research system. Candidates whose proposal is to create a new line of research, in institutions with established tradition in research, may also apply; 2) In this case, the proposal will only be approved if: a) The applicant has an outstanding productivity for his career level; b) Identification of special circumstances (for instance, an application which aims to create a new research group in an Unit or in a department) that would justify the support.

b.5) Institutional compliance with the proposal, according to the regulation of the program.

c) Regarding the research project:

c.1) Definition and relevance of the objectives.

c.2) Originality and importance of the intended contribution for the corresponding field(s) of knowledge.

c.3) Scientific foundations and methods employed.

c.4) Adequacy of the requested resources considering the relevance of the intended scientific or technologic contribution.

c.5) If the project involves Scientific Initiation or Graduate students.

c.6) Compatibility of the Data Management Plan with the proposal, considering eventual ethical, confidentiality or security issues, among other applicable constraints, according to the practices of the research areas involved in the project.

d) Regarding the Proposed Budget

d.1) Budget adequacy in relation to:

d.1.i. The project needs;

d.1.ii. The applicant experience in managing resources; and

d.1.iii. The Principal Investigator’s ability to take full advantage of the requested resources.

d.2) The justification for each of the requested items.

11.2) Procedures

a) FAPESP practices the peer-review system adopted in the most important research funding agencies worldwide.

b) Each application is reviewed by one or more researchers, not formally linked to FAPESP, with expertise in the knowledge area under consideration. These reviews ground the decisions issued by FAPESP.

c) If the reviewers recommend that the application should not be accepted, the applicant has the full right to appeal against this negative decision. Appeals are reconsideration requests based on the discussion of the objections raised by the ad hoc reviewers.

c.1) The unlimited practicing of this right of appealing – which may lead to the plea of another ad hoc review – is the necessary counterpart of the importance that the external reviews have on the decisions of the Scientific Directorate.

d) International experience and experience accumulated by teach that the good performance of this review system depends essentially on the preservation of the anonymity of the ad hoc reviewers. The degree of independence and objectivity of peer-reviews is certainly proportional to the degree of the reliability of the secrecy offered by the Foundation regarding the identity of these reviewers.

d.1) Thus, by decision of FAPESP’s Board of Trustees, its higher decision body, every request for an opinion to an ad hoc reviewer is accompanied by an explicit commitment to preserve his/her anonymity.

e) On their hand, ad hoc reviewers oblige themselves to maintain confidentiality regarding the content of their own reviews, of which only FAPESP Area Coordinators review process will be aware. This trust relationship between FAPESP and its reviewers cannot be broken under any pretext whatsoever.

f) When sending an application to FAPESP, the applicant shall declare that:

f.1) (S)He is familiar with the FAPESP review system;

f.2) (S)He authorizes his/her application be reviewed according to this system and, in particular, be submitted to review by researchers chosen by FAPESP, whose identities will be kept confidential.

g) FAPESP’s review system is described at www.fapesp.br/1478

11.3) FAPESP Conflict of Interest Policy

a) In order to preserve the high degree of credibility of its analysis procedures and avoiding potential embarrassment to its peer reviewers, FAPESP requests that, before starting to review a project, the reviewer considers the possibility of a potential conflict of interest. According to FAPESP, the following situations configure a potential conflict of interest:

a.1) Current or previous participation in the project;

a.2) Regular collaboration in research activities or publications with any of the applicants in recent years;

a.3) Relationship supervisor/student with any of the applicants;

a.4) Financial interests in the proposed research;

a.5) Family relationship with one of the applicants;

a.6) Any previous relationship with any of the applicants that can be seen as a hindrance for an unbiased opinion.

b) If one or more of the aforementioned circumstances occur, or that might characterize potential conflicts of interest, the reviewer shall return the application immediately. If the reviewer feels unsure about the existence of a potential conflict of interest or not, (s)he can consult with FAPESP’s Scientific Directorate.

11.3.1) Reviewer Declaration

On signing the advisory report, the ad hoc reviewer formally declares : "There is no circumstance that typifies a situation of potential conflict of interest or that may be seen as a hindrance for an unbiased opinion. I hereby agree to keep completely confidential and not disclose, publish or use for any purpose, except as expressly authorized by the Principal Investigator responsible for the current proposal, any information obtained by reading the Proposal.”

11.4) Reconsideration request

FAPESP guarantees to the applicant, the right to a new review of the application, upon justified request submission for reconsideration of the initial decision. Further information at www.fapesp.br/reconsideracao.

12) Scientific Reports (Back)

a) Deadlines for submitting Scientific Reports are defined in the Grant or Fellowship Term. Their submission within stipulated time limits is essential for the release of the remaining balances of the awarded grant.

b) Usually (the Principal Investigator must always verify the Grant or Fellowship Term, since the valid dates are there specified), the deadlines to submit the Scientific Progress Report and the Final Scientific Report are:

b.1) 1st Scientific Progress Report until the 20th day of the 18th month of the grant.

b.2) 2nd Scientific Progress Report until the 20th day of the 36th month of the grant.

b.3) 3rd Scientific Progress Report until the 20th day of the 48th month of the grant.

b.4) Final Scientific Report until the 20th day after the 60th month of the grant.

c) Eventual balances will be automatically cancelled on the very date stipulated in the Grant Term to be the end of the project.

d) It is suggested that the Final Scientific Report and every Scientific Progress Reports be written according to the model in the Formatting Manual for Scientific Reports.

e) Upon submission of the Final Scientific Report, the Principal Investigator must provide a link to a Web page that describes how to access the data made available by the project, in accordance to the current Data Management Plan. This link can be provided upon submission of the first Scientific Report, and is compulsory upon submission of the Final Report.

12.1) Scientific Reports procedures for submission:

a) Required documents for Annual, Final and Reformulated Scientific Reports:

a.1) Document with a Brief Description of expenditures of Research Overheads and Fringe Benefits (for hard copies and SAGe processes). The lack of this document implies in the return of the Report.

a.2) Submission Form for Scientific Report of Grants filled and signed (only for hard copy processes).

b) Processes submitted through SAGE system must have their Scientific Reports forwarded electronically, as described in the manual "Submisso de RC" that can be consulted in the Manuals link at SAGe.

c) For hard copy processes, the documentation must be sent to FAPESP by post or delivered in person. The submission form of the Scientific Report and the Brief Description of expenditures of Research Overheads and Fringe Benefits must be signed by the Principal Investigator.

12.2) Guidelines for a Young Investigator Fellowship linked to an Young Investigator Grant.

a) If the Grant includes a Young Investigator Fellowship, the Scientific Progress Report of the Grant will also be considered as the Scientific Progress Report of the Fellowship. An identical copy of the Scientific Progress Report must be attached to the corresponding Fellowship Grant process at SAGe.

a.1) If the fellowship holder has benefitted from the Resolution PR n. 05/2012, the Scientific Progress Report must also describe the extra-fellowship activities developed in the period, including the working hours.

a.1.i. In case of remunerated activities, a financial statement from the paying source must be attached, specifying the nature of the services provided, the number of working hours per week, the duration of the service and the amount received, for tracking purposes.

b) The 1st Scientific Progress Report, to be presented on the 18th month of the grant, will serve as a base for the analysis for the first Fellowship extension for a 12-months period.

c) The 2nd Scientific Progress Report, scheduled for the 36th month of the grant, will serve as a base for the analysis for a second Fellowship extension for a 12-months period, in this case the second report must be anticipated in two months and presented in the 34th month of the grant. The non-observance of the deadlines may result in discontinuance of payment of the Fellowship.

d) If the extension is not approved, the fellowship holder must submit a Complementary Scientific Progress Report related to the remaining period (6 months in the case of the first extension request and 2 months in the case of the second request).

13) Financial Report (Back)

a) Deadlines for submitting Financial Reports are defined in the Grant or Fellowship Term.

b) The Financial Report must be written according to the model available at: www.fapesp.br/1416.

c) FAPESP allows the Principal Investigator appoint SAGe account users to support entering the data on the Financial Report. Information about the registration of users and their official appointment are available in www.fapesp.br/materia/1416.

14) Amending the Grant Term (Back)

a) By signing the Grant Term, the Principal Investigator officially recognizes that resources provided by FAPESP are sufficient to enable the execution of the approved project, barring unpredictable circumstances. b) For this reason, Investigators are advised to sign the Grant or Fellowship Term only after having assured themselves that the items and amounts in the budget FAPESP approved are, under predictable circumstances, enough to fully guarantee the successful execution of that project. c) In the lack of this certainty, it is recommended that the investigator does not sign the Grant or Fellowship Term and immediately submit a well-founded request for reconsideration of the approved budget, which will be analyzed by FAPESP Area Coordinators. d) Recognizing that, in certain cases, circumstances unpredictable at the moment of the initial award may occur, requiring changes in the agreed conditions, FAPESP accepts that requests for changes in the Grant or Fellowship Term may be made by means of an Amendment to the Grant or Fellowship Term, under the following conditions.

14.1) Requests for Amendment to the Grant or Fellowship Term justified by unpredictable circumstances, and without the granting of additional resources

a) Requests for amendments for extending the duration of the grant due to unpredictable circumstances without granting additional resources may be analyzed by FAPESP when they are submitted at least 30 days before the closure date initially approved. b) Requests for amendments for other changes justified by unpredictable circumstances, without granting additional resources may be analyzed by FAPESP when submitted at least 30 days before the date on which the change will be effective. c) Requests shall be submitted, together with their proper justification, through the service available for this purpose at “Converse com a FAPESP” or through SAGe.

14.2) Requests for Amendment to the Grant or Fellowship Term for supplementary resources, justified by unpredictable circumstances

a) Requests for amendments to supplement resources, justified by unpredictable circumstances, may be analyzed by FAPESP when they are submitted at the moment of submitting a Scientific Progress Report.

a.1) Requests for amendments to supplement resources not submitted on these occasions will be analyzed exceptionally only if the grantee demonstrates that the budget items and amounts in question could not have been predicted at the moment of signing the Grant or Fellowship Term or of submitting previous Scientific Progress Reports presentation

b) Requests shall be submitted together with their proper justification through the service available for this purpose at “Converse com a FAPESP” or through SAGe.

Verso para impresso | URL: fapesp.br/6251