General Comments

• It is noted that the overall quality of the proposals as well as the number of applications have further increased this year. Many proposals have displayed thoughtful research design and greater attention to societal impact.
• It is observed that the research undertaken in Hong Kong is internationally leading.

Application Stage

• High diversity is observed in respect of articulation of “Pathways to Impact Statement”. Some were found not directly relevant to the research areas, some were difficult to evaluate their validities, and some had only included the project abstract in the statement.  PIs are reminded of the importance of evaluation plans and value assessment strategies as well as to demonstrate how deliverables would achieve impact beyond journal publications and conferences in a realistic manner.  Universities are also encouraged to provide suitable guidance to PIs in writing effective “Pathway to Impact Statements”.
• For re-submitted proposals, PIs are encouraged to provide more details on the difference in their re-submissions to show improvements from the previous applications, as well as to highlight the changes that have been incorporated to address concerns and suggestions of previous reviewers.
• PIs should provide essential information in the Gantt Chart, such as a clear timeline, key dates, tasks and milestones. Universities are therefore encouraged to provide sufficient guidance to PIs.
• PIs are encouraged to include well thought-out plan for student involvement and education.
• The level of requested budget in general has grown, and in some case the requested amount is substantially larger than others. PIs are advised to be realistic in their budgeting and to avoid excessive “padding”.  The proposals should articulate why requested resources are necessary and how they will be used.  Universities are encouraged to conduct a more detailed vetting on the budgets of PI’s applications.  
• PIs are reminded that strong justifications should be provided in the proposals for requests for relief teachers, and travel budget for research collaboration would not be granted under normal circumstances.
• Specifically on research projects that involve clinical trials, PIs should provide more details on the methodology and design of such trials in the proposal in a clearer manner.

Project Management Stage

• There are concerns about the substandard preparation of mid-term progress reports of some on-going projects. PIs are reminded to submit the reports on time and be clear when there are any research barriers that the PI encountered during the reporting period.  “Request for change of on-going project” should be made to the RGC for approval as necessary, e.g. when there is a change in the project objectives.

Project Completion Stage

• PIs are reminded to submit their completion report on time.
• It is noted that some PIs included irrelevant publications / research outputs in the project completion reports and some did not acknowledge the RGC funding in their publications. PIs are reminded that claiming irrelevant research outputs as direct outputs of the project is considered unethical.  The rating of the project may be downgraded when irrelevant work is included in the project completion report.
• PIs are encouraged to articulate to what extent the extent of impact given in the pathway to impact statement have been realised.