We fund the best quality research led by the brightest minds. Every penny we invest is spent according to our research strategy, focused on high-quality research that addresses our research priorities. Our research strategy was developed collaboratively with experts in the field, including those with lived experience. This, along with regular reviews of all of our ongoing research projects, ensures that the funds generously raised and donated by our amazing supporters go towards research that will ensure brighter futures for children and young people with cancer.
Choosing the research we fund
At the heart of our research grant award process is a rigorous system for expert review (sometimes called peer review), ensuring that all new research funding by CCLG has been subject to independent scrutiny by people with relevant expertise. It is the advice of independent experts about the quality of research that informs decisions about which proposals of funded.
CCLG is a member of the Association of Medical Research Charities (AMRC). As a member, we are committed to meeting specific requirements that ensure we are supporting the best research and the best researchers. Our research grant award process is based on meeting these requirements.
Excellent research governance is at the heart of our research decision making. Our independent Research Advisory Group (RAG) overseas our research grant rounds. All of our RAG members and external peer reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest and adhere to our Grant Review Code of Conduct. Following peer review, the RAG will discuss and rank the applications for funding. Final approval comes from our Board of Trustees (which may be delegated to our Executive in the case of Special Named Funds and restricted funds), or the Board of Trustees of the partner charity if the funding is not directly from CCLG.
Process for awarding new research grants
Our process for awarding new research grants is based on the steps recommended by AMRC, meaning that expert review is at the heart of the process.
- Grant round defined & advertised
- Internal Triage
- Written Peer review
- Research Advisory Group
- Charity Trustees
- Project Monitoring
- Engagement & Dissemination
Read our full grant award process
Expert review
Expert review, also known as peer review, is the assessment of the quality and value of research applications by independent experts to guide research funding.
Experts include individuals with relevant knowledge or experience in a particular subject area. They can include academic researchers, clinicians, industry representatives and regulators as well as patients, people with lived experience, service users, carers and loved ones, donors of tissues cells and data, and other interested members of the public where appropriate.
The way experts are used to support decision making may differ from one charity to another, as well as between funding streams or grants calls within an individual charity.
Why is expert review important?
Expert review is recognised as the most robust and rigorous way to decide what research to fund. For medical research charities, expert advice helps us to ensure charity funding is used effectively, and maintains the credibility of the charities' contribution to research, the research system and the public.
Properly conducted, expert review allows us to support high quality research, maximise the impact of our funding, and deliver changes that really matter to our community.
External organisations consider AMRC membership a hallmark of quality in research funding. It gives assurance that the expert review standards of a charity are rigorous and reliable and can be used to confirm eligibility for government funding schemes such as:
- the Charity Research Support Fund (CRSF)
- Research Part B Cost funding for studies in the NHS
- the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Non-commercial Partner status.
Guiding principles
We abide by the AMRC’s six principles of expert review in research funding:
Charities must ensure the review process is ‘fit for purpose’ with reviews proportionate to both the size and scale of the award and the expertise sought sufficient and relevant to provide effective review. Charities must seek additional review for applications where there is a lack of expertise on a particular subject area on any research review committees or among in-depth reviewers used by the charity, or where the funding requested is substantial in relation to the charity’s research spend.
Charities must take account of advice provided by experts who are independent of the charity’s administrative staff and trustees.
Charities must seek recommendations from a range of experts with relevant knowledge or experience, who appropriately reflect the views of a range of stakeholders. Charities must also consider the diversity of experts involved in the review process in terms of location, career stage, gender and ethnicity or other factors as appropriate.
Charities must rotate the experts involved in decision making to ensure they are regularly incorporating fresh ideas and new perspectives into their expert review processes. This allows charities to incorporate the views of a range of individuals, including those who may not have been otherwise represented. It also allows charities to change the membership of their research review committee(s) as appropriate and required to meet their research strategy.
Charities must publish and adhere to a conflicts of interest policy, specific to research funding. This policy must clearly articulate the types of conflicts that may arise in research funding contexts and specify the actions that conflicted committee members should take so that they are not able to influence funding decisions. Additionally, where research funding is awarded to trustees of the charity, this must be done according to the Charity Commission rules in Annex 1, AMRC's conflicts of interest guide, and the charity’s governing documents (e.g. articles of association) must permit this.
Charities must publish their research strategy and expert review process online so that external audiences can see the rigorous methods used to make research funding decisions, including the names of the experts involved in the decision-making process. It is important that charity funders share transparently how and why animals are used in research. When funding research involving animals, charities must consider the 3Rs through expert review.