1. No category

CONSULTATION PAPER
Current and Emerging Issues for- NHMRC Fellowship
Schemes
Issue 1: The balance is changing between the number of research grants available and the number of
Fellowships.
Issue 2: Is the structure of NHMRC fellowship schemes still appropriate?
Issue 3: Should there be a stronger strategic approach to granting Fellowships?
Issue 4: Responsibilities of employing institutions and the health and medical research sector.
The background to this paper is that NHMRC’s budget for the next four years is steady state, and the number of
Project Grants is projected to fall over that period.
Government appropriations to the NHMRC for funding research and Fellowships through the Medical Research
Endowment Account (MREA), reached a plateau in 2012 after more than threefold growth since 2000.
The Forward Estimates (the Federal Government's budget projections of expenditure over the next four years) also
show no growth (apart from indexation).
In contrast, application numbers for most NHMRC funding schemes continue to grow.
Detailed data on NHMRC research funding and fellowships is provided in Attachment A.
The Federal Government announced in May 2014 its intention to establish the Medical Research Future Fund
1
(MRFF). However at the time of preparing this document, the timing of its establishment is not yet certain. It is
anticipated that disbursements will not reach significant levels for several years after establishment and there is
currently little known about how disbursements will be allocated. Thus, the MRFF cannot be seen as a mechanism
for alleviating the current funding pressures in the next half decade or so.
Of course, NHMRC will work within Government and the research sector will continue to press for more funding
and this may change the current circumstances.
However, the current funding pressures raise a number of questions about the balance of grant and fellowship
schemes and how the NHMRC can best continue to support the best research and researchers, while ensuring we
are building and maintaining capacity in strategic areas.
NHMRC’s Fellowships from Early Career to Senior Principal Research Fellowships have been a crucial part of
building Australia’s excellence in health and medical research.
1
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/budget/publishing.nsf/content/budget2014-hmedia14.htm
Page 1
Over the last 15 years, the breadth of Fellowships has increased significantly with clinical and public health streams
in Early Career and Career Development Fellowships and translational fellowships including Practitioner, TRIP and
Industry Career Development Fellowships (see Table 3). This expansion of Fellowship schemes occurred during a
quadrupling (in dollar terms) of NHMRC funding.
Many of Australia’s current and past leaders in research, education, health care and policy have held an NHMRC
Fellowship at some stage of their careers.
NHMRC is committed to continuing support of outstanding researchers through fellowships.
However, it is timely to discuss with the research and wider communities a number of issues that have arisen and
which loom for the future. Most of the issues raised in this paper are not unique to Australia (as outlined in the
2
recent paper from Kirshcner et al. which analyses the current situation in the US.)
This consultation paper seeks your views on the following key issues:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The changing balance between the number of research grants available and the number of Fellowships
The structure of the Fellowship schemes
Future strategic approaches
The responsibilities of employing institutions and the health and medical research sector.
“Australia has never had a policy discussion on the nation’s needs for health and
medical researchers, the time has come to think seriously about how best to use
Australia’s talent.” Professor Warwick Anderson
Alberts, B., Kirschner, M., Tilgham, S. and Varmus, H. 2014. “Rescuing US biomedical research from its systemic flaws” Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 111 no. 16, 5773-5777, DOI 10.1073/pnas.1404402111. Available:
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/16/5773.long
2
Page 2
Issue 1: The balance is changing between the number of
research grants available and the number of Fellowships
NHMRC’s Project Grants scheme is currently being maintained at the same level of funding (in terms of total
number of dollars) as in the previous 5 years.
However, the substantial increase in the budget size of each Project Grant, primarily due to a move towards more 4
3
4
and 5 years grants as recommended by the McKeon Review and adopted into Coalition Policy , is reducing the
numbers of grants able to be funded each year.
The numbers of Project Grants awarded in recent years and NHMRC’s predictions over the Forward Estimates are
shown in Table 4.
On current projections (with indicated assumptions outlined in Table 4), the number of Project Grants awarded in
2017 may be fewer than 480, compared to 731 in 2012 (Table 4A). Were 5 year grants to be mandatory, the
number awarded in 2017 would be around 248 (Table 4B). In reality the actual number of Project Grants awarded
in 2017 is anticipated to be between these two numbers.
If Fellowships numbers awarded are held close to 2014 levels (Tables 5A and 5B), the ratio between Project
Grants available and Fellowship will fall.
Furthermore, most Project, Program, Development and Partnership Project grants are held by Chief Investigators
who are employees of universities, medical research institutes or hospitals (Table 6), not NHMRC Fellows.
Any change in the ratio between the number of Fellows and the number of Project grants will affect all applicants;
that is, there will be fewer Project Grants for non-Fellows and/or fewer grants for researchers on NHMRC
Fellowships.
Question 1: How should NHMRC’s funding balance between research grants and fellowships be adjusted as the
total number of Project Grants available falls progressively over the next few years?
Please provide your comments via the Current and Emerging Issues - NHMRC Fellowship Schemes page in the
NHMRC consultation portal (http://consultations.nhmrc.gov.au) . Please select Question 1 from the drop-down
menu to provide your comments.
Issue 2: Is the structure of NHMRC fellowship schemes
appropriate for 2015 and beyond?
The strategic purpose of NHMRC Fellowship schemes is to build Australia’s research capacity and to ensure that
we have an excellent cohort of full-time researchers working in areas that can have the greatest impact on the
creation of knowledge and its translation into improved health.
3
Refer to page 3 of the McKeon Review, available at:
www.mckeonreview.org.au/downloads/Strategic_Review_of_Health_and_Medical_Research_Feb_2013-Final_Report.pdf
4
refer page 5 of The Coalition’s Policy to Protect and Streamline Health and Medical Research Funding available at
www.nationals.org.au/Portals/0/2013/policy/HealthAndMedicalResearchFunding.pdf
Page 3
Making room for new researchers
NHMRC maintains a pyramid shape to its Fellowships schemes. – 600 Early Career Fellowships (ECF), 256
Career Development Fellowships (CDF), and the long-standing NHMRC Research Fellowship scheme with 129
SRFA, 108 SRFB, 97 PRF and 99 SPRF level Fellows. Detailed numbers are given in Table 3.
ECF and each of the two levels of CDF can only be held once.
In contrast, Fellows in NHMRC senior Research Fellowships scheme (SRFA, SRFB, PRF and SPRF) may hold
these any number of times (5 years each, including at the same level) provided they can successfully compete
against all applicants in that year.
The issue is whether this arrangement for NHMRC Research Fellows (SRFA and above) means that emerging
researchers from the CDFs and other Fellowships, and other researchers emerging from clinical and academic
research environments, industry and from overseas, have reduced chances to gain a Research Fellowship and
therefore developing further as full time researchers.
If there is limited turnover in the NHMRC Fellowship schemes, the cohort of Fellows at any one time may be
excellent but it is increasingly hard for the expanding cohort of emerging CDFs and others to move to a NHMRC
Research Fellowship.
Age data for researchers supported by NHMRC Fellowships (Tables 7A and 7B) show the average age of NHMRC
Research Fellows is in the 50’s (with some in their 70’s).
Career Development Fellows are on average in their 40’s, an age when most would be expected to have well
established careers, rather than a developing career. Indeed, our recent analysis of CDFs shows that successful
5
applicants already have an excellent record of achievement in research.
Early Career Fellows are on average in their 30’s, though there are large differences between the different streams
(biomedical, clinical, health services and public health) (Table 7C).
While Fellows can reapply and be reappointed to the NHMRC Research Fellowships levels, this means that the
achievements of Fellows at this level tend to grow and grow, making it difficult for new-comers.
Some figures are given at Figure 1 on the numbers of times existing fellows have been reappointed at the same
level.
Turnover in the NHMRC Fellowship schemes would increase if it was a requirement that Fellows needed to be
promoted to the next Fellowship level (e.g. SRFB to PRF, PRF to SPRF) of the scheme when they sought a
renewal of their Fellowship. In other words, the proposal would be that Fellows could hold a fellowship at each
level only once. This would still mean that Fellows could have an NHMRC Research Fellowship for up to 20 years
(or longer if the duration were increased – see below).
Question 2: To increase the turnover of NHMRC Research Fellows, should these schemes be seen as ‘up
and out schemes’, whereby Fellows wishing to reapply can only do so at a higher level?
Please provide your comments via the Current and Emerging Issues - NHMRC Fellowship Schemes page in the
NHMRC consultation portal (http://consultations.nhmrc.gov.au) . Please select Question 2 from the drop-down
menu to provide your comments.
Taken together, there are seven levels in total within the ECF, CDF and NHMRC Research Fellowships schemes;
one at Early Career, two levels at Career Development and four levels in the NHMRC Research Fellowship
scheme. The current structure appears to encompass a life-time career ladder. However in reality the “pyramid
shape” of the number appointed at each level means that the fellowship path will only ever be available to a small
number of researchers.
5
See A Guide for researchers applying for Career Development Fellowships at: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants-funding/apply-funding/careerdevelopment-fellowships
Page 4
Question 3: Are there too many Fellowship levels? Does this structure impede the career progression of
rapidly rising stars in health and medical research?
Please provide your comments via the Current and Emerging Issues - NHMRC Fellowship Schemes page in the
NHMRC consultation portal (http://consultations.nhmrc.gov.au) . Please select Question 3 from the drop-down
menu to provide your comments.
There has been much discussion in recent years around the desirability of longer term grants to provide more
certainty to researchers, especially younger and emerging researchers, with the hypothesis that this would also
allow them to decide on higher risk research projects.
Question 4: Taking into account that awarding longer grants means fewer grants overall in steady state
funding, should NHMRC extend the duration of Early Career Fellowships to more than four years? Should
the Career Development Fellowship be extended beyond 5 years to, say, seven or ten years?
Please provide your comments via the Current and Emerging Issues - NHMRC Fellowship Schemes page in the
NHMRC consultation portal (http://consultations.nhmrc.gov.au) . Please select Question 4 from the drop-down
menu to provide your comments.
Issue 3: Should there be a stronger strategic approach to
granting Fellowships?
Priority Fellowships
NHMRC must always base its decision-making on excellence and this is the primary basis of the current schemes.
However, in the last decade, NHMRC has also moved towards a more strategic approach overall in its funding,
with the introduction of streams of biomedical, clinical and population health into its Early Career and Career
Development Fellowships. This is in recognition of the breadth of research needed to tackle the full breadth of
health research questions.
As well, NHMRC Practitioner Fellowships are available for people working in the health system and working in
research concomitantly. Now some of Australia’s most successful and eminent researchers are Practitioner
Fellows. Translating Research Into Practice (TRIP) Fellowships are translational early career fellowships.
However, more could be done.
For example, many urge NHMRC to establish special fellowships in areas of need such as bio- and health
informatics and statistics, or for NHMRC to build capacity in particular areas of health. Governments have chosen
mental health and dementia for particular focus in recent years.
Women leave full-time NHMRC Fellowships as their careers progress, with over 63% of ECF applicants being
women, falling to 53% for SRF and just 11% for SPRF in 2014. The proportion of women Chief Investigators on
Project Grants awarded in 2014 was 34%. NHMRC has recently introduced a number of changes with the aim of
6 7
better support for women applicants, but the loss of so many women to research is very concerning.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders remain highly underrepresented in health and medical research. Again,
though NHMRC has focussed on this issue, there is much to be done to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait
8
Islander researchers are more fully represented in our Fellowship schemes.
6
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/research/women-health-science
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/research/women_in_science/table_3_part_time_fellowship_outcomes_gender_141205.pdf
8
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/health-topics/indigenous-health
7
Page 5
Question 5: Should NHMRC identify particular areas that require capacity building for the future and
maintain support for those areas for long enough time to make a difference? What else should be done to
support women and increase participation and success by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
researchers?
Please provide your comments via the Current and Emerging Issues - NHMRC Fellowship Schemes page in the
NHMRC consultation portal (http://consultations.nhmrc.gov.au) . Please select Question5 from the drop-down
menu to provide your comments.
Flexibility
More and more, researchers may wish to have a “non-linear” career, spending time in other sectors (i.e. industry,
public service) and then wanting to return to research. In clinical and public health research in particular, this
accounts for some of the increased age profile mentioned above.
Fellowship schemes should be able to support people from a variety of backgrounds.
These changing patterns challenge NHMRC’s funding rules for Early Career and Career Development Fellowships
which (for good reason) specify the number of years post-PhD for eligibility to the various fellowship schemes.
Without eligibility rules related to total research experience, it is difficult for peer reviewers to judge achievements
comparatively in applications for fellowships (e.g. at an extreme, a Level D academic at the top of their career
could apply for a Career Development Fellowship unless some eligibility rules were in place).
Question 6: Is there a better solution to encouraging diversity in careers than those based on years postPhD?
Please provide your comments via the Current and Emerging Issues - NHMRC Fellowship Schemes page in the
NHMRC consultation portal (http://consultations.nhmrc.gov.au) . Please select Question 6 from the drop-down
menu to provide your comments.
Issue 4: Responsibilities of employing institutions and the
health and medical research sector
Although NHMRC provides by far the largest support for health and medical research fellowships in Australia, we
do not employ these Fellows.
This raises important issues around security of employment for many researchers and the responsibilities of an
institution when it takes on the employment of a researcher.
Researchers employed by research institutions with fellowships support from NHMRC, unlike those employed to
also teach or provide health care, are understandably concerned about security of employment.
NHMRC runs competitive fellowships schemes that assess applicants each year based on merit. The researchers
are employees of Universities, Medical Research Institutes, hospitals and government institutions. NHMRC cannot
provide secure employment tenure – employment conditions are the responsibility of the employing institution. If
the institution cannot provide funding for applicants who are unable to gain an NHMRC Research Fellowship, say,
at the end of a Career Development Fellowship, their employment may cease abruptly (in this case after perhaps a
decade or more in research).
NHMRC’s Research Committee has discussed whether institutions should be required to guarantee applicants for
NHMRC Fellowships more security; say an extra year for unsuccessful applicants.
Page 6
Question 7: Should employing institutions be expected to provide more certainty to their employees than
now?
Question 8: Would this be achieved if NHMRC required institutions to commit to one or more years of
ongoing support for researchers exiting from NHMRC Fellowships?
Question 9: Should this be restricted to Early Career and Career Development Fellows?
Please provide your comments via the Current and Emerging Issues - NHMRC Fellowship Schemes page in the
NHMRC consultation portal (http://consultations.nhmrc.gov.au) . Please select Questions 7-9 from the drop-down
menu to provide your comments.
“It’s now time to better plan and act to ensure that the country has the researchers it
needs for the future. Everyone has a stake in this discussion; research institutions,
public and private sector employers, the taxpayers of Australia, the entire
community. It would be great if the discussion was led actively, and not defensively,
by researchers themselves. Change will come; researchers have an inherent
interest in leading and shaping the changes.” Professor Warwick Anderson
Page 7
Attachment A
Table 1: Medical Research Endowment Account (MREA) Budget Appropriations – Source 2014–15 Portfolio Budget Statements*
Million
$1,000
$847
$853
$800
$856
$746
$836
$837
$703
$644
$715
$689
$600
$618
$463
$415
$400
$333
$437
$413
$263
$200
$185
$0
PBS Forward Years
*includes projected Government investment into MREA
+
the increase in appropriation in 2006-2007 is due to a one-off increase in funds to support the Australia Fellowships scheme
Page 8
+
Table 2: Trend in number of applications for NHMRC Career Development and Early Career Fellowships (2005 to 2014)
FUNDING SCHEME
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Career Development
Fellowships
222
184
349
406
434
428
356
345
308
419
Early Career
Fellowships
377
411
443
433
393
433
391
463
516
550
Total
599
595
792
839
827
861
747
808
824
969
Table 3: Total number of NHMRC Fellowships Supported in 2014
FELLOWSHIPS SUPPORTED IN 2014
Fellowship Level
Total Number
Senior Principal Research Fellowships
99
Principal Research Fellowships
97
Senior Research Fellowship B
108
Senior Research Fellowship A
129
Career Development Fellowships
256
Early Career Fellowships
600
TRANSLATIONAL FELLOWSHIPS SUPPORTED IN 2014
Fellowship Level
Total Number
Practitioner Fellowships 2
38
Practitioner Fellowships 1
44
Translating Research into Practice (TRIP)
12
Page 9
Table 4: Projected modelling of grant numbers
Table 4 models a scenario of the impact of the budget plateau phase on reducing the number of Project Grants if the allocation of MREA funding continues into
the future. Table 4A shows the predicted number of Project Grants based on the 2014 level of funding to 5 year Project Grants (25%) continuing to 2020. Table 4B
shows modelling of all Project Grants moving to 5 years. In reality the actual number of 5-year Project Grants will likely be between these two predictions.
4A.
Based on 2014 proportions: 25% of Project Grants funding is committed to 5-year grants
NHMRC Project Grants
Completed or expected
commitments on Project grants
Number of grants made/expected to
be made
Funded rate
$m
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
$357
$383
$415
$455
$458
$420
$420
2015* 2016* 2017* 2018* 2019* 2020*
# of
686
685
756
771
731
646
553
grants
%
26.5% 22.8% 23.4% 22.9% 20.5% 16.9% 14.9%
$420
$420
$420
$420
$420
$420
527
502
478
455
434
412
13.3%
11.9%
10.5%
9.4%
8.4%
7.4%
* Notes:
1. Based on the 2014 proportion of funding committed to 5-year Project Grants (25%).
2. Assumes flat MREA funding, e.g. no anticipated MRFF distributions are anticipated in this forecast. No allocations from the 'Boosting Dementia Research' initiative have been inc
3. Growth in application numbers of 7% p.a. The assumption of 7% p.a. growth in applications used for the modelling of Project Grants funded rates is the Compound An
(CAGR) over the last 10 years, including the 2014 application round. Though there are signs that this may be slowing in the last few years, the long-term growth rate s
Growth in average grant size of 5% p.a. A component of this 5% will account for any future increases of Personnel Support Package amounts.
4B.
Mandated 5 year grant scenario: Proportion of funding committed to 5-year Project
Grants grows to 100% in 2016
NHMRC Project Grants
Completed or expected commitments
on Project grants
number of grants made/expected to be
made
Funded rate
‡
$m
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015‡
2016‡
2017‡
2018‡
2019‡
2020‡
$357
$383
$415
$455
$458
$420
$420
$420
$420
$420
$420
$420
$420
260
248
236
225
214
6.1%
5.5%
4.9%
4.3%
3.9%
# of
686
685
756
771
731
646
553
442
grants
%
26.5% 22.8% 23.4% 22.9% 20.5% 16.9% 14.9% 11.2%
Notes:
1. Assumes that the proportion of funding committed to 5-year Project Grants grows from the 25% observed in the 2014 application round to 50% in 2015 and 100% in 2
2. Assumes flat MREA funding, e.g. no anticipated MRFF distributions are anticipated in this forecast. No allocations from the 'Boosting Dementia Research' initiative have been in
3. Growth in application numbers of 7% p.a. The assumption of 7% p.a. growth in applications used for the modelling of Project Grants funded rates is the Compound An
(CAGR) over the last 10 years, including the 2014 application round. Though there are signs that this may be slowing in the last few years, the long-term growth rate s
Growth in average grant size of 5% p.a. A component of this 5% will account for any future increases of Personnel Support Package amounts.
Page 10
The question arises whether NHMRC should consider moving MREA funds from fellowship support schemes into research support schemes to address this
imbalance. The number of new Project Grants is likely to continue to decline in future as indicated in Tables 4A and 4B above. The possibility may arise of there
being an imbalance between fellowships and research grants. Table 5 shows modelling of the numbers of new Project Grants vs Fellowships awarded each year
to 2020, based on current budget approaches.
Table 5A: Ratio of Project Grants per Fellowship Based of Number of Grants Awarded Each Year*
Funding type
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
502
286
478
282
455
277
434
273
412
269
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.5
756
771
731
646
553
Project Grants Awarded
527
Fellowships Awarded
304
333
307
306
296
290
Ratio of Project Grants per
2.5
2.3
2.4
2.1
1.9
1.8
Fellowship
* Based on the 2014 proportion of Project Grants committed to 5 year grants as shown in Table 4A above.
Table 5B: Ratio of Project Grants per Fellowship Based of Number of Grants Active in Each Year i
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Number of Active Project Grants
2042
2143
2252
2348
2232
2056
1869
1727
1744
1687
1605
Number of Active Fellowships
1301
1337
1406
1444
1469
1469
1392
1369
1299
1245
1182
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
Funding type
Ratio of Project Grants per
Fellowship
As highlighted in Table 6, 3,733 Chief Investigator researchers with NHMRC grants in 2014 do not receive their salaries through NHMRC funding but are employed
by Universities, hospitals, Medical Research Institutes or other sectors. Their career progression and work at their employing institution is also influenced by
being research active and therefore the proportion of investment in NHMRC Fellowships vs Project Grants affects Australian health and medical research broadly.
Solutions are sought on how NHMRC should address the challenges of these current funding pressures.
Page 11
Page 12
Table 6: Total number of individuals supported by NHMRC in 2014 by salary source
Group
Category
Fellows
Chief Investigators
with NHMRC
Fellowship or PSP
support
PSPs
Chief Investigators
without NHMRC
Fellowship or PSP
support
NHMRC grants but not
as Chief Investigators
Without
Salary
Salary Type
Senior Principal Research Fellowships
Principal Research Fellowships
Senior Research Fellowships
Practitioner Fellowships 2
Practitioner Fellowships 1
Career Development Fellowships 2
Career Development Fellowships 1
Early Career Fellowships
Sub-total Fellowship Support
PSP 5
PSP 4
PSP 3
PSP 2
PSP 1
Sub-total Research Support Grants
Total
99
97
237
38
44
85
171
600
1,371
283
315
58
4
3
663
Sub-total Chief Investigator with Salary
2,034
No NHMRC Salary
3,733
Sub-total without Salary
Chief Investigator Total
PSP 5
PSP 4
PSPs
PSP 3
PSP 2
PSP 1
Sub-total
Without No NHMRC Salary
Salary
Sub-total
Non-Chief Investigator Total
Grand-total
3,733
5,767 9
111
1,187
2,657
1,529
590
6,074 10
6,514 11
6,514
12,588
18,355
9
Includes all named Chief Investigators who received funding from NHMRC in 2014
Includes all non-Chief Investigator personnel listed on an NHMRC grant budget (post-peer review) who received funding from NHMRC in
2014. These individuals are not necessarily named on the grant and therefore there may be some overlap in these individuals.
11
Includes all researchers listed on a funded NHMRC grant in 2014 who are not Chief Investigators or salary supported personnel. Most of
these individuals are named Associate Investigators.
10
Page 13
Table 7A: Profile of total NHMRC salary supported Chief Investigators in 2014 (by age in 2014)
Salary level
Senior Principal Research Fellow
Principal Research Fellow
Senior Research Fellow
Practitioner Fellow 2
Practitioner Fellow 1
Career Development Fellow 2
Career Development Fellow 1
Early Career Fellow
Chief Investigator - PSP5
Chief Investigator – PSP4
Chief Investigator – PSP3
Chief Investigator – PSP2
Chief Investigator – PSP1
TOTAL
# Chief Investigators
99
97
237
38
44
85
171
600
283
315
58
4
3
2034
MIN
43
39
36
46
43
35
31
26
34
29
30
40
41
26
AGE
MAX
74
76
74
66
67
63
58
60
71
68
64
54
64
76
AVG
58
55
51
56
53
45
40
37
49
41
42
47
49
48
Table 7B: Age profile at initial appointment to each level of Research Fellowship 2010 to 2014**
Fellowship Level
Senior Principal Research Fellowship
Principal Research Fellowship
Senior Research Fellowship B
Senior Research Fellowship A
Total
MIN
MAX
AVG
41
37
33
35
33
64
72
62
60
72
52
49
48
46
49
**Total figures based on appointment types 'Promotion out of Synchrony' &
'Reapplication with Promotion' for SPRF, PRF & SRFB as well as 'Initial Application' for SRF
(General) and SRFA.
Table 7C: Comparison of Age Range of NHMRC supported Early Career Fellow in 2014 by Broad Research
Area
BROAD RESEARCH AREA
Basic Science
Clinical Medicine and Science
Health Services Research
Public Health
Grand Total
MIN MAX AVG
26
54
34
28
60
39
31
57
41
27
60
39
26
60
37
Page 14
Figure 1: NHMRC Research Fellowship Reappointments
Proportion of fellows reapplying in SRF, PRF and SPRF schemes (cohort from 2002 to 2013)
60%
50%
40%
Fellowship held once
30%
Reapplied and fellowship
held twice
Reapplied and fellowship
held thrice
20%
10%
0%
Percentage of SRF A Percentage of SRF B Percentage of PRF
reapplying
reapplying
reapplying
i
Percentage of SPRF
reapplying
Table 5B was added to the consultation paper on 2 April 2015.
Page 15