Funding Landscape in Germany: The Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation, DFG)

The mission of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, as defined in the first article of its statutes, is to serve all branches of science and the humanities by funding research projects and facilitating cooperation among researchers. It devotes particular attention to the education and advancement of young researchers and promotes equality between men and women in the scientific and academic communities. 

 

The DFG advises parliaments and public authorities on scientific matters and fosters relations with the private sector and between scientists and academics at home and abroad. This mission corresponds with the DFG's strategic orientation towards interdisciplinarity and networking, promoting young researchers and internationalization. As the self-governing body of German science and research, the DFG fulfills its central responsibility of funding research in all branches of science and the humanities.

 

Mission of the DFG
The DFG funds research at the European level on the basis of scientific competition. To this end, and to promote cross-border scientific cooperation, the DFG has established numerous bilateral and European programs. This requires sustainable networks which the DFG has been building in Europe for a long time. The European Liaison Office of the German Research Organisations (KoWi), which provides information and advice on EU funding opportunities for scientists and scientific organisations, is particularly important in this respect. It is supported by the DFG as a central research facility.
The honorary members of the review boards and the scientific members of its statutory bodies are elected by the research community. Scientists and academics hold a majority on all decision-making bodies. The DFG is an association under private law, just as it was when it was first founded in 1920 as the Notgemeinschaft der Deutschen Wissenschaft, the legal predecessor to the present-day organization. The fact that Germany's federal and state governments now provide the DFG with an annual budget of over 2 billion Euro to fund research in all disciplines clearly shows the trust they place in the principle of self-government in science and research.
To carry out its mission the DFG receives budgetary resources from the federal government (67 %) and the 16 states (32 %) as well as from EU funds and private benefactors. The Donors' Association for the Promotion of Sciences and Humanities in Germany also provides an annual financial contribution to the DFG. Recognizing that modern research requires medium-term planning security, the federal and state governments have continually increased the DFG budget over recent years.

Routes to Scientific Independence
The promotion of young researchers is recognized as a priority task in the statutes of the DFG. Approximately two-thirds of all program funding is used to pay fellowships and the salaries of research assistants. On average, the DFG funds 20,000 project staff every year, the majority of whom are either working towards their doctorate or in the postdoctoral phase.
The DFG offers young scientists and academics suitable funding opportunities at every stage of their postgraduate research career. These support measures are modular in structure and thus form a "funding chain", which extends over the entire qualification period from completion of a university degree to a professorial appointment.

Research Funding by the DFG
The freedom of science and research, which is essential to the work of the DFG, is accompanied by the equally important element of competition between researchers and between their institutions. Each research funding proposal passes through a peer review process to determine its quality. The DFG currently funds approximately 22,000 research projects each year. These come from all areas of science and the humanities and involve a variety of programs. There are no priorities funding areas but rather the science driven process of a bottom-up proposal process.
Essentially, the DFG offers two forms of research funding: first, the funding of individual research projects, and second, of coordinated, collaborative research programs which serve to build capacities at host institutions, i.e. the universities. Certain features apply to all programs: Funding in all programs is granted solely on the basis of proposals sent to the DFG. Responsibility for the proposed project and its subsequent realization rests solely with the project leader.
In the review process, firstly, honorary peer reviewers assess all the proposals which the DFG receives to determine whether they meet the funding criteria. In all programs, it is the reviewers' decision that forms the basis for the funding decision. The DFG's Head Office selects the reviewers. The final evaluation and quality assurance of the proposal is done by a member of the review board. The key criteria in all funding decisions are the applicants' qualifications and the scientific quality and degree of originality of the projects submitted.

Taking all the programmes together, more than 17 000 proposals were evaluated by 12 400 reviewers - around 2 700 of whom came from abroad. A positive decision was reached in ~10 200 cases. Source: DFG

Thus, the DFG review boards are an important body in the decision-making process on DFG grants. Their members not only evaluate grant proposals according to scientific criteria, but advise the DFG on strategic issues, suggest innovations in the funding system, and are especially committed to early-career support for researchers. In November 2011, the DFG holds new elections to select volunteer scientists and academics to serve on its review boards. All scientists, who have completed a doctorate and conduct academic research, during the election period, at a German institution that is an established DFG voting centre, are eligible to vote in the review board election.
The final funding decisions are made by either the Joint Committee or the Grants Committees which it appoints. Researchers and representatives of the federal and state governments serve on these committees.
 

Further Reading: www.dfg.de/en/dfg_profile

By Cornelia Pretzer, DFG Public Relations
This article originally appeared 2011 in CNS Volume 4, Issue 4, Funding in Science
 

Writing Successful Grant Applications

A conversation with Dr. Christina Schütte on practical advice, pitfalls and what makes a successful grant.

MC: Christina Schütte, you have been advising many researchers and laboratories in their search for funding over the past 7 years. You have also participated in the evaluation of grant applications for various funding agencies. What do you think makes a successful grant application?
CS: The first thing that comes to mind is clear aims. There is no such thing as a successful scientific project that does not know where it is going. Every project must have a clear topic and a detailed plan for its execution. The topic should be very specific and clearly limited. One cannot solve all questions using every available method in one project. The execution of the project should be clearly stated and planned. Mentioning what could go wrong and how problems will be addressed is also a plus. Accessibility is also extremely important. Careful attention should be paid to the fact that reviewers are possibly not absolute specialists. Too specific scientific jargon should be avoided and the project should be well integrated in the current socio-economic context.

A large part of your activity also consists of training researchers in grant writing. Could you reveal to us a couple of your tips? Do you have specific guidelines while writing a grant application?
It is important to understand the process of grant application and evaluation as a whole. My first advice is always to start by reading the guidelines for applicants and those given to the reviewers, if they are provided. It is important to imagine what one would expect as a reviewer of the project. The next step is to clearly define your aims and make an outline. Then comes the hard work: writing. Finally, it is always advisable to have others read your work, ideally someone who is not directly from your field: a colleague from the department or a fellow student is always a good person to ask.

Christina Schütte obtained a PhD in Biochemistry at the University of Bonn in 1999. She followed this up with a postdoctoral training in the Department of Neurobiology at the Max Plank Institute for Biophysical chemistry in Göttingen from 2000 to 2003. In 2004, she founded ProSciencia with her associate Hans-Wilhelm Berghoff in order to help individuals, laboratories and companies in getting funds and managing projects.

What are the major pitfalls when writing a grant application?
I can see two major caveats often found in many applications: On the one hand, we have projects that are too vague, that try to tackle big questions but fail to define a clear plan. This type of mistake is often found in projects written by early career applicants. Another pitfall is to get too technical, use jargon and fail to capture the attention of the reader with an easily understandable problem. The lack of structure in the text is also clearly a killer for any application. There is nothing more difficult to read than long blocks of text over pages of technical descriptions.
Applicants often neglect skills they sometimes do not even realize they have. Some funding programs encourage applicants to provide details about themselves, like describing their leadership qualities. Applicants, in particular at the early stage of their career, often disregard this step. This is a mistake.

Do you know what applicants tend to find difficult while writing their application?
Writing is hard work and is often underestimated. What I can see in my classes is that first-time applicants in particular have a hard time clearly writing down their plans. Lots of them also tend to underestimate the time required to write their applications and achieve certain goals.

Prosciencia is a consulting company providing communication services to companies, scientists, researchers and start-ups of the technological sector. Today, about half of their activity is centred on training workshops. For instance, Prosciencia provides four highly attended two-days training sessions at Humboldt Graduate School per year. Contact information can be found at http://www.prosciencia.eu

What are the odds for a PhD student or a postdoc to find their own funding solution in Germany?
I could not answer this question precisely, but information is generally available on funding agencies website. I know for example that the DFG's standard "Sachbeihilfe" has been known to fund up to 50 % of applicants. After the recent crisis, Germany has been betting on research and funding for basic research has increased. This situation has made Germany a very attractive country, as the situation in neighbouring countries tends to be much harder.
The research policy in Germany can nowadays be considered a bottom-up approach. It is relatively easy to start a project on any topic, provided one is able to propose a clear plan.

In addition to this bottom-up approach you mentioned, do general science policies decide on what type of research and which science field is funded?
Of course, like in most countries, research policies are decided by politics. These decisions are taken through very long processes whereby expert researchers are regularly consulted about the "hot topics" in their field. Ministries and foundations are always listening to the experts (i.e. researchers) and make calls for projects in particularly promising fields. Researchers can actively participate in these processes by signing up to news services, for example, at the Community Research and Development Information Service (CORDIS) or at the national contact points (NCP) for EU funding. (mc)
 
More information:
"Sachbeihilfe": http://www.dfg.de/foerderung/programme/einzelfoerderung/sachbeihilfe/index.html
CORDIS: http://cordis.europa.eu/news/home_en.html

Interview by Maximilien Chaumon,
This article originally appeared 2011 in CNS Volume 4, Issue 4, Funding in Science