What's required in my application?
The following information will be requested on the submission form:
- Project title
- Category (UG - PG/CPD - EDI)
- Name, job title and institution/organisation of the Primary Investigator (PI)
- Name, job title and institution/organisation of all co-applicants (no more than 5 allowed)
- Specify role of the PI and each applicant in the project including %FTE commitment
- Host organisation (which will administer any award), and Administrative Contact Information (note that this person is not usually a co-applicant)
- Start date and the expected length of the proposed project in months
- Enquiry Goals (Aims, objectives, research questions etc.)
- Research Summary:
- Has this application, or part of this application, has previously been submitted to this or another organisation? If so who? Please indicate why it was unsuccessful.
- Where a previous, related application was made to this scheme, please indicate how this research application differs from the previous application
- Justification for enquiry: (total word count 3,000 words excluding references, with no more than 2 tables or graphs)
- Background and rationale
- What is the problem being addressed and why is it important?
- Detail on design and methodology, including justification of sample size, sample selection (power calculations and exclusion criteria where applicable) and analysis
- Success criteria and barriers to proposed work
- Ethics requirements and procedures
- A Gantt chart indicating a schedule for the completion of work, including the timing of key milestones and deliverables
- Projected outputs and Dissemination
- Expected Outputs of Research/Impact
- Relevant expertise and experience – please provide details of why the group is considered well qualified to do this research.
In addition, a one page CV for each applicant should be provided* highlighting relevant educational expertise and experience, plus relevant concurrent grants and details of up to 10 publications over the last five years (*in addition to the overall total 3,000 word count)
Applicants should read the Awards FAQ page as it may help with queries about their submission
Research management arrangements
- The finance section (200 words maximum in addition to the overall total 3,000 word count) should provide a detailed budget/breakdown of costs associated with undertaking the research as described in the proposal.
- Payments will be made to the contracted organisation only and the contracted organisation will be responsible for passing on any money due to their partner organisation(s).
- Appropriate sub-contracts and/or collaboration agreements must be put in place for any element of the research which is to be paid to another organisation.
- The fund will not support more than one fifth of the total amount of the application for conference attendance.
- Any equipment costs must exclude VAT.
- A representative of the sponsoring body must sign off the application.
- Please suggest three potential peer reviewers who have the relevant expertise to provide appropriate peer review for your application
- These reviewers should be independent (i.e. not have worked with you directly in the recent past) and should have no competing/conflicting interests with your application (such as being from your own institution/university). Your suggestions will be used as only one source of peer reviewers and these individuals may not be approached to undertake a review.
Applications will be assessed against the following criteria:
- Evidence that the project links directly with GMC education priorities
- Clarity as to the aims and objectives of the work
- Coherence between the aims and objectives, and the approach or methods used to measure and/or report outcomes
- Demonstrated outcomes/outputs for medical students, doctors, education and training programmes, including identification of key drivers for success/failure. Potential trajectory to patient benefit will also be considered as an outcome criterion.
- Targets/outcomes, and if reached/achieved
- Evaluation of process as well as outcome(s) (i.e. why it worked as well as "it worked")
- Evidence as to whether or not the work has maintained momentum, or details of how successful candidates would use the prize funding to further extend the project.
ASME particularly welcomes applicants from diverse and under-represented backgrounds.
Please click here to view the assessment form used by the assessors
Congratulations to the 2021 winners:
Winner, UG Category: Cindy Chew, Director of Imaging, Hospital Subdean, University of Glasgow with their submission: Developing an Anti-Discriminatory Curriculum: The Value and Impact of Simulation in Preparing Learners to Recognise, Respond to and be Upstanders when confronted with Harassment and Incivility.
Winner, PG Category: Yarrow Scantling-Birch,
Health Education England (HEE) Leadership & Education Fellow in Ophthalmology, Sussex Eye Hospital, Brighton wiht their submission Anatomical Three-dimensional Orbital ModelS (ATOMS) Study
View award announcement here
Congratulations to the 2020 winners:
Winner, CPD Category: Linda Jones, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Medical Education Dundee with their submission Considerations for practice: effective use of online discussion Boards
Winner Undergraduate category: Zoe Moula, Research Fellow, Medical Education Innovation & Research Centre (MEdIC), Imperial College London, with their submission Deconstructing ‘BAME’: Protecting, embracing, and promoting authenticity in medical students from Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic groups
Winner Undergraduate category: Dominic Proctor, FY1 Doctor, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust with their submission Investigating UK Medical Student Attitudes Towards Working Abroad: A Realist Evaluation
View award announcement here
Congratulations to the 2019 winners:
- Winner UG category: Dr Kathleen (Kay) Leedham-Green, Medical Education Fellow, Imperial College London, Designing for health: Evaluating an interdisciplinary learning project in collaboration with service users .
We are pleased to be able to share with you Kay’s final report on her award winning work. To view it, please click HERE
- Winner PG category: Professor Tim Dornan, Professor of Medical and Interprofessional Education, Queen’s University Belfast (QUB) Patient Advocacy for Prescribing Safety (PAPS). Using implementation science to optimise service user involvement
We are pleased to be able to share with you Tim’s final report on their award winning work. To view it, please click HERE
- Winner of the CPD Category: Dr Daniele Carrieri, Research Fellow, University fo Exeter, ‘Thriving Lessons’: Optimising strategies to promote medical students’ wellbeing.
2018 winners will be posted here soon
Congratulations to the 2017 winners:
- Winner UG category: Dr M Bartlett, Keele University Whole simulated consultations in primary and secondary care; an exploration of their impacts on final year students’ self-efficacy
- Winner PG category: Kenneth Walker, NHS Highland Process evaluation of a “take-home” laparoscopic deliberate practice programme for core surgical trainees
- Winner CPD category: Dr C Morris, Institute for Health Sciences Education, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London Life beyond workshops: building sustainable approaches to faculty development through peer observation of teaching.
Congratulations to the 2016 winners:
- Winner UG category: Susan Law, University of Dundee. To investigate and evaluate a one year immersive community based medical educational programme in rural Scotland
- Winner PG category: Stephanie E Wells, Cardiff University. Roles Reversed: FY1s experiences of the Student Assistantship as Supervisors
- Winner CPD category: Jo Hart & Lucie Byrne-Davis, Manchester Medical School. Developing a coding framework to understand the Behaviour Change Techniques used in CPD
Congratulations to the 2015 winners:
- Winner CPD category: Mandy Moffat, Aberdeen. Educational development in context: Developing a regional community of practice (CoP) in Psychiatry
- Winner PG category: Jeremy Brown, Edge Hill University. An investigation into Specialty Trainee engagement with e-learning in Health Education North West
- Winner UG category: Janet Lefroy, Keele University. Authentic UG placements in GP: a recruiting force for generalists? A realist evaluation of how the UG learning environment influences career choices.
Read all the award guideline and read the FAQs if you have general award questions and click on the Apply Now buttons on this page.