General provisions.

When submitting materials containing data that may become the subject of copyright to the Foundation, including when submitting applications and reports on projects and other related documents, the project manager presenting the materials must ensure that copyright was not violated during their creation and other rights of third parties and there is consent of the copyright holders for their submission to the Foundation and their use by the Foundation for conducting an examination and for publishing the results of the study.

All types of support for fundamental scientific research are provided by the Foundation on a competitive basis, regardless of age, academic title, academic degree or position held by the scientist, as well as the departmental affiliation of the scientific organization with which the scientist has an employment relationship.

A scientist can participate as a leader in each type of competition in several areas of competitive activity. For example, be simultaneously the manager of one project “a” and one project “p_a” (see Table 1).

These restrictions do not apply to competitions of type “g”.

A scientist can also participate as a performer in each type of competition in several areas of competitive activity. For example, to be simultaneously the executor of one project “a” and one project “p_a”. Participation as a performer in a project led by an administratively subordinate person is prohibited.

The condition for the Foundation to provide financial support is the obligation of scientists to make research results public domain, publishing them without fail, including in Russian publications. When publishing any scientific work created as a result of research within the framework of a project financed by the Foundation, the authors are required to refer to the received grant indicating its number. A prerequisite is also the consent of the authors to the publication by the Foundation of an abstract on the supported project and scientific reports (in printed and in electronic format).

The funds allocated by the Foundation are used in accordance with the approved “List of types of expenses for the implementation of RFBR projects”, which is an annex to the agreement “Fund – Manager – Organization” and posted on the RFBR website.

The following are not allowed to participate in the competition:

– projects not designed according to the rules;

– projects for publishing scientific works without a manuscript or trial translation;

– projects submitted by fax, by e-mail or on electronic media;

– projects received by the Fund after the announced deadline.

Also, research projects whose name and content completely coincide with the name and content of any planned topic carried out in the organization and financed from the federal budget are not allowed for the competition (responsibility for compliance with this condition rests with the project manager). In case of project support, you must receive registration number in the center information technologies and organ systems executive power(CITiS).

It is prohibited to submit the same initiative project simultaneously to different RFBR competitions (for example, to “a” and “m_a”). A project supported through any competition is prohibited from being submitted to any competitions in the future.

Materials submitted to the competition will not be returned (except for manuscripts, which authors must pick up from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research within three months after approval of the results of the competition for projects to publish scientific works). Substitutions of pages and changes in the text of the submitted project are not allowed.

When submitting applications, double-sided printing is allowed.

The Foundation notifies the project manager of receipt of a printed copy of the project, of non-admission to the competition and of the results of the competition through the Grant-Express system (on the “Your Projects” page in the “Status” field).

Expertise. All applications accepted for the competition undergo a multi-stage independent examination. Information about the content of projects and the examination is strictly confidential. In accordance with the rules of the Foundation, experts and employees do not have the right to disclose it.

Conditions for the implementation of supported projects. The project is financed through an organization specified by the project manager (F). This must be an organization - the place of work of the manager (P) or the organization in which the work on the project is carried out (K). Funding through other organizations is not permitted. The amount and terms of financing are communicated to the managers of projects and organizations (in a package of documents attached to the agreement “Fund – Manager – Organization”).

If circumstances arise that prevent the project manager from performing his functions, the Fund considers the feasibility and conditions for continuing to finance the work on this project. The decision to replace the project manager is made by the Foundation Council Bureau based on the conclusion of the relevant expert council.

The project manager is obliged to immediately inform the Foundation about changes in the conditions of the project, including violations related to the expenditure of funds allocated by the Foundation.

A change of the organization through which the project is financed is possible upon the proposal of the project manager in situations where: the organization’s management does not comply with the conditions of the Fund or interferes with the implementation of the project; The project manager (or team) has changed their place of work.

Relations between the parties are governed by the agreement “Fund – Manager – Organization”, which is legal document, establishing the mutual responsibility of the parties for the entire period of the project.

In accordance with the agreement, the PROJECT MANAGER IS RESPONSIBLE:

1. Strictly within the deadlines specified by the Fund, draw up an estimate of the costs of implementing the project within the planned amount of funding and submit it for approval to the Fund.

2. Ensure the project is completed in accordance with the stated program and deadlines.

3. Ensure the targeted use of funds allocated for the project in strict accordance with the rules of the Fund and the approved cost estimate within the limits of the annual funding of the project.

4. Strictly in deadlines submit scientific and financial reports to the Foundation on the implementation of the project or its individual stages.

5. When publishing any scientific work created as a result of research within the framework of a project financed by the Foundation, refer to the received grant indicating its number.

6. If it is impossible to obtain the expected results and/or it is identified that it is inappropriate (impossible) to continue the work, immediately inform the Foundation about this and submit final scientific and financial reports on the project.

7. Immediately inform the Foundation in cases where the project manager cannot for any reason (long-term - more than three months - business trip, serious illness, etc.) fulfill his duties.

THE PROJECT MANAGER HAS THE RIGHT:

1. Spend grant funds in accordance with the cost estimate approved by the Foundation and with regulatory documents RFBR.

2. Adjust the program research work and cost estimates within the framework of the declared tasks and goals of the competitive project.

3. Adjust the list of co-executing organizations.

4. Change the composition of the performers of the competition project, notifying the Foundation about this in a report.

5. Use equipment purchased with grant funds as a priority to implement the project program throughout the entire duration of the project.

6. Save the received grant and equipment, instruments and durable items purchased with funds from the FUND (including software and materials) in case of transfer to another place of work under the following conditions:

a) work on the competitive project announced and financed by the grant will continue;

b) the FUND will be notified of the transfer to another place of work by a corresponding letter within a month from the date of transfer;

c) the expert council in the relevant field of knowledge agrees with the change in the organization of project financing;

d) the rules defined for this case will be followed.

The manager also undertakes to documentally inform the Foundation about the results of work on the project that have signs of patentability, commercial use or defense (dual) use, within two months from the date of completion of work on the project.

In case of obtaining the results of scientific and technical activities (RSTD), the manager is obliged, within the framework of the agreement “Fund – Manager – Organization”, to take into account these results in accordance with current legislation.

When submitting a project to a competition, the manager determines the deadline for its completion, which cannot be subsequently extended. The decision to continue financing the project for the next year (within the specified implementation period) is made by the Foundation on the basis of an expert review of annual scientific and financial reports. Timely submission of annual and final reports by the project manager (including when early completion project) – required condition Fonda. In the event of a negative expert opinion on the report, financing of the project may be terminated early based on a decision of the Foundation Council upon the recommendation of the expert council. The decision of the Foundation Board is final. Claims based on the results of review of reports will not be accepted.

When examining grant applications to Russian foundations for the support of basic science, I drew attention to repeated errors in the preparation of such projects, which often lead to their loss in the competition. The small explanations I prepared from my own experience, of course, will not generate new scientific ideas, but they will help put them in a form that will be better accepted by foundation experts.

It so happened that over the past 2-3 years I have reviewed about one hundred and fifty applications for grants from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and the Russian Science Foundation - the two main Russian foundations for supporting basic research in the field of natural sciences. For the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, while working on scientific councils for some competitions, I also reviewed abstracts of more than 300 applications for grants in fundamental medicine. The foundation system is not without its drawbacks, however, if you work in Russia, in a state scientific institution, receiving a grant from these foundations is almost the only way to gain relative independence and carry out the research that you yourself have in mind.

Why am I preparing this text? Despite numerous explanations from the participants in the process, applications submitted by young (and not so young) researchers contain repeated errors that force experts to reduce their scores on individual characteristics applications. As a result, potential winners with fairly bright ideas, but insufficiently developed applications, lose out to the competition to simpler, sometimes trivial in thought, but correctly designed projects.

In this article, I will share my experience reviewing applications in the biological and medical sciences. I hope my suggestions will help researchers improve their applications and compete more successfully in the grant battlefield. I note that I speak unofficially, without connection with the position of other reviewers and representatives of funds. I myself am not very successful in winning grants - almost a shoemaker without boots - nevertheless, I will share my feelings from the other bank of this rather sluggish grant river.

How are grants evaluated?

First, the terms of the competition are determined. They include thematic, financial (that is, the amount of money for the project) and sometimes age restrictions, requirements for the composition of teams, and the like. IN international projects requirements for foreign teams are added. Now money is issued “bilaterally” - the corresponding parts of the joint application are independently financed by Russian and foreign funds.

Before the established deadline, projects are submitted to the established online application system, and their paper versions are sent to the funds. At the first stage, a very small part of applications are withdrawn on formal grounds - for example, due to errors in paperwork. Then, a council pre-appointed by the foundation for a specific competition or an initiative group allocated from it begins to select experts to evaluate applications. Experts are selected semi-automatically from a list of candidates by topic area (there are special classifiers with codes) and by keywords specified by the authors of the application. Potential reviewers - usually from two to five per application, depending on the competition - are sent a request for access to materials in a special examination system. If the expert agrees to evaluate the project, he must do so within a certain time. The examination is paid, but quite modestly, so for those who do it, it is akin to a social burden.

For each application, the expert fills out a questionnaire developed by the foundation, which gives the sum of points, and at the end writes a review provided to the authors of the application, and also rates the project as a whole, approximately on a school four-point scale.

When an examination has been carried out on all projects submitted to the competition, the above-mentioned - usually thematic, that is, only in biology, chemistry, etc. - council is assembled to make a final decision. Its members, as a rule, themselves act as the most active experts. Since there are usually many applications, and there is only one decisive meeting, the council usually focuses on a pre-assessed passing score obtained by averaging the examination results. The passing score is obviously determined by the size of the grant and the total budget that the foundation is willing to spend on this competition. The advice is, in fact, necessary to consider difficult cases (for example, when the assessments of experts differ widely) and then it is likely to identify a conflict of interest. In competitions, a small part of applications with a “semi-passing” score is usually formed, among which the best ones are collectively selected by the council and also supported. My practice shows that in 90% of cases, expert assessments converge very closely. The remaining cases just require the attention of council members in order to decide in real time what to do with them.

Is it worth applying?

A grant application is a lot of work, comparable to preparing a good publication. If you get it wrong, your chances are reduced. I recently submitted an application together with partners from the States and was amazed at how detailed and thorough the lit review was prepared there, and the quality of the drawings they provided.

Therefore, before starting to prepare a project, it would be good to find And the entire project, an exact idea of ​​what you want to accomplish during the project, and, of course, the time to write it. Write about what you understand and know, otherwise the experts will catch you inaccurately and reduce your scores. Sometimes researchers underestimate expertise, having become accustomed, for example, to working in departmental programs, where success often requires (usually artificially!) increasing the significance of the project, directly promising the speedy implementation of the results. If you are disingenuous, you will most likely be exposed, which you will be notified about in the review.

Of course, in scientific research you cannot be sure what result you will get in the end. But it is necessary to foresee it, at least hypothetically, for the success of the project.

Therefore, apply on the topic in which you understand better than others, do not immerse yourself in foreign, even fashionable, areas. After all, even if you win a grant, it will be very difficult to fulfill it while re-acquainting yourself with a certain topic.

Bad luck begins: abstract

An abstract, an abstract, an abstract, if you will, is what the people responsible for appointing experts read, and using information from the abstract, they select these same experts. Thematic rubricators are also important - that is, what specific field of science your project belongs to - as well as keywords. In some grant systems, they automatically determine the repertoire of possible reviewers. Things are being done in a terrible hurry, and if the abstract is not written clearly, it may end up in the hands of experts in a related field. The latter do not always fully understand the “alien” topic, they are able to overlook the merits of the project and lower its scores. And in general they will be angry because they do not understand everything. Therefore, it is very important to carefully consider these formalities and assign keywords correctly. In the project abstract you need to write about what you want to do, and leave one phrase at the beginning on the premises of the work. Otherwise, you will end up with what is described in the next section.

"Cancer is a terrible disease"

There are times in the lives of scientists when they need to convince officials of something. But officials, basically, only understand something simple or socially useful. You write that studying zinc finger protein No. 127 will cure all patients and solve health problems for the next hundred years, and you have a chance. Many researchers, having communicated with departmental programs, directly transfer their experience from them and fill out more than half of the application with discussions about the importance and necessity of the entire field. Nevertheless, the examination is carried out not by officials, but by active researchers. And if you start your text with the fact that “cancer is a terrible disease,” they start getting angry. Respect expertise. Don't explain how often a disease occurs in a population, how to treat it, etc., if you want to study the phosphorylation of some distracting kinases in one cell line.

Even a slight embellishment of the relevance of the work will not add credit points to the project’s treasury. In addition, the abstract significance of the work does not need to fill most of the abstract. Often I had to read an abstract in which only the last phrase - as a conclusion from the previous one - related to what the authors still want to do. The beginning and middle were devoted to how necessary, useful and important it is. It’s better not to - there is a special place in the application, which is roughly called “the state of affairs in this area.” True, it also needs to be supplied with information from which the essence of your project directly follows. If you wanted to study the components of an important molecular cascade associated with the development of tumors, then you need to write what is known about this cascade, and not about cancer in general, its epidemiology and social significance.

"ABCD/E gene region xyZ flanked by sites modified by the FegH protein"

The opposite situation happens - the authors of the application immediately begin to write a specialized text, abundantly supplying it with abbreviations and anglicisms, rather reminiscent of scientific jargon. However, easy-to-read, coherent text makes working with the application much easier. Dealing with the intricacies of thought, when complex sentences make up entire paragraphs, is difficult even for a specialist in your field. Specifics should not overshadow the overall intent that you reflect in your application. The severity of perception can cause criticism and a decrease in job rating.

Novelty in science - not everything is clear

Grant application forms have sections where you need to describe scientific novelty research. Install it, even in modern science, pretty hard. Small projects often add to existing knowledge, sometimes replicating the design of early research in the field. There is no need to be ashamed of this - today the results of experiments in almost all areas of the natural sciences must undergo additional confirmation in independent laboratories. This is especially true for medicine. Repeating the same tests on different populations and groups of patients is a normal practice of evidence-based medical science. When describing the background of your research and its novelty, there is no need to hide this. Let an expert evaluate your knowledge. This is better than trying to show that you are the first in everything, and there is a desert around you.

Nobel Prize for half a million rubles

Often you come across applications that are well written and planned, but completely impossible when you compare the amount of work and the amount of money given. Many grants are very modest, for example, the massive competition of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research with the letter “a” is giving out 700 thousand rubles this year. Of course, this is very small, but the upper limit of one grant is usually known in advance. Applications are being submitted where the cost of reagents alone is several times higher than the upper limit of funding! This is quite severely penalized during evaluation, even if the project is written as excellent in all other respects. After all, you can’t do research for a Nobel Prize for half a million rubles! You should also not mechanically transfer a lost application to another competition if the amount of grant funding between competitions varies greatly. The expert will notice this and reduce the points.

Another similar mistake when describing a job is a vague description of the scope of work. For example, people write that blood plasma samples from patients with such and such a disease will be compared with samples from healthy people, but they do not indicate how many patients they will involve in the study. This is a trick, because when you don’t specify anything, bribes are easy. However, the expert will not approve such a work plan. Because 10 thousand patients is a conditional article Nature, and 5 people is already a question for the project.

What should a newbie do?

When studying an application, the groundwork that its authors have is assessed. Does this mean that to receive a grant for new topic, on which this researcher has not worked before, is impossible? Of course this is not true. Of course, this will be more difficult, since points will be reduced for a small gap. But if the rest of the application is good, there is certainly a chance. In grant policy, as in many other areas, the “money to money” principle applies. That is, if a team is successful, it has a large backlog and many grants on this topic, it is easier for it to get the next ones. It is important for early career researchers to know whether they can get their first grant without a publication record. Let's just say it's more complicated. And sometimes it is directly prohibited by the terms of the competition. If they have had an internship with a research team, be it coursework or a thesis that resulted in a joint paper with their bosses, they are considered more likely to do well on their project. Therefore, experts like the presence of good publications even in the first grant application.

I've read everything, now will I win a grant?

Like any competition, the competition for grants is, in a sense, a lottery. The share of grants won from the number of applications varies in competitions known to me from 5 to 20%. This means that often very good applications do not pass the filter. Experts are people too, and they can have subjective views on certain areas within their area of ​​specialization. Hidden conflicts of interest are also common. It is important not to give up and submit the project to all available competitions to which the application you created is suitable, taking into account the expert’s comments. And if, God forbid, you find incompetence or bias in a review of a project, do not hesitate to inform the funds about it. It is impossible for us to appeal to review the results of the competition, but to complain about bad job an expert is needed. This may be noted by the relevant scientific councils and measures taken: for example, excluding this expert from the list for future competitions.

By selecting the menu item "Your projects" on the left of your personal page, you are taken to a page with a list of all RFBR projects in which you participated as a leader or performer. If there are applications with your participation that have not yet been signed or registered with the RFBR, prepared through the Intra-Grant system, then they will also be shown at the end of this list.
For each project, its number, name, year of beginning - year of ending, project status and the degree of your participation (manager or performer) are given. The "Project Status" field can take the following values:

To create a new application, you must click on the “Create” button on the page with a list of your projects.
You will be asked to choose from a list of types of competitions for which applications are currently accepted. Having selected the type of competition, you are taken to a page with a list of forms required when filling out an application for this type of competition.
When creating a new application, the system automatically inserts your personal data into Form 2 and assigns you the status of “Project Manager”. The application must be filled out only from the manager’s personal card. When filling out an application from the performer’s personal card, it will not be possible to sign the application.
Similarly, the application automatically includes information about the organization in which you work, with the status “Place of work of the project manager.” When editing an application, you can change the status, for example, assign your organization the status of “Project Financing Organization”.

The list of new application forms for each form contains the following information: form code (form number from the competition announcement), form name, comment and form status. The comment provides Additional Information, in particular about the mandatory completion of specific forms, or in what cases the form must be submitted.
The "Status" field can take the following values:
For forms that allow multiple copies (for example, information about project executors), the “Status” field provides information about the number of created forms of this type and their general status(for example, “all are checked” or “not all are checked”).
To switch to the editing mode of a specific form, you need to click on its name in the list of forms. This will open a window containing all the required fields of this form (some of them may not be required to be filled out).
After filling out the form, click the "Check" button at the end of the page. You can also exit without saving changes by clicking the "Exit" button, or save the form without reviewing it as it is currently located by clicking the "Save" button.
After clicking the "Check" button, a formal check is made to ensure that the form fields are complete and correct. If errors are found, an additional window opens with a list of errors found and the names of the fields in which errors were made. To quickly access these fields in the form editing window, you can simply click on the field name in the additional window.
After correcting the errors, click the “Check” button again. Repeat these operations until there are no more errors in filling out the form. After successfully passing the formal verification, you will again be taken to the page with a list of application forms and can continue working with other forms. In this case, the verified form receives the “Verified” status.
The order in which you fill out the forms does not matter. In addition, you can pause your work and log out of the system at any time by selecting "End session" in the menu on the left. You can log in again later and continue working.
When filling out forms containing large text fields, you can copy text prepared in advance into these fields from text editor(for example, Microsoft Word or others) via the clipboard. If you fill out such fields manually, we recommend that you periodically save the edited form by clicking on the “Save” button at the bottom of the page.
When working with forms that allow multiple instances, you first go to a page containing a list of instances of forms of this type (for example, a list of Forms 2 for performers and project managers). Using the "Create", "Edit" and "Delete" buttons on this page, you can respectively create a new blank instance of the form, edit or delete it.
You can also use the "Copy" button to open a list of your colleagues who participated in your previous projects in an additional window. By clicking on the name of the person you want to include in the new application, you will automatically create a new copy of the form, already filled out by him personal information. Similarly, you can add organizations in Form 3, but you can choose from full list organizations registered in the database.
If for any reason you decide not to submit a new application for registration, you can delete it by clicking on the “Delete” button on the page containing the list of application forms.

Once all forms have been completed and verified, i.e. have the status "Verified", you can sign the application. To do this, click on the “Sign” button on the page with a list of required forms. At the same time, your application undergoes a final check, and if no errors are found, it receives the “Signed” status. If errors are found, an additional window will open with a list of errors found and the names of the forms in which errors were made. To quickly go to editing the form, you can simply click on the form name in the additional window.
After signing, the application is submitted for registration to the scientific department of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, corresponding to the field of knowledge and type of competition specified in your application.
Once the application is signed, you will no longer be able to make changes to the application forms. If such a need arises, you must contact the relevant scientific department of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research. If the application has not yet been registered, then a department employee can remove the “Signed” status from the application.
In addition, the "Signed" status can be removed by an employee scientific department RFBR if it finds that the application is missing some essential information. In this case, you will receive an email with a request to finalize the application, and in the list of your projects the application will again appear with the status “Not signed”.
After your application is successfully registered, its status in the list of your projects will change (instead of “New Application”, “Application” will appear). After this, you need to print out the application and title page, sign them and send them to the RFBR within 5 days. To print all application forms, click on the "Application" button in the list of your projects, and then in the lower part of the left frame of the window that opens, click on the "All forms" item. From the window that opens, you can print or save the full text of your application to a file. The application cover page is printed in the same way.
Please also note that after registration, your application will have a number that is already indicated on your printed copies of the application. You can also refer to it when contacting the RFBR.

To register a report on a RFBR grant, you must go to the list of project reports by clicking on the “Reports” button on the page with a list of your projects. If reports on this project are currently being accepted, then at the bottom of the page you will find a “Create” button. By clicking on it, you will go to the list of reporting forms required by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research for submitting reports on this type of competition in a given year.
In the future, your actions in filling out forms, checking them and signing the report are similar to your actions when working with applications.
If your report contains graphs, formulas, pictures, tables, photographs and other elements necessary to adequately present the results obtained during the project, you can prepare an additional file in RTF format (for example, using Microsoft Word) or PDF (for example, using Adobe Acrobat Exchange). The following information must be included in this file:
- project number;
- Project name;
- Full name of the project manager;
- a brief summary in Russian (in accordance with Form 501);
- a brief summary of English language(according to Form 502);
- a detailed scientific report (in accordance with Form 503).
You may also include a list of scientific publications produced as part of the project work.
To submit this file, select the line "Full-text scientific report in PDF or RTF format" in the list of reporting forms. On the page that opens, click on the "Browse.." button next to the "File location" field and find the desired file on your computer. Then click the "Submit" button at the end of the page. After this, you need to wait for the system to confirm that the download was successful. This may take some time depending on the size of your file and connection speed.
You can only attach one file per project. If the file has already been uploaded, you can replace it by submitting a new file.
After a successful download, you can view the file for verification by clicking on the "View" button on the same page.

The report can be printed at any time, including before signing or registering the report. To do this, use the "Print" button in the list of project reports. When you click on it, two windows open, in one of which all completed forms for the report are displayed, and in the other - the finished title page. You need to send to the RFBR forms printed after signing the report (they must have the “Signed” label on them), in two copies.
Before sending the printed version to the RFBR, you need to put all the necessary signatures (of the project manager, its participants, the chief accountant of the organization) and seals on the title page and after the relevant forms.

ATTENTION! Procedure for obtaining Consent for Recognition electronic documents, signed in KIAS RFBR simple electronic signature

1. Consents for the recognition of electronic documents are drawn up in accordance with the Procedure for registration of Consent for the recognition of electronic documents signed in the RFBR CIAS with a simple electronic signature, equivalent to documents drawn up on paper, and confirmation of the information specified by Users in the RFBR CIAS (hereinafter referred to as the Consent), published in personal accounts KIAS RFBR.
2. The authorized person to certify the signature of the CIAS User - an employee (graduate student, student) of Moscow State University on the Consent may be the dean/director, deputy dean/director for scientific work or scientific secretary structural unit, whose signature is certified by the seal of the unit. Responsibility for the accuracy of certified information rests with the authorized person.
3. Completed Consents (certified and stamped) can be sent to the RFBR, including in batches, both by mail and through the mailbox in the RAS building.

I. Registration of Applications for participation in RFBR competitions

An application for the Competition is submitted by the Project Manager in the manner established by the Foundation (http://www.rfbr.ru/rffi/ru/): electronically via information system- KIAS RFBR.

If the project is planned to be completed at Moscow State University, then when submitting an application to the KIAS RFBR for proper registration Forms 3(Information about the organization) as the organization through which the project will be financed, you must select the organization:

INN/KPP 7729082090/772901001
federal state budget educational institution higher education"Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov";
short name of the organization: Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, Moscow University or Moscow State University

In accordance with the Rules for the provision of federal government budgetary institution"Russian Foundation for Basic Research" grants through a targeted subsidy from the federal budget, only a legal entity can act as an organization in which a scientific project is being implemented. In this regard, financing projects through branches, representative offices and other separate institutions that are not legal entities, not allowed.

If a division of Moscow State University is indicated as the funding organization, then the Application Forms will be generated by the KIAS system incorrectly.

You must indicate the organization of financing when submitting your application. This can be done without changing the information about your place of work in your personal account.

In accordance with the “Procedure for the implementation of projects supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research”, approved by the Order of Moscow State University dated March 12, 2019, in order to obtain the consent of the organization to provide conditions for the implementation of the project at Moscow University, it is necessary to fill out an application from the Grant Recipient, agreed with the head (deputy head for scientific work ) structural unit at the main place of work of the project manager.

! For participation in Competition at best projects fundamental scientific research carried out by young scientists studying in graduate school (“Postgraduate Students”) Application for participation in the RFBR “GRADUATE STUDENT” competition

! For participation in Competition for the best fundamental scientific research projects carried out by young scientists - candidates of science in scientific organizations of the Russian Federation (“Perspective”) , it is necessary to obtain the consent of Moscow University to submit an application to the RFBR. To do this, you need to fill out a Young Scientist Application, coordinate it with the head (deputy head for scientific work) of the structural unit in which the project is planned, and then submit it to the Department of Scientific Policy and Organization of Scientific Research (MSU State University, room 1010).

Attention! To the winners of the RFBR competitions “Postgraduate” and “Perspective”, who did not receive the consent of Moscow State University when submitting an application, to sign an agreement between the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and Moscow State University may be refused.

IV. The procedure for signing reports on RFBR grants

Information about the project must be entered into the IAS “Science-MSU” (“TRUTH”) before submitting the report for signature to the vice-rector.

Reports are prepared by the Project Manager in the manner and within the time frame established by the Foundation.

To obtain correct information when completing Appendix 4 (Information on payments made by the organization on behalf of the project manager), you must contact the financial services of the unit. Printable form Appendix 4 is drawn up in 3 copies: the 1st copy is provided to the Russian Foundation for Basic Research as part of the general report on the grant, the 2nd copy is to be kept by the project manager for 3 years after the end of the project, the 3rd copy is to be stored at Moscow State University.

Appendix 4 is signed by the Deputy Chief Accountant of Moscow State University E.N. Zagretskaya and vice-rector - head of UNPiONI.

To obtain the signatures of the Deputy Chief Accountant of Moscow State University and the Vice-Rector, Appendix 4 must contain visas (with a transcript of the signature):

1. project manager;
2. chief accountant of the division (for divisions served by the Central Bank of Moscow State University - an authorized employee of the Central Accounting Department of Moscow State University (1 academic building, room 330, office hours: Mon - Thu from 14:00 to 17:00);
3. head (deputy head for scientific work) of the unit.

Documents for signature by the Deputy Chief Accountant of MSU are accepted at the Central Accounting Department of MSU (1st academic building, room 348, office hours: Mon – Thu from 14:00 to 17:00).

For signature by the vice-rector, simultaneously with Appendix 4, provide a Project Data Control Sheet (Order No. 108 dated June 13, 2017) printed from the IAS “Science-MSU” (“TRUTH”).

Documents for signature by the vice-rector are accepted at UNPiONI.