Vasculitis UK aims to spend at least 50% of annual income on supporting research. As a small charity depending entirely on donations, we are able to support 3 projects of up to £50,000 each year as part of our annual grant call. Applications must address the priorities set out in our research strategy.

Vasculitis UK is pleased to announce its 2023 grant call for research proposals.

The call launches on 15th September with a deadline for applications of 15th October 2023. Decisions will be announced in early 2024.

Please download our 2023 Application Form and our Application Guidelines.

Research links on the right provide more information on current and past research projects which Vasculitis UK have supported financially.

How to apply

All applications must be made using the Vasculitis UK application form which can be downloaded here. The application guideline document can also be downloaded. Please read this prior to submission.

Our Peer Review Process

All our funding applications are subject to peer review.

Peer review enables us to bolster the finest research and researchers, optimising the impact of our funding and bringing about meaningful advancements for patients with vasculitis. This ensures that they benefit from the outcomes of the research.

Following internal validation, all submitted applications are subject to review by external expert peers. Some funding rounds are subject to shortlisting ahead of peer review (in cases of a high volume of applications) and this is carried out by the scientific advisory board and our patient representatives. You will be informed via email at an early stage if your application has not been shortlisted.

Peer reviewers are asked to consider several aspects of the application:

Technical reviewers (typically scientists, clinicians, methodologists)

The six key peer review criteria by which each application is assessed are listed below. For assessment, a score of 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent) is assigned to each criterion:

  1. Novelty of the proposed activity and contribution to wider knowledge and understanding
  2. Feasibility of research design and proposed timetable of activity
  3. Relevance of the proposed research to research priorities
  4. Patient benefit and the impact of the proposed work
  5. Value for money

Patient Reviewers

  1. Clarity of the language used for a lay audience
  2. Relevance of the proposed research to research priorities
  3. Involvement of patients and the public
  4. Patient benefit and the impact of the proposed work
  5. Value for money

Peer reviewed applications are considered finally at the scientific advisory board meeting where funding recommendations are made to the board of trustees who will make a final decision.