Application forms and related guidance notes
Common project application failings
These are the nine most common failings in contemporary project licence applications. Avoid these mistakes when making an application.
-
In Section 18 the protocols are described rather than discussed, and not discussed in relation to the objectives.
-
The justification for the choice of model, together with the choice of species and the consideration with the alternatives, is lacking in Section 18.
-
Consideration of reduction, refinement and replacement is not adequately handled either under individual protocols in Section 18a or in Section 18b.
-
The objectives set out in Section 17 are too vague and non-specific (not SMART or SMARTER) and the benefits are not realistically linked to the objectives.
-
The background described in Section 17 fails to take account of other's progress in the topic and to identify clearly what needs to be discovered.
-
Amendments are offered without an explanation or with an inadequate explanation or justification in Section 18.
-
The 19b protocol contains too much text, much of which is either descriptive or restrictive
-
Clear end-points are not set in relation to predicted adverse effects.
-
The difference between re-use and continued use of animals is not appreciated.