George Peat, Northumbria University, (SSCR Career Development Award Alumni)
As an early-career researcher it is often difficult to make the jump towards establishing your own research path. You can spend years contributing to worthwhile research led by senior academic colleagues. These experiences provide key learning, but what about finding the time to develop your own research path? For me, a NIHR SSCR Career Development Award was pivotal to do just that.
I have written elsewhere about my award and aims to work alongside a group of adults with neuromuscular conditions to further understand the placement of social care in their lives, explore their ambitions for change, and take one ambition forward in the shape of a future funding application.
Co-producing a funding application
When starting to consider the application, I was immediately aware that alongside notions of co-production as freeing and enabling, were feelings of anxiety and unease. The path from a blank piece of paper to a co-produced funding application felt daunting.
Much of the early work was reflective of our interactions as a group. This entailed meeting online with less of a template and more of a vague idea, with experiences shared and talk of where social care could do better. We imagined lots of ‘what-ifs’ whilst never becoming too removed from the lived realities of group members. If there was an outcome of these discussions, it was that lots needed to change, both in the quality and quantity of social care, and how its associated processes (e.g. ‘assessments of need’) are experienced.
Our sense (mainly mine perhaps) was that we needed an academic anchor to substantiate the group experiences. Something to say, ‘look this is not just us saying or feeling this way about social care’. The answer came in the form of a systematic scoping review that we co-produced and was recently accepted for publication in the Journal of Long-Term Care.
Following the review, we had a sense of where change was needed, and we could confidently say that our views were expressed across the wider literature. We felt that not a lot had changed since the Walton Report, that access to adequate social care was still a ‘battle’, and that the answers to questions such as ‘who are the key actors in social care for adults with NMCs and their families?’ remained largely unanswered. However, the translation of known gaps and ideas into a funding application required the support and guidance of others.
Introducing Pathfinders Neuromuscular Alliance
Here I want to introduce Pathfinders Neuromuscular Alliance (PNA), a user-led organisation run for and by people with NMCs. Good organisations it seems attract good people. Of the many fortunes in my career path being introduced to people who work for and support PNA is perhaps at the top.
It is through PNA that I have fostered relationships with people, two in particular, whose advice, input, mentorship and friendship have substantially enriched the funding application at the centre of this piece and, more broadly, my research career.
I have worked closely with Dr Suzanne Glover who, among other roles, heads research at PNA for several years, supporting Pathfinders to deliver key research projects (e.g. Entering adulthood with Duchenne Muscular Dystophy). Professor David Abbott is an NIHR Senior Investigator and longstanding advocate for people with NMCs and their families. In my experience as an ECR, you need those around you that are genuinely invested in you. People who are willing to offer their time to guide, to review, to listen. I think it is fair to say that my interactions with Suzanne and David and those at PNA have been mutually enriching, we all learn from each other.
From shared ideas to co-produced application(s)
Initially, we identified the NIHR RSPC as a suitable call. We discussed what the central premise of the application should be. What were we aiming to do or change?
We established that we were at a juncture where choosing to describe these problems would perhaps be unethical. We knew of the challenges and barriers faced; what was needed was a solutions-based agenda.
We felt part of the ‘solution’ was to say, ‘who are the key actors here and how can we involve them in ways that are meaningful and inclusive?’. Without the shared voice of adults with NMCs, informal carers and social and allied health professionals, we would struggle to influence and enact change in ways hoped.
More formal arrangements were made with organisations and people who had been pivotal to the journey. PNA were costed as equal partners, contact was made with a local authority, and kind, supportive people from academic and professional backgrounds were costed as co-applicants and advisors, including group members. Conversations were had, ideas shared, and a shared vision began to manifest with a group committed to its delivery.
The writing of the application was a genuinely collaborative effort; the application was created as a shared document to allow contributions in ways reflective of expertise/interests. In the time pressure experienced when writing the application, I felt opportunities to discuss the evolution of the application with the group were reduced. Nevertheless, email exchanges continued and ‘what do you think’ was regularly asked.
Perseverance and luck
We created an application that progressed to stage two of the application process. Unfortunately, the application was rejected at this stage, with valuable feedback offered. I have also been fortunate that support from the initial group of five young adults has remained steadfast throughout, as has the guidance from the rest of the team. Without this, I would not have felt able to revisit the application and commit the necessary time needed to rework the application to fit the call of the NIHR Three Schools Prevention Programme.
Such work happened, people committed their time, friends offered their support, and fortunately our two-year project was funded and began in April 2025. Around the same time as news of our funding application, we also found out that we had been highly commended by Rare Disease UK for our work.
Next steps
Others have written about ways in which academic institutions (and their processes) need to adapt to meaningfully embrace co-production. Beginning the project has been fraught with governance challenges, Nevertheless, work has started, meetings had, and an advisory group formed.
Career Development Awards are about far more than funding; they allow the vital time to make meaningful connections with others. It is these connections, these people, that have supported me as an early-career researcher to make the first steps on the bumpy road of academia.
