Dear Colleagues,
			CCP4 derives its core financial support from the
BBSRC (UK). We are now in the process of attempting to renew our grant
funding. The grant proposal has four sections
(1) New methods for working with low resolution and difficult structures
(2) Improvements in data processing, dealing with new detectors, split
crystals etc
(3) A new database to provide intelligent decision making for new to
moderately experienced users (that is, the programs will make sensible
choices in order to avoid mistakes and automate the work flow). Where no
such clear choice exists, the program will provide clear and sensible
one-click suggestions to proceed based on analysis of your data to this
point.
(4) Continuing support of workshops, bulletin board, installation, etc.

The choice of these areas was made by Working group 1 in January. I am
writing to you to ask for your help. The BMS grant committee of BBSRC will
probably have, at most, one person who has used CCP4.  It is therefore
important that we can show evidence of its success in the past and,
crucially, its continuing importance in the future. Our proposal will have
to compete against high quality project grants in a normal funding round
and, if we fail to demonstrate its importance, CCP4 may fail to be funded,
just like any other grant. International and national support will be very
useful in making the case.

If you feel (and only if) you can support CCP4, it would greatly help to
have letters of support (as attached PDF format letters with your letter
head addressed to me), "Jim Naismith, Chair of CCP4". Please email these to
[log in to unmask], marked CCP4.

If the letter is to be useful, you should explain who you are, what your lab
does and what it comprises, please list your publications in the last five
years that have used CCP4 (please remember PISA at the EBI is funded by the
current CCP4 grant). Any personal highlighting would be very welcome. In
this letter, if you were able to say how any or all the aims of the new
proposal (1-4 above) will help you, that will be absolutely crucially
important. Words like step change and paradigm shift, are useful if you
relate them to new capabilities, since this is the rubric of BMS committee.

Other things that you might like to mention are how important the training
and support aspects of CCP4 are to your lab (any specific instance welcome).

It is important that colleagues who use CCP4 (say jointly supervise a
student, post-doc, collaborate, etc.) but do not see themselves as
crystallographers support us, again only if they feel able to. The support
of people who are not crystallographers will be extremely important and will
no doubt heavily with the committee. 

If you are a student or post-doc using CCP4 as a non-expert, your support
would be helpful (although check with the PI first). If you think an
"automated expert system" for tough problems would help you, please say so.
If you have found a CCP4 sponsored workshop or training to be good, again
please say so. If the PI in your lab does not read the CCP4BB, show them
this message.

Can I stress, that what will not help at all is a letter saying "CCP4 is
great - fund it!". What will help immensely is an explanation of the role
that CCP4 has played, and will continue to play, in aiding you in achieving
your scientific goals. In that regard, if there are five PI's in your
department one letter from each one of you is better than a single letter on
behalf of all five.

The pre-proposal for the grant has just been accepted (submitted months
ago), but we now have only four weeks to submit the full application. (Who
would have figured it was a government organization?) This is my priority, I
cannot promise to reply to emails in good time. If you could send your
letters in the next two weeks, it would be great. Your letters will be
treated in confidence, no lists put up. I will send them by post to the
committee.

I thank you in advance for any support you might be able to offer.

Best
Jim


Chair of CCP4