Hi all,

I am a historian currently writing up a grant proposal.

The history of the organisations I want to write about has hardly been covered in the literature before. The only study so far is an officially commissioned history that covers the basics. This, I mention in my literature review and say that this commissioned history is useful for basic facts but remains superficial.

Now, in my detailed proposal, I mention three specific international organisation I want to explore in detail. These international organisations are all mentioned in the commissioned history. My question is whether - after I mentioned that this commissioned history covers the basic history of my topic - I need to cite the commissioned history again when I mention the existence of these three international organisations for the first time [I mean the simple fact that they existed. Not any kind of interpretation/idea I might take from the commissioned history]? Or would that not be necessary given that I already mentioned the commissioned history before?

What I basically have is a sentence like:

"This study will investigate how international organisations, such as A and B in New York, managed their staff."

So in that case I would need to change it to: "This study will investigate how international organisations, such as A and B in New York (Smith 2009), managed their staff." ?

Also, I am wondering whether the mere existence of these three organisations is not simply common knowledge? If I type their names into google books etc. I will always get several results where people mention them in a different context.

Thanks!

[Crosspost from here: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAcademia/comments/d3y8x4/citation_needed_for_basic_facts/]