Banish your doubting inner voice with this quick compendium of advice on preparing first bids
This week, Funding Insight concludes a two-part series on the fundamentals of any funding application. Last week’s article dealt with aims and objectives, while this week we consider research importance and methods.
Early career researchers just getting to grips with the challenges of finding funding might also want to consider this article from July 2022, in which columnist Adam Golberg laid out how to prepare for a first bid before putting pen to paper (or much more likely—finger to keyboard).
I’m going to open with a quote from Yoda, because the diminutive, elf-eared old sage from the Star Wars films really did know a thing or two about grant applications. In particular: “Do or do not—there is no ‘try’.”
In other words, if you’re going to commit to writing a grant application, you need to be prepared to devote a substantial amount of time and effort. You might give your application your best efforts and it still might not get funded. But if you submit a rushed, half-hearted, phoned-in, last-minute effort, your chances are close to zero. You’ll have wasted your time, the time of the people supporting you, and the time of the funder and referees and reviewers.
To be in with a realistic chance of success, you need to allow time to develop your ideas, to draft, re-draft and re-draft again—to seek out and respond to feedback, to get the technical and irritatingly fiddly bits of the form right. All the advice that’s given to undergraduates who are assessed via essays is advice you need to follow for grant applications. In addition, I’d also say this…
Bark up the right tree
Make sure you have found the most appropriate funder and the most appropriate opportunity for what you want to do. This can be tricky, especially if you work in a niche area. Not all funders do a great job of explaining their schemes or remit. Eligibility rules can be complicated. Funding calls are complex documents and hard to read without projecting your own interests on to them. You should seek advice from senior colleagues and your friendly neighbourhood research development manager. Get the wrong scheme and you’ll have wasted a lot of everyone’s time.
Lower your expectations
If you’ve already lowered them, lower them again. You probably already know the success rate for the scheme you’re aiming for, and if it’s much above 25 per cent it’s one of the better ones. People usually enter academia after a lifetime of being top of the class, so it might come as a shock to learn that, whatever the success rate is, it applies to you. Don’t get disheartened, however. Some people do succeed, and you might be one of them.
Your primary goal should be to assemble, construct, scope, shape and write a research grant application that you’re proud of and that does full justice to your research vision. You want to get it through your institution’s internal approval systems and submitted on time and in funder-specified format. For your first application, if you’ve done this, then you’ve succeeded, whatever the funder response may be. You will have learned a lot through this process. It will have helped you develop your research ideas, get a better sense of how to express them, and learn about the trials and tribulations of the application process.
Your ‘stretch goal’ should be for your proposal to make it through to the final stage of assessment. This isn’t possible with all funding schemes, but some have formal outline stages or other levels of sift where only some go forward. If it’s still in the running at the final stage, it’s competitive. You can’t control the strength of your rival bids or how discussion goes on that final panel, and while funding isn’t a lottery, there’s no denying the role of luck.
Actually winning funding should be considered a ‘cherry on the cake’ goal. It is perfectly possible for your first application to win through, but that should not be treated as the sole indicator of success. Even without such pressure, if you don’t get the funding, it will hurt. Go easy on yourself.
Commit to the admin
As well as writing your application, there will be several administrative tasks to be completed, and processes to follow. Miss any of these or get them wrong and it can prevent your application being submitted or lead to immediate rejection from the funder. It’s important to be aware of these and take early action.
You will need a proper costing for your project and for that costing to be approved before your application is submitted. Different funders have different rules about what they will and will not fund, and it is seldom straightforward. When you apply for funding, your university is endorsing your application and (effectively) agreeing to support you in delivering the project for the budget requested (which, in the UK at least, seldom covers the full costs). It’s not unreasonable, therefore, for your university to want to make sure the budget has been done correctly. You’ll probably have access to a self-service costing tool and/or administrative support for costings.
There will be a deadline for your final application to be submitted for internal approval, and likely another for internal peer-review to develop and improve your application. If you need a letter of support from your head of school or other senior leader, that also takes time. The letter needs drafting (which you’re likely to be asked to provide some material for) and approving and signing. This depends upon their availability, so find out early.
You should also engage early with the online submission system. You should make sure you (and your team members) have accounts, and that you’ve thoroughly explored the system and the application requirements. Some funders will provide PDF printouts of the form, but these can be misleading—some sections may appear or disappear if certain boxes are ticked. You don’t have to start populating the online version of the form until later, but you want to make sure you know what’s there and how it works.
Well-resourced universities that are serious about research will make sure you’re not on your own. It might be your first grant application, but you should have the support of a research administrator (for costings and approvals) and/or a research development manager (to advise on funder choice, scheme rules, lay review). Supporting funding proposals is literally their job, so enlist their help as soon as you’re even thinking about applying.
Oh, yes…the writing
Writing grant applications is different from writing academic papers, and rather than trying to explain why and how in less than 150 words, I’m going to bombard you with even more links.
Previously on Funding Insight, I’ve written about summaries, about applying for small grants, about outline applications and postdoc fellowships. I’ve also written about getting better feedback on draft applications.
I’d like to think all these articles are worth a read. But because time is short and you don’t want to spend all your writing time reading, for first-time applicants I’d particularly recommend this article on how to structure a proposal and one on who you’re writing for when you’re writing a grant application. Errors in those two areas are easy to make, but with a little thought they’re also easy to avoid.
If you want one final tip, and it’s probably the most important tip—don’t ‘do a Gollum’. Don’t keep your precious proposal secreted away; get as much help and feedback and support and as much external input as you can.
Best of luck!
Adam Golberg is strategic research development manager (research growth) at the University of Nottingham. He tweets @Cash4Questions and blogs at socialscienceresearchfunding.co.uk.