MYTH #4: All proposals should be treated in the same way

Shakespeare wrote that a rose by any other name would smell as sweet: its characteristics remain intrinsically unchanged regardless of what it is called. While this may be true in botany, it’s inaccurate when it comes to funding.

This is perhaps one of the biggest myths along the path to funding success. I have seen Fellowship proposals written as if they were standard mode grants, with the PI giving the impression that they are going to disappear into a lab for five years if they successfully become an EPSRC Fellow. Yet Fellowships are personal awards: they are about demonstrating leadership, ambassadorship, and advocacy. This must come across in both the proposal and the interview.

Or perhaps a New Investigator Award proposal grows into an overly ambitious project rather than focusing on only one or two key objectives. Without taking the time to identify the key features that set funding schemes apart, it can be almost impossible to ensure your proposal is in alignment with the given criteria.

Beyond scheme differences, each funder is going to have a different approach. These are the key aspects to be aware of:

• Remit: What area of research does the funder look after? Your proposal has to be within remit to be accepted. For the UKRI research councils, make sure to use their remit query service if you think your project will cross council boundaries.
  
  
• Risk: What is the funder’s appetite for risk? Are they looking for incremental change or is it all about high-risk, high-reward research? Sometimes funders are looking for both!
  
  
• Strategy: What does the funder want to accomplish? How do they intend to do it? Please note that strategy is not about trying to trick or outwit the funder!
  
  
• Criteria: What assessment criteria will be used to evaluate your proposal? For UKRI research councils like EPSRC, these criteria should be listed on the reviewer form and within the reviewer guidance, both of which can be found online.
  
  
• Guidance: What instructions are provided? What formatting is required? Following the guidelines to the letter can help prevent a proposal being returned to you for revision or, even worse, a proposal being rejected due to a technicality.
  
  
• Finances: Is there a cap on the funding? Is there a deadline for the spend? What resources are ineligible for funding? Please note that standard computers/laptops and PhD students/MSc students are not eligible expenses on UKRI grants.
  
  
• Process: What system is used to evaluate your proposal? At EPSRC, standard mode proposals are sent out for expert peer review; proposals with at least two supportive reviews are then sent onward to be moderated and put into a rank order list by a prioritisation panel.

Taking the time to understand these differences before you start to generate ideas or write a grant proposal will help you avoid getting stung by potential thorns.