Eligibility Requirements

Check funding agency guidelines carefully before assuming you can apply to a particular scheme. If you do not seem to meet the criteria, check your status before starting to write your proposal. 

Key things to watch out for: 

  • Employment status: funding agencies will generally require applicants to hold a formal contract or affiliation with the host institution that extends beyond the date of the proposed project. 
  • Residency: Many schemes make residency (or proposed residency) in a particular country or countries a basic requirement for eligibility. 
  • Geography: Some funding agencies and schemes limit applicants to a particular geographical region. 
  • Career Stage: This is typically expressed in years from PhD. Be aware that early career can mean anything from one to twelve years from PhD. 
  • Collaboration: Schemes may be confined to research teams of a specific minimum size or may require the involvement of non-academic partners. 

Get Good Advice!

Research proposals cannot be produced in isolation. The list below shows the type of input and support you can obtain when preparing a proposal. ​​​​​​​

Insider intelligence on the particular scheme, funding agency or evaluation panels

  • Colleagues who have acted as evaluators in the past for the funding scheme you are intending on applying to
  • Colleagues who have enjoyed success in the scheme you are intending on applying to
  • Ena Brophy, as the MACSI Research Manager 
  • Colleagues in the University of Limerick Research Office
  • Your subject associations 

Administrative or Financial Details of the scheme:

  • Ena Brophy, as the MACSI Research Manager 
  • Colleagues in ULs Research Office (institutional backing)
  • Colleagues in ULs Finance Office
  • Head of Department (institutional backing)
  • Funding agency programme managers

 

Building Blocks of an Application:  

The list below is not comprehensive but will give you an idea of what may be included in a proposal. Always check the call guidelines and call documentation for the required elements for your proposal. 

  • Abstract/Summary: Usually 250 - 500 words that you should write at the end of the whole process and with great care. This is your foot in the door. Grant readers are in a hurry. They want to know straight away what your project is about and the impact it will have. 
  • Objectives: A list of bullet points that explain what you expect to achieve by the end of the project.
  • Research Question and/or Hypotheses: The question that your project will answer. This is usually supplemented by a short list of hypotheses or sub-questions that each relate to a phase or element of the research project. 
  • Background/Literature: A concise, introductory section to your case for support that provides evidence that the question is important, and introduces the sub-questions, hypotheses or phases of the research project. 
  • Plan of Investigation: The main section of your case for support that provides a detailed account of your research methods and analysis in a way that shows how you will answer the question. 
  • Dissemination: How will you communicate your project findings? 
  • CV (DORA compliant or another format) 
  • Budget: A list of all the costs associated with the project, calculated and broken down according to the funding agency regulations. 
  • Justification for the Budget: A summary of why each resource is necessary.
  • Non-academic dissemination: Identification of stakeholders and non-academic beneficiaries and what you will do to involve them and communicate your findings. 
  • Project Management: A Gantt chart showing what happens and when during the project. 
  • Appendices: Technical or legal requirements, Letter of support etc. 
  • Ethics: Evidence to show the project will be conducted to accepted standards
  • Data Management Plan: (see UL's Research Data Management LibGuide​​​​​​​) 

 

What Success Looks Like: 

Your key task as an eligible PI is to convince the funding agency decision makers that your question is worth paying to have it answered. Why is your research question important? Keep in mind that what makes a question important varies according to the funder criteria. You want to ensure that you are always waiting for the outcome of more than one application at a time to keep a constant possibility of success ahead of you.

Know that your colleagues with consistent success from the funding agency you are intending to apply to may be willing to meet you to talk through successful proposals. 

Use Informal peer review from colleagues from similar but not identical field or known sceptics about your field or methods.  

Start to make lists of people you know who fit in the following criteria: 

  • Colleagues with consistent success for each funder
  • Colleagues from a similar but not identical field
  • Evaluators

 

The Impact of Rejection

Handling rejection is one of the hardest lessons that you have to learn as a research grant applicant. When you receive rejection letters, you may feel angry, humiliated and devasted. The sense of failure can be very difficult, and it is hard to pick yourself up and work on the next application in the immediate aftermath of a rejection letter. Unfortunately, success rates being what they are, you will likely need to submit several applications in order to win one research grant and doing this in the face of regular setbacks is a real challenge. 

In order to survive these psychological blows, you need to understand and thoroughly assimilate the role that luck plays in research grant competitions. In order to keep positive to make the next application, you will also find it useful to keep hope on your side. 

When the dust settles re-read proposal reviews.

  • Are there any consistent criticisms that you have dismissed?
  • Are there any patterns or consistency for example, do reviewers regard your research topic as important?
  • Do they mention your track record?
  • Do they seem unsure about how you will deliver the project?