Grant Writing Tips

Top 10 Dos and Don'ts of Grant-Writing

These were developed from discussions at the Grant Writing Workshop for Institute PIs held at the Barbican in June 2014.

DO

  1. DO address the funder’s priorities.  Look at the funder’s remit and strategic priorities, and focus your proposal accordingly.  Are they specifically interested in one disease area, or a wider understanding of biological systems?  Are they focused on basic or translational/clinical research?
  2. DO follow the funder’s application template.  Read the guidance carefully and provide the right information in the right sections.  In the Research Proposal / Case for Support, follow the guidance on layout.  Follow formatting rules (font size, margins, page limits, etc).
  3. DO emphasize the timeliness of your research question.  Show why the research needs to be done now.  Is it a novel project whose objectives can only be achieved with modern technology?  If it could have been done 20 years ago (but hasn’t), it probably won’t catch the reviewers’ attention.
  4. DO include convincing pilot data.  This shows that you are capable of achieving your objectives and that your approach is feasible.  It is particularly important in reassuring conservative reviewers if your methodology is innovative.
  5. DO structure your proposal so that important information comes first.  Make sure that the key points are obvious to a speed reader.  Reviewers and committee members can be very rushed for time.  Summary sections such as the abstract or lay summary are vital for drawing the reader in and ‘selling’ your proposal.
  6. DO express your project plan clearly.  Show how your approach will provide the answers to the scientific questions set in the ‘objectives’ section.  Focus on novel methodology and don’t provide excessive detail on standard methodologies.
  7. DO make a consistent case throughout your application.  All sections need to work together to show why the research question is important and that you are capable of addressing it.  The details of your research plan must be capable of addressing the hypothesis.
  8. DO aim for readability to the non-expert.  Make it as easy as possible for busy reviewers to understand the importance of your project.  The ‘designated committee members’ assigned to lead the committee discussion on your application may not be specialists in your area.  For some charities, lay members play an important part in reviewing proposals.
  9. DO grab the reader’s attention.  Your application will be competing with a large number of high-quality proposals.  Include a snappy title, and show clearly why this research is important and needs to be done now.
  10. DO ask colleagues to review your draft applications.  Ask them to be constructively critical and act as a ‘devil’s advocate.’  Overly nice or polite comments won’t help you refine your proposal.

DON’T

  1. DON'T assume that readers are experts in your area.  Although peer reviewers are likely to be specialists, the committee which makes the ultimate funding decision may not even include an expert in the eye.  This is especially true with large funders e.g. MRC or Wellcome Trust.
  2. DON'T focus too narrowly on the eye.  You will increase the fundability of your application if you can show how your research is relevant to other diseases/organs, and/or if it can show something fundamental about how biological systems work.
  3. DON'T set contingent aims in your research proposal.  If Part B of your proposal depends on the success of Part A, what happens if Part A doesn’t turn out as expected?  Always have a back-up plan and show how you would deal with challenges or setbacks.
  4. DON'T show lack of understanding of the disease area.  If you are a basic scientist, make sure your statements about the related clinical conditions are correct.
  5. DON'T be uninteresting.  You are competing for reviewers’ attention, and will not attract support if your proposal is boring, uses negative or unenthusiastic language, and does not clearly show why the research question is important and timely.
  6. DON'T include irrelevant information that doesn’t contribute to your case.  Don’t include lengthy background information on the history of the research area or standard methodologies.  Concisely show the current state of the art, and how you will advance it.
  7. DON'T oversell your proposal.  It’s important to be positive about your likelihood of success, but don’t exaggerate your existing expertise or include too broad a range of objectives.  Junior researchers can be particularly prone to this.
  8. DON'T respond emotionally to peer reviewers’ comments.  You will often have a chance to respond to peer review before the committee meets.  Respond calmly and rationally with good data to counteract negative comments.
  9. DON'T send the same proposal to different funders without refocusing.  You may be able to send the same project to several different funders, but you will need to realign it according to their priorities.  Also, ensure that your proposed approach still appears fresh and timely.
  10. DON'T assume you will have more success if you ask for less funding.  It is important to ask for a realistic amount that will enable you to run your project successfully. Committees primarily base their assessment on the science of the proposal, rather than the cost, although it is of course important to show why your proposal is good value for money. 

SLMS Research Co-ordination Office

The Research Coordination Office, in collaboration with other UCL professional services teams, provides support to individual researchers within SLMS to identify potential funding sources for their research and to develop a strong application with the best possible chance of success. The RCO also coordinates and develops large-scale strategic bids.

Other Grant-Writing Resources

These links may provide some useful guidance on the grant-writing process.  However, please always give priority to the funder guidelines for the specific scheme to which you are applying.