What to pay attention to when consulting call documentation
“Make sure you read the call spec” is one of the most frequently dispensed pieces of advice from research offices. It might sound mind-numbingly obvious, but many applicants to funding schemes—especially the smaller ones—won’t have followed it and their chances of success will be slim to none as a result.
While most applicants won’t make such an elementary error, it can pay to unpack what this apparently self-evident advice entails. Knowing how call literature is usually written and presented, what to look out for and how to read it can make the difference between your bid sinking or swimming.
Three elements
A typical research funding call will have three core elements: a strategic overview of the call, with aims and objectives, a practical guide to applying and the application form itself.
The overview will outline the aims of the call, what the funder hopes to achieve and why, and explain what’s in and what’s out of scope. These documents have varying degrees of clarity and precision. Pay attention because sometimes calls have a matrix of cross-cutting themes and topics and you need to know where yours might fit in.
The application guide will tell you how to go about applying. It should include all of the practicalities and may go into further detail about what’s expected in each section of the application form. It will explain costing rules, the call timeline and how to log into the online system. Sometimes there’s an online FAQ document, too. If there is, bookmark it and return to it, as some funders will update it. Sometimes questions on the form will just contain a short title while leaving the detailed explanation to the guide where it can easily be missed.
These days, most application forms are either online sub-mission systems, uploadable templates or a set of guidance notes to configure your own Word document.
You should be able to find text with these three distinct purposes—overview, guide and application form—even if they are configured differently. If you can’t, you’re probably missing a document. Some schemes combine the overview and the application guide, while others put the whole lot on one sprawling web page.
My primary piece of advice is to read all the documents. Even the dull bits. Read them out loud, or out loud in your head. There are key elements of information—deadline, budget and so on—you need to find but it’s so easy for researchers to skim through, only looking for those. To raise your chances of success, it’s crucial to understand what the funders are trying to achieve with the call.
If you don’t understand those aims, you can’t help them spend their money to achieve them. The more complex the remit, the more important it is that you locate your proposal clearly within it. Remember, for complex calls, the reviewers may be confused, too. Quote their framing language back at them.
You need to minesweep—study the call documentation (including the submission portal) for anything that might explode and sink your bid if not dealt with early. Sometimes, for example, there may be particular requirements for the principal investigator buried in the guide. Unusual call requirements are not at all unusual, and generally make sense in context. You need to be aware of them early, as they may require you to identify new partners.
Study the form
If you’re considering a bid, you should engage with the application form or online submission system as early as possible. Some funders will provide a PDF printout as a sample form. That’s helpful, but it’s no substitute for exploring the submission portal itself. Sometimes questions that appear to be binary ‘yes/no’ responses on a printout will have hidden supplementary questions or ask for further details. Equally, when you forward your draft for internal review, make sure it’s on the official form. You’ll get much more useful feedback on an application presented in its natural habitat.
The focus of the application form may tell you a lot about the priorities of the call. If you’re asked about it, it matters. If the form asks for a lot of detail about project legacy and less about the specifics of your topic, for example, that speaks volumes.
It’s easy to get swept away with the excitement and possibilities of a new research funding call that looks like a great fit with your research ambitions. But it’s important to take a breath at the start and ensure you’ve got the best possible understanding of the call and its process. Only then can you ensure that your bid will give the panel the feeling of ‘good fit’ that leads to a project being green-lit.
This is an extract from an article in Research Professional’s Funding Insight service. To subscribe contact sales@researchresearch.com