To say that research funding success requires patience and perseverance is an understatement, but it is a useful starting point for what is a career-long journey full of hits and misses. Ahead of our upcoming Research Insights: Navigating Research Funding Outcomes – Refine, Resubmit or Rethink? event on 12^th November 2026, we are revisiting the invaluable advice from University of Sydney researchers in our Research Funding Insights video series on how they approach their research funding strategy. 

Here are some key takeaways from the series that explore how to decide when it’s time to forge ahead with a particular grant – and when it’s time to reconsider. 

What other funding is out there?

Rejection puts you in the majority of the applicants for typical grant schemes, so you’re in good company if you don’t get the outcome you are hoping for. But it’s important to keep this in mind before you decide to refine and resubmit your application, and consider whether it’s the right place to invest your energy. “It's so important to keep the options broad,” says Associate Professor and NHMRC Principal Research Fellow Christina Abdel Shaheed. 

“Category 1 funding is very competitive. The success rate usually ranges from somewhere like five percent to 15 or 20 percent if you're lucky. So whilst it is a good idea to apply for Category 1 funding, it's important to have other options. Sometimes Category 2 funding options or philanthropic funding might be appealing, particularly to early to mid-career researchers.”

For those starting out, it may require some more time building your track record before you become competitive enough to apply for the more selective schemes. Ambition can be inspiring, but it’s important to stay grounded in what stage you are in your career and focus on the big picture. For those early in their career, “Consider applying for small seed funding that will help kind of build your track record and get your ball rolling,” says Dr Mouna Sawan, Dementia Centre for Research Collaboration (DCRC) Research Fellow. And if at first you don’t succeed, use the learnings as takeaways for your funding strategy. “I have used grant calls that I have not been successful in to actually inform my research program,” says Dr Sawan.

Are you the best person to lead the grant?

Before you set out writing or rewriting an application, consider deeply whether you are the right person to deliver the project you are proposing, or if you should focus on the opportunities that exist elsewhere. This can involve having honest conversations with yourself and others in the team. 

Missing the mark can happen to the very best of us, as Professor Rachel Codd, Deputy Director and Theme Leader for AMTAR (the Australian Research Council Research Hub for Advanced Manufacture of Targeted Radiopharmaceuticals), shares: “I’ve had projects I was extraordinarily passionate about, where I thought I’d absolutely nailed the grant application, received great reviews, and yet the grant failed. Reflecting on that, I realised that while I was incredibly passionate about the project, I wasn’t necessarily the best person in Australia to deliver it. 

“That was confronting, because I realised that a fundable grant isn’t just about having a great idea. You also have to demonstrate that you’re the best person to deliver it. Sometimes that means recognising when your research doesn’t align with a funding body and being prepared to step away.”

Professor Alex Broom, founder and co-director of the Sydney Centre for Healthy Societies and Academic Director at the Australian Research Council, urges researchers to see the magic in the creation of new ideas. “A process of not getting something, a bid, a project, a fellowship, and so forth generally speaking is a generative process nonetheless,” he says. “It brings people together and you have sparks that get things moving. So you can't see the failure to generate money as a failure of a process.” Reworking the idea can include looking for a different scheme for your team or applying your learnings to a new project entirely. 

Prepare to write

Whether you are on your first draft or on your resubmission, the application should reflect your enthusiasm for the project. It’s important to learn the foundations of a competitive application if you want yours to be one of them, and this includes expressing your research to a non-specialist audience, as Professor Bartlett advises: “Step back and think from the perspective of a generalist assessor, how is this going to look? And you really need that excitement to come across in as general and lay terms as possible. You need to be able to make that case very quickly using non-technical language, but still convey the excitement and key things that you're trying to achieve in that grant.”

Rejection is inevitable, but using it to make a stronger, more competitive application is an art in itself. Before any resubmission, do your research on past winners to deepen your understanding of how best to position yourself for the scheme the next time around. A bit of investigation can assist you in understanding whether your application meets the criteria that the assessors are looking for. “Think about that person back when they applied for that grant and think about what their track record was back then,” says Professor Bartlett. 

“How does your track record compare to theirs? Are you able to make the same type of case that they made in their successful application that you are the one to deliver on this?” If so, then it’s time to get started. And if not, to find a search for another source of funding where you will be.