Your Progress

Step 1 of 10

Getting Funded: Complete Guide

Master the art of securing research funding with this comprehensive step-by-step guide

1

Understanding the Funding Landscape

Before applying for any grant, you need to understand the ecosystem of research funding.

Types of Funding Sources:

  • Government Agencies: NIH, NSF, DOE, DARPA (US); UKRI, BBSRC (UK); ERC (EU)
  • Private Foundations: Wellcome Trust, Gates Foundation, disease-specific foundations
  • Industry Partnerships: Pharmaceutical companies, tech corporations
  • Internal Funding: University seed grants, departmental awards

Funding Mechanisms:

  • Individual Fellowships: Support for you specifically (K99, F32, MSCA)
  • Research Grants: Project-based funding (R01, R21)
  • Training Grants: Institutional training programs (T32)
  • Center/Program Grants: Large collaborative projects (P01)
💡 Pro Tip:

Start with smaller grants ($25K-$50K) to build your track record. Success breeds success in grant applications.

Key Questions to Ask:

  • What's my career stage? (PhD student, postdoc, early-career faculty)
  • What's my research area and which funders support it?
  • What's a realistic budget for my project?
  • How much time can I dedicate to grant writing?
2

Finding the Right Opportunities

Finding grants you're actually competitive for is half the battle.

Where to Search:

  • Be-Funded Platform: Our database of 6,000+ opportunities with smart filtering
  • Agency Websites: NIH RePORTER, NSF Award Search, Research Professional
  • Professional Societies: Your field's society often lists member opportunities
  • Colleagues & Mentors: Ask what they've applied for successfully

Filtering Criteria:

Career Stage: Are you eligible? Check citizenship, degree, and years-since-PhD requirements.

Research Area: Does your work fit the funding priorities?

Budget Range: Can you realistically use the budget amount?

Timeline: Can you prepare a competitive application by the deadline?

Using Be-Funded Effectively:

  1. Set up your profile with research interests and career stage
  2. Create custom alerts for new opportunities
  3. Use advanced filters (location, budget, deadline)
  4. Bookmark promising opportunities
  5. Track your applications
⚠️ Common Mistake:

Don't apply to everything! Focus on 3-5 opportunities where you're truly competitive. Quality over quantity.

Ready to find your perfect grant?

Search Opportunities →
3

Pre-Application Research

Before writing a single word, do your homework. This step separates funded applications from rejected ones.

Read Funded Examples (Critical!):

  • NIH RePORTER: See abstracts of funded R01s, R21s, F32s
  • NSF Award Search: Find similar projects in your field
  • Ask mentors to share their successful proposals
  • Look for publicly available examples online
✅ Success Pattern:

Researchers who read 5+ funded proposals before writing their own have 40% higher success rates.

Contact the Program Officer:

Most applicants skip this. Don't be one of them!

What to ask:
  • Is my project a good fit for this program?
  • Are there any red flags in my eligibility?
  • What's the typical profile of successful applicants?
  • Any common mistakes to avoid?

Understand Review Criteria:

Every grant lists review criteria. These are your roadmap!

Typical criteria:

  • Significance: Why does this matter?
  • Innovation: What's new here?
  • Approach: Is this feasible and well-designed?
  • Investigator: Can you pull this off?
  • Environment: Do you have the resources?

Study the Review Process:

  • Who reviews? (Peer scientists, community members, program staff?)
  • How many reviewers? (Usually 3 for NIH, varies elsewhere)
  • Scoring system? (1-9 for NIH, percentage for NSF)
  • Success rates? (Know if it's 10% or 30% - changes strategy)
4

Crafting Your Research Plan

This is the heart of your application. Take your time here.

Start with Specific Aims (1 page):

This is your elevator pitch. Many reviewers decide here if they're excited.

Structure:
  1. Opening paragraph: The problem and why it matters (3-4 sentences)
  2. Gap in knowledge: What we don't know (2-3 sentences)
  3. Your solution: Your central hypothesis (2 sentences)
  4. Specific Aims: 2-3 testable aims
  5. Expected impact: So what? (2-3 sentences)

Research Strategy:

Significance Section:

  • What's the problem and why does it matter?
  • Current limitations in the field
  • How your work addresses these gaps
  • Potential impact (scientific and societal)

Innovation Section:

  • Novel concepts or approaches
  • New methodologies or technologies
  • Challenge existing paradigms
  • Refinement/improvement over existing methods

Approach Section (the bulk):

For each aim:

  • Rationale: Why this aim?
  • Experimental design: Specific methods
  • Expected outcomes: What results support/refute hypothesis?
  • Alternative strategies: What if Aim 1 fails?
  • Timeline: When will this be done?
💡 Pro Tip:

Use clear topic sentences. Busy reviewers often skim. Make your key points stand out.

Preliminary Data:

This makes or breaks your application. Show you can do what you're proposing.

  • 2-4 figures with actual data
  • Directly relevant to proposed work
  • Shows feasibility of methods
  • Demonstrates progress (not just published work)
5

Writing Excellence

Writing Principles:

✅ DO:

  • Write clearly and concisely
  • Use active voice
  • Define all acronyms at first use
  • Use figures to illustrate complex concepts
  • Tell a coherent story

❌ DON'T:

  • Use jargon unnecessarily
  • Write in passive voice
  • Make unsupported claims
  • Include irrelevant background
  • Exceed page limits (instant rejection!)

Common Writing Mistakes:

❌ Mistake #1: Burying the lead

Bad: "Cancer is a disease affecting millions..."

✅ Better: "We will identify novel therapeutic targets in triple-negative breast cancer using CRISPR screens."

❌ Mistake #2: Vague methods

Bad: "We will use molecular biology techniques..."

✅ Better: "We will perform CRISPR-Cas9 knockout screening in MDA-MB-231 cells (n=3 biological replicates) using the Brunello library (76,441 sgRNAs)."

The Clarity Test:

Can a smart colleague outside your field understand your specific aims? If not, revise.

Download our free grant proposal template

Get Template →
6

Budget Planning

Your budget must be realistic, justified, and aligned with your research plan.

Budget Categories:

  • Personnel: Your salary (if allowed), students, technicians, postdocs
  • Equipment: Usually items >$5,000
  • Supplies: Consumables, reagents, animals
  • Travel: Conferences (usually 1-2/year allowed)
  • Other: Publication costs, software licenses, participant costs
  • Indirect Costs: Institutional overhead (varies 25-60%)
💡 Pro Tip:

Justify every line item. Connect each expense to specific aims in your proposal.

Budget Justification:

For each item, explain:

  1. What it's for (connects to which aim?)
  2. Why it's necessary
  3. How you calculated the cost
  4. Why the amount is reasonable

Download our budget planning spreadsheet

Get Spreadsheet →
7

Supporting Documents

Your supporting documents strengthen your credibility. Don't rush these!

Biosketch/CV (Critical!):

Most grants use NIH biosketch format or similar. This isn't a full CV.

What to include:
  • Personal Statement: Why you're perfect for this project (4-5 sentences)
  • Positions & Honors: Current position, education, awards
  • Contributions to Science: 4-5 areas of research with your key papers
  • Research Support: Current and pending grants (be honest!)
⚠️ Common Mistake:

Don't list publications that don't relate to this proposal. Show focus, not volume.

Letters of Support:

Strong letters from the right people can make the difference.

Who to ask:

  • Collaborators: For multi-PI or collaborative projects
  • Department Chair: Confirming resources and support
  • Core Facility Directors: Access to equipment/services
  • Consultants: Experts providing specific expertise

What they should say:

  • Specific role in the project
  • Why they're excited about this work
  • Concrete commitments (time, resources, access)
  • Your qualifications (if from senior colleague)

Facilities & Resources:

Show you have everything needed to succeed.

  • Lab space: Square footage, biosafety level, special features
  • Major equipment: List relevant instruments you can access
  • Core facilities: Genomics, imaging, animal facility, etc.
  • Computing resources: HPC clusters, data storage
  • Clinical resources: Patient populations, tissue banks (if applicable)
💡 Pro Tip:

Get letters early! Give letter writers at least 3 weeks notice and provide them with a draft of your specific aims.

Other Common Documents:

  • Data Management Plan: How you'll handle and share data (increasingly required)
  • Human Subjects/Animal Protocols: IRB/IACUC approval or pending status
  • Letters from Institutions: For equipment purchases or core facility access
  • Vertebrate Animals: Justification and alternatives considered
8

Review and Submission

Internal Review Process:

Get feedback before submitting. Multiple rounds of review dramatically improve success rates.

Recommended review timeline:
  • 6 weeks before deadline: First complete draft to mentor/PI
  • 4 weeks before: Incorporate feedback, send to 2-3 colleagues
  • 2 weeks before: Mock study section with department (if available)
  • 1 week before: Final polish, check formatting
  • 2-3 days before: Submit! Don't wait until the last hour

Getting Good Feedback:

✅ Ask reviewers specific questions:
  • Is the significance clear in the first paragraph?
  • Do the aims flow logically?
  • Are there any feasibility concerns?
  • What's the weakest part of the proposal?
  • Would you fund this?

Pre-Submission Checklist:

  • ☐ All page limits respected (check character counts too!)
  • ☐ All required sections included
  • ☐ References formatted correctly
  • ☐ Figures are high resolution and readable
  • ☐ Budget totals correctly and matches narrative
  • ☐ All acronyms defined at first use
  • ☐ Biosketch lists all current/pending support
  • ☐ Letters of support signed and on letterhead
  • ☐ Institutional signatures obtained (if required)
  • ☐ PDF files properly named and under size limits

Submission Systems:

  • Grants.gov: Most US federal agencies (register early!)
  • eRA Commons: NIH applications via ASSIST
  • Research.gov: NSF applications
  • Agency-specific portals: Many foundations have custom systems
🚨 Critical Warning:

System registration can take 2-4 weeks! Register for Grants.gov and get institutional approval BEFORE you start writing.

After You Submit:

  1. Save a PDF of your complete application
  2. Note the confirmation number
  3. Check for validation errors within 24-48 hours
  4. Mark your calendar for when reviews typically happen
  5. Start planning your next application (seriously!)
💡 Pro Tip:

Most successful researchers have 3-5 applications in play at different stages. Don't put all your eggs in one basket.

9

Dealing with Reviews and Resubmissions

Understanding Your Summary Statement:

You'll receive written critiques from reviewers. Here's how to decode them.

Key sections in NIH summary statements:
  • Overall Impact: Big picture - is this fundable?
  • Scored Review Criteria: Significance, Innovation, Approach, Investigator, Environment
  • Additional Review Criteria: Vertebrate animals, human subjects, budget
  • Strengths: What they liked
  • Weaknesses: What needs improvement (read this carefully!)

Understanding Scores:

NIH Scoring:

1 = Exceptional
2-3 = Excellent
4-6 = Good
7-9 = Fair/Poor

Percentile:

1-10th %ile = Likely funded
10-20th = Maybe
>20th = Unlikely

When to Resubmit:

✅ DEFINITELY resubmit if:
  • Score in fundable range but not funded (payline cutoff)
  • Reviewers liked the idea but had specific concerns you can address
  • You have new preliminary data that addresses critiques
  • Program officer encourages resubmission
⚠️ Consider starting fresh if:
  • Reviewers didn't understand the premise
  • Major feasibility concerns you can't address
  • Your research direction has changed significantly
  • Scores were very poor (>7 average)

Writing an Effective Resubmission:

Introduction to Resubmission (1 page):

  1. Thank reviewers: Be gracious, even if they were harsh
  2. Summarize major critiques: Show you understand the concerns
  3. Overview of changes: What you did to address each point
  4. Highlight improvements: Especially new data or strengthened team
💡 Pro Tips for Resubmissions:
  • Address EVERY concern, even small ones
  • Use bold text in the introduction to make changes easy to find
  • Highlight changed text in the proposal (check if allowed)
  • Generate new preliminary data if possible
  • Show you took critiques seriously - don't argue with reviewers

Rejection ≠ Failure:

Remember: Most successful researchers had multiple rejections before their first award. NIH success rates are often 15-20%. Getting funded usually takes persistence, not perfection. Learn from reviews, improve your proposal, and keep applying.

Learning from Rejection:

  1. Take 24 hours to be disappointed, then move on
  2. Read reviews carefully with mentor/colleagues
  3. Identify what you can control vs. what you can't
  4. Use feedback to improve the science, not just the writing
  5. Consider submitting to a different funding mechanism or agency
  6. Keep the long game in mind - this is a marathon, not a sprint

Read success stories from researchers who persevered

Read Success Stories →
✓

You're Ready to Apply!

Congratulations! You've completed the guide.

You now have the knowledge to write competitive grant applications. Here's your action plan:

Your Next Steps:

  1. Find your ideal grant: Search our database of 6,000+ opportunities
  2. Download resources: Templates, checklists, and examples
  3. Join our community: Connect with successful grant recipients
  4. Start writing: Give yourself 3-4 months before deadline
  5. Get feedback: From mentors, colleagues, and grant office

Want personalized guidance?

Subscribe to our newsletter for weekly tips and new opportunities

Subscribe Now →