Take-home messages from our Grant Writing Workshop

C2D3 held a Grant Writing Workshop at The Glasshouse, home of @ Innovate Cambridge, in January 2026. On what could have been a cold wet day in January, we were treated to natural light flooding the vibrant event space. The Grant Writing Workshop was designed for participants from the data science and AI community; PhD students and Early Career Researchers were all welcome to join, as it's never too early to learn about grant writing.

The event provided opportunities for participants to engage with experienced researchers, academics, and professional services staff. It began with a warm-up exercise in which participants practised elevator pitches with one another, followed by a talk reflecting on a personal journey from seed funding to securing a fellowship. This was followed by a panel discussion, and the session concluded with networking, allowing attendees to connect directly with the speakers. Throughout the afternoon, there were many opportunities for audience questions and interactive discussion.

Here is a summary of the take-home messages:

Strategies, Reviewers, and Collaboration

Grant writing requires balancing ambition with feasibility while ensuring alignment between research ideas and funder priorities. Developing a clear research vision, building strong collaborations, and producing realistic project plans are essential for credibility. Early preparation, iterative practice, and actively seeking feedback from mentors and colleagues (from both within and outside your area of research) help refine proposals and improve strategic thinking, while rejection should be seen as a normal part of the process that provides valuable insights for future submissions. Redefining failure as professional development helps sustain motivation over time.

Understanding reviewer perspectives is critical: proposals are typically evaluated on innovation, impact, and feasibility, and funders’ risk tolerance must be considered, as some are more risk-averse than others. Demonstrating a solid foundation of prior work, securing seed funding, clear project management, and a strong rationale for methods strengthens credibility and assures reviewers that the project is well-planned and executable.

Interdisciplinary projects can be particularly appealing to funders, as they tackle complex problems that single disciplines cannot address alone, but they require careful communication to avoid misunderstandings. Clear, well-written applications—free of errors, with strong summaries and proof of concept—help engage both expert and non-expert reviewers and counter the effects of reviewer fatigue.

Mentorship and collaboration play a central role throughout the process, providing feedback, perspective, and reassurance. Engaging mentors early allows proposals to be shaped thoughtfully, ensuring that research visions, collaborations, and project plans are robust, feasible, and clearly presented to reviewers.

Time management and motivation

The discussion highlighted time management as a significant challenge in grant writing, noting that grant preparation is highly time-intensive and often insufficiently recognised in formal workload planning. The panel talked about the importance of being honest about feasibility, advising researchers to be prepared to pivot or abandon an application if it becomes clear that the timing or scope is not realistic. They added that many early-career grants are assessed more heavily on the applicant’s existing track record than on the precise details of the proposed project.
Motivation and resilience were also discussed as integral to time management, and participants were encouraged to think about a personal motivation, perhaps treating themselves after grant submission as a way to sustain morale during the demanding application process. They also stressed the importance of emotional preparedness for both possible outcomes, whether a grant is awarded or rejected.

Practical Advice on Budgeting

The panel offered practical advice on budgeting, emphasising that while preparing a budget can feel burdensome, it is a critical part of any grant application and should not be taken lightly. Developing a budget requires balancing all aspects of the research vision to ensure that proposed activities are realistic and properly resourced.

Panellists highlighted the support available from programme managers, departmental grants teams, and senior colleagues, noting in particular the value of grants teams in advising on staff costs such as national insurance and pension contributions. Applicants were encouraged to identify eligible and non-eligible costs early and to account for any activities required by the funder.

The panel cautioned against common budgeting mistakes, including failing to include VAT on relevant items and underestimating the impact of exchange rate fluctuations in international funding schemes, both of which can lead to significant financial shortfalls. Finally, they noted that budgets signal credibility to funders: unrealistically low budgets may suggest inexperience, while overly expensive ones may raise concerns about value for money.

Using AI as a tool for writing grant applications

Many funders allow the use of AI as a tool for writing, but some do not. The Research Funders Policy Group is made up of some of the major UK science and health funders and has published a joint statement on this topic. If you do use generative AI tools, then you should acknowledge this.

Beyond the benefits, there are the usual considerations including care around sensitive data when using generative AI and the removal of emotive language and personality from your text.

Build a Long-Term Funding Narrative

Rather than isolated applications, researchers are encouraged to think in terms of a coherent funding trajectory. Each grant should build toward a broader research vision. The panel stressed the importance of understanding one’s own research identity and long-term goals.

Strategic Use of Seed Funding

Seed funding was described as particularly useful for generating preliminary data. This data can strengthen applications for larger, more competitive grants.

Emotional and Psychological Aspects of Grant Writing

Imposter syndrome was discussed as being a normal experience – most researchers go through it at one time or another.

Final messages

Ensure applications are free of typos
An excellent lay-person summary is critical
Start early and plan backwards
Build a long-term funding narrative to give you clarity over the coming years
Find funding opportunities and information about available support on our website: https://www.c2d3.cam.ac.uk/supporting-your-research