A funding check, then a multi-round strategy

Checking thousands of programmes for your research

You send

A short profile: research focus, type of institution, federal state, capacity for proposals, plans for the next two years.

You receive

A report with the programmes worth preparing, the programmes ruled out, the identified readiness gaps, and the source behind every finding.

Then

A conversation about the report, including the strategic question below.

Price

Set below the direct-award thresholds at most universities, so a chair or institute can commission it without a tender. The exact threshold differs by institution and is clarified first.

Developing project outlines with design thinking

A project outline is developed together with the people who will carry the project. The work starts from the research question and the group's capacity, and turns to what a programme asks for only after that.

• clarifying the problem the project addresses and for whom
• sketching several possible project shapes before settling on one
• testing the outline early with colleagues, partners or a programme officer
• naming open questions and readiness gaps early

The result is a short outline the group can use to decide whether, and with which call, to go ahead.

Building a long-term funding strategy with future foresight

Funding priorities shift with policy, research agendas and budgets. A funding strategy considers programme cycles and policy signals alongside where the group wants to be when future rounds open.

• reading programme cycles, work programmes and relevant policy signals
• working through several possible futures and what each would mean for the group
• sequencing applications so that one funded project prepares the next
• deciding which calls to leave aside, with the reason recorded

Updating the report as calls open and rules change

New calls open, deadlines move and guidelines are revised. With a subscription the funding check is run again at agreed intervals, and changes that affect the group are flagged with their source.

For institutions with several groups, a framework agreement covers more than one profile.

Fit with your own line of work and long-term vision

Once eligibility and readiness are clear, a third question follows: whether the project serves your own line of work and long-term vision, or whether it was shaped to fit the call.

A funded project that leads in the wrong direction can cost more than a rejected proposal: it binds staff and attention for the length of the project and shapes the next application. This part is settled in conversation, with an outside view and judgement.

Preparing proposals with experienced colleagues

Some reports show a gap that is larger than one proposal. In that case the following can be agreed separately:

• closing readiness gaps in the group or institute
• organisational development around grant acquisition
• support during a specific application, with the writing staying with you