Faculty are navigating one of the most complex grant funding environments in recent memory. Federal priorities are shifting. Budgets are tightening. And competition for research dollars continues to rise.
At the same time, institutions continue to depend on external funding, but often without updating the systems and structures that help faculty pursue it effectively. For many scholars, especially those early in their careers, the grant process still feels like a high-stakes guessing game.
If campuses want to support faculty success, it’s time to rethink the model. Here are four friction points that come up again and again, and what can actually make a difference.
1. The Planning Window is Too Narrow
Many faculty don’t start thinking seriously about grant applications until a deadline is just a few weeks away. That’s usually when institutional support kicks in, too, with compliance checklists, internal routing forms, and basic formatting assistance. But by that point, the most important work—shaping the research vision, aligning with funder priorities, and building strong collaborations—should already be in motion.
Without lead time, proposals become reactive rather than strategic. And even promising ideas can fall flat when they’re developed in a rush.
What helps:
Start conversations 6–12 months ahead of major deadlines. Host planning sessions that help faculty identify aligned funders and sketch out proposal timelines before the writing begins.
2. The Workshop Model Falls Short
Workshops are common, but they’re not enough. Most offer broad advice about writing grants in general, with little attention to specific funders, disciplines, or proposal types. And because they’re usually disconnected from actual writing cycles, the content doesn’t always stick. Faculty show up, take notes, and then return to their offices without a clear next step.
The problem isn’t that faculty don’t want help. It’s that the help they receive doesn’t match the moment they’re in.
What helps:
Pair workshops with real-time support. Offer short, targeted sessions on specific proposal sections and create space for faculty to get feedback on actual drafts.
3. Faculty are Writing in Isolation
Unlike publishing, grant writing happens behind the scenes. Most faculty never see what a successful proposal looks like, especially from someone in their field. They don’t have spaces to talk about what’s working, where they’re stuck, or how to interpret vague reviewer feedback. As a result, the process feels murky and discouraging.
When grant writing is treated like a private struggle, faculty miss out on the opportunity to learn from each other, and institutions miss the chance to build a culture of shared success.
What helps:
Create peer writing groups, draft-sharing circles, or informal “grant hours” where faculty can connect, ask questions, and normalize the process.
4. Rejection Ends the Conversation
Faculty know that rejection is part of the grant game. But that doesn’t make it easier. After investing months into a proposal, getting turned down can be disorienting, and often there’s no clear guidance on what to do next. Should they revise and resubmit? Start fresh? Wait a cycle?
Without institutional follow-up, faculty are left to make that call alone. And too often, strong ideas are abandoned because no one helped shape what came next.
What helps:
Build in post-submission debriefs. Help faculty interpret reviewer comments and plan for resubmission. Track and celebrate second-round wins to show that persistence matters.
The Opportunity Ahead
Better grant support doesn’t have to mean bigger infrastructure. Small shifts (like earlier planning, more tailored feedback, visible examples, and post-review follow-up) can go a long way. Especially now, when the stakes are high, the right support system can make the difference between faculty who give up and faculty who grow.
We’ll be continuing this conversation throughout the summer, with more strategies and tools to help faculty navigate funding with confidence.