General Research Fund/Early Career Scheme
- It is encouraging to note that an increasing number of experimental and high quality proposals are funded.
- Panels are pleased to note that as a result of addressing the comments made in previous reviews, the overall quality of resubmissions has improved. For re-submitted proposals, Principal Investigators (PIs) are advised to provide their detailed responses to the comments and concerns of the Panel and reviewers made previously.
- There is an impression that the review process of GRF/ECS applications and the role of panel members are not clear to the local faculty. Although relevant details can be found on the RGC website, the RGC should step up efforts to improve communication and engagement.
- Panels suggest that details of the output dissemination plan should be set out in the application form in a clear and organized manner.
- It is noted that the size of grants requested by PIs vary considerably in previous exercises in some panels. Similar to the current practice of the Biology & Medicine Panel, the Engineering Panel has decided to cap the project budget to $1.2 million. Proposals costing more than $1.2 million would still be considered but they must be supported by strong justifications.
- PIs are reminded to follow strictly the standard RGC format when preparing the proposals, e.g. font style, maximum number of words in the PDF document uploaded in the system. These have been clearly specified in the application form and its explanatory notes.