Research funding demonstrates your ability to win competitive resources independently — a core signal of research leadership. The panel values grants where you were Principal Investigator, prestigious fellowships, and total career funding. It is not just about amounts; it is about independence and peer selection.
Why funding evidence matters
If leading funding bodies — EPSRC, Wellcome, ERC, NIH — have reviewed your research programme and chosen to fund it, that is credible external validation of your scientific quality. Even a modest but competitive grant demonstrates independence in a way that salary alone does not.
Tiers of funding evidence
PI vs Co-I
Being Co-Investigator on a large collaborative grant shows research influence, but it does not demonstrate independent leadership. The panel looks for evidence that you can develop and lead your own research programme. If most of your funding is as Co-I, you need particularly strong publication and recognition evidence to compensate.
What if you have no large grants yet?
For Exceptional Promise (Route 4), not having a major grant is expected. The panel looks for one of: a competitive fellowship, a pending application to a major scheme, or an unusually strong publication record. The key question is whether your trajectory suggests you will win major funding — not whether you already have it.