How to Secure Your First Research Fellowship: What Reviewers Look For

Early-career fellowships help researchers move from supervised work to greater research independence. However, intense competition can make the fellowship application process challenging for early-career researchers (ECRs). This practical guide explains how to strengthen your fellowship application, from evaluating your research track record to developing a compelling proposal and choosing the right host institution. It draws on our experience running a fellowship support structure in the Department of Chemistry at University College London (UCL), which has supported more than 40 successful ECR applicants.

UCL’s programme combines clear online guidance for PhD students and postdocs with personalized advice from experienced researchers. The support system helps applicants assess their readiness, refine their research proposals and understand how their work fits within the wider research community. Although the programme was developed in one department, its core principles can help ECRs applying for fellowships at universities and research institutions elsewhere.

Our guidance focuses on three essential questions: Is my research track record suitable for the fellowship I want to apply for? How can I develop and present the strongest possible research programme? And which university or host institution is best placed to support me as a future fellow?

Answering these questions will help you evaluate your application from a reviewer’s perspective. Combining this approach with a clear passion for your research can significantly improve the strength and credibility of your fellowship application.

Start early

Beginning your fellowship planning early is essential. Thinking about future applications during your PhD and early postdoctoral career gives you time to build your research profile, strengthen your CV and align your achievements with fellowship requirements.

Set clear milestones for your application and research development. These might include submitting a paper, presenting at a conference, generating preliminary data, applying for a small grant or developing a collaboration. Create personal deadlines well before the official fellowship deadline so you have time to revise your proposal, request feedback and address unexpected delays.

Evaluate your research track record

Fellowship reviewers want to see evidence that applicants can conduct independent research, provide intellectual leadership and make an original contribution to their field. Before applying, assess your achievements against the criteria used by your chosen funder.

Leadership. Reviewers may use traditional indicators such as first-author publications, book chapters and papers in leading journals in your field. Co-corresponding-author, senior-author or single-author publications can also demonstrate research leadership and independence, although these opportunities are less common during doctoral training. If confidentiality or commercial restrictions limit publication, consider presenting alternative evidence, such as patents, patent applications or a clearly documented leadership role in delivering major research projects.

Applying for funding takes too long. How can I focus on my research?

Many funders are also adopting narrative CVs, which allow applicants to describe contributions that publication metrics alone cannot capture. These contributions may include mentoring, open-science practices, public engagement, team building, contributions to research culture and service to the wider community.

Reviewers should also take account of legitimate personal leave, career interruptions and differences in the research support available to applicants at previous institutions. If relevant, explain these circumstances clearly and concisely in the application.

Independence. Evidence of independence can include securing small research grants, obtaining travel or conference funding, contributing as a corresponding or senior author and leading outreach or engagement activities. Other indicators may include moving between institutions, establishing external collaborations or developing a distinct research programme. Although some methodological overlap with previous supervisors or research leaders is expected, your proposed work should demonstrate a clear intellectual direction of your own.

Use relevant benchmarks. To understand how competitive your application may be, study the profiles of previous fellowship recipients. Funders often publish information about successful applicants on their websites. Review their publications, CVs and research achievements at the time they applied. This can help you identify the qualities the funder values most and assess how your own experience aligns with its selection criteria.

Develop a compelling research proposal

The quality and originality of your proposed research are central to a successful fellowship application. Reviewers assess whether a project is important, innovative and potentially impactful, but they also want to know whether it is feasible and supported by an effective network of collaborators.

Significance, novelty and impact. Significant research addresses an important gap in scientific knowledge. Novel research tackles that gap in a substantially different way, perhaps through a new theoretical model, experimental approach or methodology. Impact describes the changes your project could bring to science, policy, practice or society if it succeeds.

Step-by-step guide to a successful tenure promotion package

The meaning of “important” and “novel” varies across disciplines. Develop a fact-finding mindset as you read widely and identify unanswered questions in your field. Reviews in leading journals can help reveal emerging priorities, while conversations with experienced researchers may show where the most significant gaps remain. Ask which problems require transformative or high-risk approaches and how your idea differs from incremental work.

Discuss the significance of your research with mentors and colleagues. Does it open a new scientific direction, challenge an established assumption or generate important follow-up questions? You should also check that your project fits the funder’s remit, level of ambition and approach to research risk. Some funders prioritize bold, exploratory ideas, whereas others favor a more gradual path to reliable progress. Comparing abstracts and summaries from previous successful fellows can help you understand the expected level of innovation, ambition and potential impact.

Feasibility and collaboration. A novel idea is not enough; reviewers must be confident that you can deliver the proposed research. Explain why your chosen approach is well suited to the problem and compare it critically with credible alternatives. Discuss practicality, likely risks, expected insights and the overall scope of the project.

If your proposal depends on a new experimental or computational method, compare it directly with an established approach. Explain what the new method adds, where it may fail and which alternative strategies could keep the project on track. This demonstrates that your fellowship project is ambitious while remaining realistic and achievable.

Finally, use your track record to show why you are well placed to lead the work. Identify the skills, experience and collaborations required to complete the project, then provide evidence that you already possess—or can access—the expertise needed to deliver it.