Thanks! To answer the questions under the first bullet point:
Individuals performed better than organizations, but there weren’t that many organizations.
Individuals pursuing research directions mostly did legibly well, and the ones who didn’t do legibly well seem like they had less of a well-defined plan, as one might expect.
But some people with less defined directions also seem like they did well.
Also note that maybe I’m rating research directions which didn’t succeeded as less well defined.
I don’t actually have access to the applications, just to the grant blurbs and rationales
Grants to organize conferences and workshops generally delivered, and I imagine that they generally had more concrete roadmaps
There was only one upskilling grant.
In general, I think that the algorithm of looking at past similar grants and see if they succeed might be decently predictive for new grants, but that maybe isn’t captured by the distinctions above.
Thanks! To answer the questions under the first bullet point:
Individuals performed better than organizations, but there weren’t that many organizations.
Individuals pursuing research directions mostly did legibly well, and the ones who didn’t do legibly well seem like they had less of a well-defined plan, as one might expect.
But some people with less defined directions also seem like they did well.
Also note that maybe I’m rating research directions which didn’t succeeded as less well defined.
I don’t actually have access to the applications, just to the grant blurbs and rationales
Grants to organize conferences and workshops generally delivered, and I imagine that they generally had more concrete roadmaps
There was only one upskilling grant.
In general, I think that the algorithm of looking at past similar grants and see if they succeed might be decently predictive for new grants, but that maybe isn’t captured by the distinctions above.