Rgc Write

RGC GRF/CRF Proposal Writing Guide

Critical Reminders

• Do NOT modify official section headings in the RGC application form
• Respect page limits strictly: 15 pages for GRF research plan (including references), 20 pages for CRF
• All content must be in English (RGC standard; some schemes may accept Chinese)
• Proofread carefully — language errors suggest carelessness to reviewers

GRF Proposal Structure (Standard)

Research Plan (max 15 pages including references)

1. Objectives — Clear, concise statement of research goals
2. Background / Literature Review — Context, gaps, and motivation
3. Research Methodology and Plan — Detailed approach, techniques, analysis
4. Significance and Value — Contribution to the field and broader impact
5. Timetable / Milestones — Realistic project timeline
6. References — Within the page limit

Other Required Components (separate from 15-page limit)

• PI's CV and Publication List
• Budget and Justification
• Ethical Review (if applicable)
• Declaration of Overlap with Other Funding

CRF Proposal Structure

CRF proposals follow a similar framework but must additionally address:

• Rationale for Collaboration — Why multi-institutional collaboration is essential
• Role of Each PI / Institution — Clear delineation of responsibilities
• Shared Resources / Infrastructure — How collaboration creates synergy
• Management Plan — Coordination mechanisms, meetings, milestones

Core Principles

Know Your Audience

• External reviewers are international experts (often outside Hong Kong)
• Panel members cover broad disciplinary areas
• Each reviewer handles many proposals — clarity and conciseness win
• Assume reviewers are knowledgeable in the general area but not your specific niche

The "What–Why–How" Framework

Every strong proposal answers three questions:

1. What — What is the research problem and what will you achieve?
2. Why — Why is this important and why now?
3. How — How will you accomplish this? (methodology, feasibility)

Write for Skimming

• Use clear headings and subheadings
• Bold key terms and findings
• Start each paragraph with the main point
• Use bullet points for lists of items
• Include figures that summarize complex ideas

Section-by-Section Guidance

1. Objectives (半页 / half a page)

Purpose: State what you will achieve — clear, specific, measurable.

Tips:

• 2–4 specific objectives, each in one sentence
• Use action verbs: "develop," "investigate," "establish," "demonstrate"
• Objectives should be achievable within the funding period
• Avoid vague language ("explore," "study," "look into")

Example structure:

This project aims to [overarching goal]. Specifically, we will:

1. Develop ...
2. Investigate ...
3. Demonstrate ...

2. Background / Literature Review (3–5 pages)

Purpose: Establish context, identify the gap, and motivate your research.

Structure:

1. Broad context — Why this field matters (1–2 paragraphs)
2. State of the art — What has been done, key achievements (2–3 pages)
3. Gap / Problem — What remains unsolved or poorly understood
4. Your angle — How your proposed work addresses the gap

Tips:

• Cite 30–50 references, emphasizing recent work (last 5 years)
• Be fair and balanced — acknowledge others' contributions
• Don't just list papers; synthesize and critique
• End with a clear statement of the knowledge gap your project fills
• A summary figure here (conceptual diagram) is highly effective

3. Research Methodology and Plan (5–7 pages)

Purpose: Convince reviewers your approach is sound and feasible.

Structure by objective: For each objective, describe:

• Approach — What method/technique will you use?
• Rationale — Why this approach? What are the alternatives?
• Expected outcomes — What results do you anticipate?
• Potential challenges — What could go wrong? How will you mitigate?

Tips:

• Be specific about methods, not generic
• Include preliminary results if available (strengthens feasibility)
• Describe data analysis plans
• For experimental work: sample sizes, controls, statistical methods
• For computational work: algorithms, software, validation strategies
• Include a methodology flowchart (see rgc-figure skill)

4. Significance and Value (1–2 pages)

Purpose: Articulate the impact and contribution of your research.

Cover:

• Scientific significance — Advances in knowledge, new theories/methods
• Practical/societal impact — Applications, policy implications, industry relevance
• Innovation — What is new or different about your approach?
• Relevance to Hong Kong — Local context or benefit (helpful but not required for GRF)

5. Timetable / Milestones (0.5–1 page)

Tips:

• Use a Gantt chart or table format
• Break into 6-month or quarterly intervals
• Include milestones and deliverables
• Show that the timeline is realistic
• Account for potential delays in critical-path items

6. References

• Included within the page limit — be selective
• Use a consistent citation format throughout
• Prioritize recent, high-impact, and directly relevant works

PI's CV and Track Record

This section is critical — reviewers assess your ability to deliver.

Include:

• Academic qualifications and positions
• Publication record — Focus on quality (high-impact journals, citation counts)
• Relevant grants — Past and current funded projects
• Supervision record — PhD students, postdocs supervised
• Selected publications (typically 5–10 most relevant) — Briefly note your contribution and relevance to the proposed project

Tips:

• Highlight publications directly related to the proposal topic
• Show a track record of completing funded projects successfully
• For junior applicants (ECS): emphasize potential and early achievements

Budget Justification

A well-justified budget reflects careful planning.

Common categories:

Tips:

• PI salary is NOT covered by RGC grants
• Every line item should connect to a research objective
• Avoid round numbers without justification
• For CRF: clearly split budget across institutions with rationale

Writing Quality Checklist

Language and Tone

• Formal academic English throughout
• No grammatical errors or typos
• Active voice preferred ("We will develop..." not "It will be developed...")
• Confident but not overclaiming
• Jargon defined on first use

Structure and Formatting

• Clear section headings matching RGC template
• Consistent font, spacing, and margins
• Figures and tables numbered with descriptive captions
• Cross-references to figures/tables in the text
• Page limit respected

Content

• Objectives are specific and measurable
• Literature review is comprehensive and current
• Methodology is detailed and justified
• Feasibility is demonstrated (preliminary results, expertise)
• Timeline is realistic
• Budget is well justified
• Innovation is clearly articulated

Common Mistakes to Avoid

1. Too ambitious — Proposing more than can be achieved in the funding period
2. Too vague — Generic methodology without specific details
3. Literature gaps — Missing key references that reviewers will notice
4. Weak rationale — Not convincingly arguing why this research matters now
5. Ignoring feasibility — No preliminary data or track record to support the approach
6. Poor presentation — Messy formatting, inconsistent style, spelling errors
7. Budget disconnected from plan — Budget items not clearly linked to objectives
8. Overlap not addressed — Failing to distinguish from other funded/pending projects

GRF vs CRF: Key Differences in Writing

After Rejection

• Read reviewer comments carefully and objectively
• Identify specific weaknesses cited
• Revise and strengthen those areas
• Seek feedback from successful colleagues
• Consider whether a different scheme (GRF vs CRF vs ECS) might be more appropriate
• Resubmit in the next cycle — persistence is key

References

• See references/writing-guide.md for additional writing strategies
• See references/review-criteria.md for detailed review criteria and common pitfalls