EDI in Research - can we please call out bad practices?

[atriskacademic]

I am really angry today and was wondering whether we could start calling out practices in the research grant application and evaluation pipeline where those with care responsibilities (and perhaps other groups too) are systematically disadvantaged or designed out of the process. I start with two examples.

1. I have been planning to apply for a research commercialisation scheme (won't say which one). For a long time, the website indicated that the scheme would open in June with a deadline in July. The application form has been online for a few weeks, so I have been working on this quite extensively. Based on last year’s deadlines (there was nothing else to go on), the expectation was that the deadline would be towards the third week of July, with the pitches / interviews in September. Today then the announcement, with one and a half weeks to spare, that the deadline is on the 6th of July, with the pitches / presentations on the 24th, 25th and 28th of July, right in the beginning of of the summer holidays in England. Now, if you have a few months notice, this is perhaps something that can be planned around, but with one month to spare? Normally, I go on holiday with my family precisely in this time – it is rather lucky that we are doing things differently this year.

2. In 2023/24, I became part of the UKRI Interdisciplinary Cross-Council Assessment College. During this academic year, I was part of both evaluation rounds, the outline stage and the full stage. Altogether, I estimate I spent about 5 working days on the evaluations and the panels. In 2024/25, I was not able to be part of the outline stage as the panel meeting day fell on my busiest day of teaching (that’s fine, tough luck). However, I also had to pull out of the full stage as the assessment period for the full applications neatly covers the majority of the summer holidays (21 July – 29 August 2025). Whilst I am obviously not officially “off” for the whole of the summer holidays, the time that I am not spending with my family is the very little undisturbed time for research I do have. And I also do need to slow down for a few weeks. So I pulled out for this round.

I am so angry today because of No 1). I will still apply, but there are many who may have to drop out of the process, more likely people with kids who actually had planned to start their holidays (or they will be looking for a place with Wifi on their holidays, cutting time actually spent with the family).

For No2), I am sure I am not the only one thinking that they won't clutter up the summer holidays with even more work to do. Again, resulting in less diversity in the evaluator pool.

But never mind, we are committed to EDI, aren't we?

I absolutely agree re point 1 and this makes me furious. They must know the deadlines far in advance - anyone who sits on a grant panel knows this to be true - so why can’t they publicise the dates as soon as they know, and people can write the grants early if need be?

re point 2 j disagree a bit. It’s not possible not to schedule deadlines in school holidays, as many academics ask for on twitter. They are three months of the year and as you say people are working normally throughout (or should be, if they haven’t taken leave). I sit on multiple panels and know how difficult it is to schedule new grant calls and all the assessment that goes with them

I am sorry that you’ve had both blows though

@bge Thanks for the feedback. Ok, maybe I am unreasonable re my second point, but I was just furious today re my first and vented!

definitely agree with you on (1).

occasionally, there are surveys from UKRI asking what people want to see changed in the grant process. And the ONE thing I always write is that the process should be consistent from year to year - same instructions, same deadlines, same system. then people can learn the rules and plan ahead and put in a good application.

A major problem with UKRI (and Wellcome to some extent) is that they keep changing the rules so the applicant never knows what is going on from year to year. I applied for the most recent UKRI-cross council grant and they even changed the instructions for some boxes on the form between first providing the blank forms to complete and the deadline day 6 weeks later! I wrote my application offline based on the initial forms and then found different instructions when I went to upload.

And it is crazy because being consistent from year to year would be cheaper for UKRI - they wouldn't have to keep redesigning things and then running training sessions and consultations etc. They just need to say - here are the rules, here are the deadlines, go for it.

The last fellowship application I made was not fundable because (I kid you not) "she seems not to have turned her track record of high quality first author papers into a senior role"

Thank you all for comments, though they making me even angrier, especially @UsernameChange1675 ! My Head of Research, whom I have emailed yesterday, has actually taken this seriously and has asked the Faculty Research Lead to reach out to other faculties to see whether they have had similar observations.
She has actually accepted my second case above as an example of not ideal practice, given how important 'service' is in promotion criteria, and given the reluctance of UKRI (apparently she has discussed EDI issues with them before) to look at their practices as a whole rather than specific cases.
I have also been encouraged to make a complaint regarding my first issue above, which I will do AFTER the decision on the grant. Sadly.

I’m commenting here because I’ve raised this before as being an EDI issue with the ridiculously short timescales (sometimes 6 weeks) to get a grant in. This year our doctoral scholarship deadline was mid January which gave no time for applicants to get their final proposal to us, us read and give proper feedback and then they turn it around for that deadline. Hence why it’s applicants who usually take two gos to get funding (if lucky) but also many of them move on to better opportunities and a whole load of work wasted. This is a tiny example in comparison to big grants but the system absolutely favours male professors with probably little teaching and an already established grant success (I’m in social sciences where it’s almost impossible to get money).

When I was going for ERC AdvG, I had 4 summers of writing grants (it took me a couple of submissions to land the dosh) and not books, because of the August submission deadline. V annoying.

But I suppose we get 4 weeks of holiday just like everyone else, and writing grants is part of our job.

I still can't use up all my annual leave. I book it off so I can get research done.

I agree re: ridiculously short notice. I've run into problems where my Uni wants me to have things approved internally 4 weeks ahead but the details of the call are only out 5-6 weeks ahead!

Less agree about the second point - that's actually a really long assessment period (6 weeks), and compared to other panels where I've only gotten 2 weeks, I'm guessing it's purposely long due to the summer holidays. I'm also on that one, and planning to take 3 weeks holiday in there. I figured I'd only actually look at applications in 1 week of that period, and potentially use a second week for writing up responses.

Keep making noise - it helps. I know a panel I was on changed its deadline from right after Christmas to end of Jan.

This seems to be a theme in academia. Most notably in our institution, promotion changes are rolled out in June, often with different requirements and hurdles, for submission at the end of the school holidays. In an already struggling sector (multiple recent job losses) this acts as a massive deterrent for people with children and part-time workers. How difficult would it be to set the rules 3 months earlier.

@ZingySparrow A few years ago, our promotion criteria were published four weeks before the deadline, with the last week before the deadline being autumn half term. I complained via EDI and the deadline was moved by a week. But yes, how hard can it be to publish criteria 5 months before the deadline? Gives everybody to plan their time, get advice and mentoring etc.

Are you saying that this is EDI issue because disabled people or those with caring duties need more time than not disabled/not caring duties?

Yes and no. Put simply: those with caring responsibilities have less flexibility to react to tight deadlines than those with others. Covering a half term week is hard enough when it is in the middle of teaching - even if the child is going to holiday club many clubs don't cover full days, meaning that this week I need to focus on core tasks, leaving me no time to fine-tune a promotion application. So essentially I have a week less than someone without caring responsibilities. Or, if I have disability and I have a bad week, I also have a week less. If I have four months to prepare for these things (grant deadlines, promotion deadlines), I have more time to plan my activities and, crucially, more contingency if things go wrong.

It's actually almost the opposite - as @atriskacademic says, those with disability or caring responsibilities GET less time when deadlines are set with the assumption that people will work over holidays/weekends.

Similar to @ZingySparrow, I've actually heard our HR say how they aim to get promotion processes out before Christmas so people "get the extra week". If it comes out before Christmas, they do add a week to the amount of time before the deadine. But that basically means that some people get an extra week - and those are the people who CAN work over holidays. Not people with disability who have been pacing and desperately need the break, or people with caring responsibilities who are fully scheduled over Christmas.

I've seen similar on short-term deadlines, things like deadlines at 9am Monday so people "get" the weekend. Except the only people who can use that are those who can physically work over the weekend. Some people can't.

How is point 2 anything at all to do with EDI? And you should try teaching on a PSRB or apprenticeship course! My team and I teach and/or assess every month of the year. You need to get things in perspective - your job is cushy and moaning about having to do work in the summer is annoying!

You clearly know nothing about academia and have not understood the OP's post at all.

I don't understand how more notice would lead to a competition that doesn't disadvantage people with other commitments or limiting disability.

OP would still have less time than someone without caring duties/disability to prepare their application. Even if OP had 6 months notice, the persons with 6 months notice without many competing commitments/disabilities that limit the intensity of their work, would still have an advantage. Seems like the only way to be fair to the disabled/carer person is to give them 'extra' time , say everyone else gets 2 weeks notice and OP gets 4 weeks notice.

@CleverKnot Well, in an ideal world, perhaps yes, giving people with care responsibilities or those with disabilities more time than others would equal the playing field even properly but this is probably unrealistic.
Just having plenty of notice gives people the opportunity to plan ahead and to compensate for difficult periods(school holidays, flare ups of medical conditions etc.) which they won't have with very short notice. Things will always be harder for these groups - but this at least gives them a chance.
And then just the basic considerations, such as not putting a presentation that provides access to a grant in the first three days of the summer holidays. With four weeks notice, thus giving not enough time to change plans if necessary. As I said, this year this is not a problem for me. Last year - loss of a £500 ferry ticket and £600 holiday chalet booking and proper time off with kids OR loss of opportunity to get grant.