Good practice guideline on the quality of research competitions

To ensure these research competitions are transparent, fair and impactful, the Science Granting Councils Initiative (SGCI), in collaboration with SARIMA and other partners, has developed a ‘Good Practice Guideline on the Quality of Research Competitions’.

As part of their mandate Science Granting Councils SGCs run competitive calls for research funding. These are essential to driving research excellence, supporting national development priorities and strengthening research ecosystems.

The guideline aims to provide a shared framework and quality criteria for assessing and improving funding calls across the continent.

Background

The guideline was developed through an iterative process involving multiple stakeholders. These included funding partners, SGCs, and university based research managers. It builds on peer learning, literature reviews, and regional workshops and was finalised following a joint SGCI-SARIMA stakeholder event hosted by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa.

The initiative recognises that well-run research competitions are fundamental to achieving research excellence. Which is especially critical when research outcomes are expected to inform development policy, innovation, or public investment.

Core elements of a high quality research competition

The guideline identifies four related phases that define the research competition lifecycle. These include:

1. Call for applications
2. Review and assessment
3. Awarding of grants
4. Monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL)

Each phase includes specific quality criteria that SGCs are encouraged to integrate into their grants management systems.

Detailed quality criteria

Call for applications

SGCs should align funding calls with national and international research priorities . Calls must be:

• Publicly accessible and well marketed
• Organisationally clear, with defined roles and responsibilities
• Transparent in eligibility criteria and review processes
• Inclusive, promoting gender and diversity considerations
• Supported with clear documentation, templates, and FAQs

Review and assessment

Peer review must be credible, fair, and technically sound. Key practices include:

• Allowing applicants to recommend or exclude reviewers
• Maintaining a qualified reviewer database
• Applying clear scoring rubrics and conflict of interest policies
• Ensuring constructive feedback and the possibility of resubmission or appeal

Awarding of the grant

Following selection, grants must be formalised through:

• Clear agreements outlining roles, timelines, and performance indicators
• Defined disbursement and reporting mechanisms
• Supportive onboarding of successful applicants to ensure effective implementation

Monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL)

Ongoing MEL ensures accountability and learning. Recommended practices include:

• Tracking progress through regular reporting against indicators
• Supporting knowledge dissemination beyond academia
• Having mechanisms in place for handling project changes, extensions, or terminations

Enabling research excellence through quality processes

The guideline states that research competition quality directly influences the quality and impact of research funded. By embedding best practices across the funding cycle, SGCs can help ensure that funded projects are scientifically rigorous, developmentally relevant, and well managed.

Furthermore, the guideline encourages a culture of continuous improvement, allowing SGCs to adapt processes based on feedback, evidence, and peer learning.

Looking Ahead

SGCI and its technical partners encourage all SGCs to adopt and contextualise the guideline. An online validation process will provide further refinement opportunities and promote broad uptake across Africa’s research funding institutions.