The Lead Chief Investigator and a minimum of 50% of the nominated Chief Investigators must reside in Australia or New Zealand (or intend to reside in Australia) throughout the funding period. They must be Australian or New Zealand citizens, have resident status, or hold an appropriate visa to work in Australia or New Zealand for the full duration of the funding period. Lead CIs who have not yet been granted a relevant visa may apply provided that such status has been sought, with evidence provided in the application.

The EOI is the first stage of the application process, introduced in 2025. Researchers submit a brief EOI outlining the proposed project's aims, significance, methodology, and indicative budget. EOIs are assessed by both the International Scientific Advisory Committee (ISAC) and the Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP). 

Applicants whose EOIs are deemed competitive are then invited to submit a full application. Progression to the full application stage is dependent on the availability of funding and the quality of EOIs received. In 2025, approximately 35% of EOIs progressed.

No. Applicants must select one category at the time of application.

The OCRF works to strict timelines to deliver the National Research Grants Program. All submissions must be received by the due date and time. Late submissions or additional documentation cannot be accepted under any circumstances. Lead Chief Investigators are strongly encouraged to submit well in advance of the closing date.

Yes, these are excluded from word counts. At the EOI stage, one pdf A4 figure (with multiple panels if needed) may be included and must be legible. The figure legend is not included in the word count and should be attached separately. The reference list can also be appended to this pdf document.

Yes. Although applicants can only be Lead CI on one application, there is no upper limit on the number of applications a single CI or AI can be involved in. However, if several are submitted, it is recommended that resourcing be considered within the application. The Team section (Full Proposal stage) should address whether investigators are involved in other applications and whether they have the capacity to complete all responsibilities across all applications submitted if successful.

The Lead CI must remain the same for the duration of the project funding period, unless this is discussed and agreed with the OCRF Research Team well in advance.

Ethics approval is not required at the time of application, but Lead CIs must acknowledge whether ethics approval needs to be, has been sought, or has been achieved. Successful Lead CIs will need to provide final ethics clearance to the OCRF before project commencement and the release of funding.

Funding commences from 1 July of the year after application. For example, a successful application submitted in 2026 would commence funding from 1 July 2027.

No. The applicant should use the Budget Justification section to discuss their budget rationale. A detailed budget breakdown is only required at the full application stage. At the EOI stage, applicants need only provide an estimated total funding request.

Grant funds may be used for salaries of research personnel directly or proportionately involved in the project, consumables, research-related services (such as sequencing, mass spectrometry, flow cytometry, imaging, core facility charges), and minor equipment. On-costs applied by the Administering Institution may be included up to a maximum of 25%.

Grant funds cannot be used for indirect institutional overhead costs, often referred to as the “cost of research” or “research levies”, unless discussed with the OCRF Research Director well in advance of submission.

If funding for a research project is offered by another funding body either at the same time as the OCRF grant or after the OCRF award, the applicant must notify the OCRF immediately. The OCRF retains the right to withdraw funding or to elect to top up the funds from the alternative funding agency rather than awarding the full amount, in order to maximise the impact of grant-making activity in Australia.

Full applications are assessed by the ISAC against four weighted criteria: Innovation (20%), Quality and outcomes (40%), Research team (20%), and Project management (20%). Strongly addressing all criteria will set an application apart.

Areas that are often overlooked include: thorough statistical analyses with justifications for sample sizes and power calculations; a well-considered scope that is feasible and thoroughly resolved rather than trying to address too many priorities at once; and a clear discussion of expected outcomes and alternative approaches should results differ from expectations. Please ensure the application clearly outlines the anticipated outcomes of your proposed project as well as any alternative approaches that may be considered - the ISAC views this as a critical element of a strong application.

Strong applications will also demonstrate a clear and solid hypothesis with supporting data (with strong supporting data for Project grants), a clear focus on design including timelines and methodologies, a well-articulated experimental rationale, a clear outline of significance and potential impact, and thorough engagement with key literature relevant to the proposed research.

The LEAP assesses full applications against three equally weighted criteria: Relevance, Equity and Alignment; Translation and Impact; and Lived Experience Engagement. Each is scored out of 10 for a total LEAP score of 30.

• Lived experience engagement: Discuss not only who the individuals with lived experience involved in the project will be, but exactly how they will contribute to the project strategically.
• Milestones and deliverables: These should be addressed in detail and in lay terminology to give the Panel a clear understanding of what will be achieved and how at each phase of the project, not only what the project hopes to achieve overall.
• Explain terminology, don't omit it: Throughout the Lived Experience Review section, the best applications are detailed and explain scientific terminology rather than omitting it altogether, which can dilute the explanation and overall understanding of the project.
• Ovarian cancer statistics and landscape: The LEAP represents people who have had an ovarian cancer diagnosis, cared for ovarian cancer patients, or are family of those affected by ovarian cancer. Please exercise sensitivity and avoid using ovarian cancer statistics. The lived experience review section should focus on articulating clear lived experience input and planning relevant to the project proposal.

The OCRF does not provide feedback on unsuccessful applications by default. However, brief written feedback may be supplied upon request, with the aim of assisting applicants to strengthen future submissions.

At the latest, all applicants will be notified of the outcome of their application by the third week of December.

Successful Lead CIs are required to submit Progress Reports on an annual basis via the OCRF Grants Portal, covering progress against stated aims, impact reporting (including lay summaries and dissemination activities), commercial interests, and financial acquittal. The OCRF strongly encourages researchers to maintain open and ongoing communication with the Research Team, particularly if challenges arise, rather than waiting for formal reporting periods. Failure to submit reports on time may lead to the suspension of future funding.

Each research proposal should be submitted as either a Pilot Grant or a Project Grant application, not both. Pilot and Project versions of the same proposal should not be submitted under different Lead Chief Investigators.