Sign in

ResBench

@resbench.bsky.social
16 followers 10 following 30 posts

ResBench creates innovative apps, tools, and resources for research strategy and research grant application development. resbench.com.au.

PostsRepliesMedia
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 22/07/2026
The bones of a homepage have been added to the mix. 👷‍♂️ resbench.com.au
resbench.com.au
ResBench Homepage
Welcome to the ResBench Homepage. ResBench creates innovative apps, tools, and resources for research strategy and research grant application development.
000
Reposted by ResBench
Australian Research Council @arc-gov-au.bsky.social · 22/07/2026
Minister for Education, the Hon @jasonclaremp.bsky.social, has released the final report of the National Competitive Grants Program Policy Review — setting the direction for a simpler, more focused research funding program. Read more: www.arc.gov.au/news-and-pub...
Cover image of the Australian Research Council's National Competitive Grants Program Policy Review Final Report displayed on a dark blue background. The report cover features the Australian Government and Australian Research Council logo, with the title "National Competitive Grants Program Policy Review Final Report" in white text on a blue banner. Below the report cover, large white text reads "NCGP Final Report now available". Decorative abstract shapes in purple and light blue appear beneath the text.
0119
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 22/07/2026
Footnote 30 on p.19 suggests ARC is at least considering the feedback. It looks like active FL fellows will be ineligible in the Lead and Mentor scheme.
010
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 14/05/2026
In response to the ARC's review, @resbench.bsky.social looks more closely at the apparent limitations of research grant assessment processes affecting interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research's funding success. tinyurl.com/82xsuamn
tinyurl.com
(Mis-)Assessing Integrative Research: Structural Disadvantage in ARC Discovery Projects' Assessment
The Australian Research Council (ARC) review of the Discovery Projects (DP) scheme’s two-step application process contains unexpected admissions about shortcomings in assessment of a swath of research...
010
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 13/05/2026
Thankfully, that's just a typo. If only the rest weren't so disappointing. (I heard someone call the situation "robbing Peter to pay Paul." So, I hope you didn't have an AEA grant under assessment.)
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 13/05/2026
If you are still searching for information on research and the Federal Budget, a Times Higher Education article can be accessed here: archive.today/9DQUA The relevant portfolio budget statements are here: www.education.gov.au/about-depart... www.industry.gov.au/publications...
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 30/04/2026
Our first customers asked for an overview of ResBench's products. It was the motivation this small business needed to make a catalogue (and show off new tools we are yet to write about in standalone posts). Take a look for a sneak preview of what we have in the pipeline: catalogue.resbench.com.au
catalogue.resbench.com.au
ResBench Product Catalogue
110
Reposted by ResBench
Australian Research Council @arc-gov-au.bsky.social · 24/03/2026
Hello, Bluesky. We fund research that helps shape Australia’s future. Follow us for updates on funding, research and outcomes.
13010
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 04/03/2026
The assistant prepares draft texts to tell the story of a researcher's: • contributions to field(s) • research impact • mentoring and leadership • research outputs' context • career-best outputs, annotated with output-level bibliometrics and altmetrics.
020
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 04/03/2026
ResBench's newest product, the 𝗔𝗥𝗖 𝗥𝗢𝗣𝗘 𝗪𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁, helps address these shortcomings. arc-rope-writing-assistant.resbench.com.au
arc-rope-writing-assistant.resbench.com.au
ARC ROPE Writing Assistant by ResBench
The ARC ROPE Writing Assistant streamlines the drafting of Australian Research Council (ARC) grant applications. It prepares detailed, well-substantiated content for Research Opportunity and Performan...
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 04/03/2026
ARC grant application forms ask researchers to narrativise evidence of research opportunity and performance in sections called, collectively, ROPE. But this evidence is often difficult to reproduce or verify, sometimes used incorrectly.
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 16/02/2026
Only detailed assessors' reports are shared with applicants. So, there was no training of that kind. The app provides feedback from the perspective of an imagined general assessor (the researchers who make up panels)—a well-read non-expert with deep knowledge of ARC funding schemes.
000
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 15/02/2026
Great to hear we're reaching the right people and you're finding the posts helpful! This app might be something for you. There's a giveaway in the thread. bsky.app/profile/resb...
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 15/02/2026
The app is proof of concept and a finished product, tested by researchers. It is intended to complement—not replace—expert peer review within relevant research fields, while helping to reduce the time and cost burden associated with preparing compliant and competitive ARC grant applications.
000
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 15/02/2026
Engagement with the virtual assessor provides general feedback on project quality and innovation and anticipated benefits. Additionally, it generates draft content that adheres to ARC instructions: • Application title • Application summary • National Interest Test (NIT) statement.
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 15/02/2026
Introducing the 𝗩𝗶𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝗥𝗖 𝗚𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗼𝗿+. virtual-arc-general-assessor.resbench.com.au The app guides users through AI-powered Socratic questioning to refine a research project idea for enhanced clarity and alignment with common elements of key assessment criteria.
virtual-arc-general-assessor.resbench.com.au
Virtual ARC General Assessor+ by ResBench
Virtual ARC General Assessor+ is an AI-powered virtual general assessor and grant writer for Australian Research Council (ARC) grant applications. The virtual assessor guides the user through Socratic...
131
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 30/01/2026
Data-driven benchmarking underpins @resbench.bsky.social’s work, setting it apart from many research grant consultancies. While we value qualitative insights from institutional knowledge and anecdotes, we also use programmatic collection and computational analysis of publicly available data.
010
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 30/01/2026
Excluding PIs, successful projects had mostly teams of one—one!—to three CIs, with a sharp decline beyond that. DP26 (CIs ONLY): Team of 1 → 104 grants (19.8%) 2 → 174 (33.1%) 3 → 137 (26.0%) 4 → 70 (13.3%) 5 → 27 (5.1%) 6 → 10 (1.9%) 7 → 3 (0.6%) 9 → 1 (0.2%) Total: 526 Average: 2.6 Median: 2.0
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 30/01/2026
DP26 (ALL CIs & PIs): Team of 1 → 42 grants (8.0%) 2 → 136 grants (25.9%) 3 → 148 (28.1%) 4 → 88 (16.7%) 5 → 58 (11.0%) 6 → 30 (5.7%) 7 → 12 (2.3%) 8 → 8 (1.5%) 9 → 2 (0.4%) 10 → 1 grant (0.2%) 11 → 1 grant (0.2%) Total: 526 Average: 3.36 Median: 3.0
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 30/01/2026
Are smaller teams genuinely more competitive, or do these patterns simply reflect received wisdom and institutional norms? During pre-award checks, did your institution comment on team sizes, or did you advise colleagues, and if so, on what basis?
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 30/01/2026
In DP26, successful teams averaged 3.36 investigators including CIs and PIs; counting CIs only, the average was 2.6. DP25 averages were almost identical. Data on DP26 team size distribution show common practices, not success or competitiveness conditional on size.
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 30/01/2026
ARC Discovery Projects 2027 (DP27) expressions of interest are already under assessment, so investigator teams cannot change. With no further round expected, now is a useful moment to reflect on whether past team composition could have been more strategically planned.
100
Reposted by ResBench
GrantConnectBot @grantconnectbot.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
New GO published by Australian Research Council: GO8166 - Discovery Early Career Researcher Award for funding commencing in 2027. View the GO at www.grants.gov.au/Go/Show?GoUuid=2d…
101
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
If you want to support ResBench's work, or just say thanks, you can pay for our next coffee at buymeacoffee.com/resbench.
buymeacoffee.com
ResBench
ResBench creates innovative apps, tools, and resources for research grant application development.
000
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
Follow @grantconnectbot.bsky.social on Bluesky to keep track of newly published research-related grant opportunities (GOs) from grants.gov.au. Made by @resbench.bsky.social.
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
@resbench.bsky.social is now on LinkedIn! Find us at www.linkedin.com/company/resb....
000
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
Next steps? 1. Consider your FoR code options. - Use FoR Finder (resbench.github.io/FoR-Finder/). 2. Check your FoR codes’ (up to three) distribution to panels. - Use FoR-to-ARC-Discipline-Panel Lookup (resbench.github.io/FoR-to-ARC-D...). 3. Evaluate strategic risks and benefits. Comments welcome!
110
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
Strategic implications: bridging disciplines is often encouraged in research, even in project descriptions for submission to the ARC, but the DE26 fellows tended to demonstrate a clear core discipline in FoR code nominations.
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
While most aren’t crossing panels, their FoR code nominations aren’t "narrow" either. 13.5% (27/200) nominated only one FoR code, whereas 33.5% (67/200) nominated two and 53% (106/200) nominated three.
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
Here is the breakdown: - 82.5% (165/200) of fellows had their FoR code nominations distributed one panel. - Only 16.5% (33/200) crossed two panels. - Just 1% (2/200) nominated codes distributed to three panels.
100
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
@resbench.bsky.social has been crunching the numbers on ARC Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DECRA) 2026 (DE26) outcomes. Attention DE27 applicants: analysis of 200 DECRA fellows’ fields of research (FoR) code nominations shows a clear trend—disciplinary focus.
110
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
Here’s the breakdown: - 82.5% (165/200) of fellows had their FoR code nominations distributed one panel. - Only 16.5% (33/200) crossed two panels. - Just 1% (2/200) nominated codes distributed to three panels.
010
ResBench @resbench.bsky.social · 28/01/2026
While the ARC funds interdisciplinary research, the data suggest that nominating FoR codes distributed to a single discipline panel is most common among DE26 fellows. See all DE26 outcomes here: tinyurl.com/56j83hja
100