I’m glad I’m not in the sciences because then I’d have to write grants once a year instead of once every 8 years. It’s not an unhelpful process. You get to plan and all that. But I hate writing anything that I won’t publish. I have an article and a conference talk that are languishing while I’m wasting my life on this paperwork.
Writing Grants
Clarissa's Blog 
You’d be very very good or lucky if you were writing grants only once a year :-). Even among my very successful colleagues, it is not uncommon to write 3 or 4 grants a year, with the hope that one will get funded.
LikeLike
God. That’s a sad life.
LikeLike
That’s why I have never wanted to be a university professor.
LikeLike
Oh yeah, I would be delighted if I only had to write grants once a year. For me, it’s 2-3 grants once a year for a big fall deadline at the National Science Foundation (NSF), and then several others of different lengths throughout the year for various other agencies and internal solicitations. The thing is, a grant in my field covers only one student, two tops, and basically squat of summer salary, so you need multiple active grants. You are right that it’s soul-sucking because you pour so much time into these documents and usually you don’t get a publication out of it and rarely you get the money you applied for. [In am in the physical sciences; in the biomedical sciences, it seems there are people who submit around the clock to the National Institutes of Health (NIH).] Having to revise grants year after year, hoping to finally get it funded, is its own circle of hell. There is no text I want to look at less than a grant I’ve already beaten to death, more than once.
LikeLike
That sounds really tough. I’m now feeling more at peace with my tiny little grant.
LikeLike
It’s the worst part of being a scientist by far 😦
LikeLike