Win Up to £50,000 for Climate Resilience Research: Mastercard Foundation and University of Cambridge CReSus Fund 2025

If you care about climate resilience in Africa and have a collaborator at the University of Cambridge, this call is built for you. The Mastercard Foundation and University of Cambridge Climate Resilience and Sustainability Research Fund (CReSus) 2025 supports paired teams — one researcher based at an African university or research institute and one at Cambridge — to plan and run research, capacity-building, or training activities that strengthen climate resilience and sustainability. Grants come in two flavours: Research Catalyst awards up to £20,000 and Workshop Grants up to £50,000. Deadline: 15 January 2026.

This article walks you through what the fund actually pays for, who makes a competitive team, how to assemble a persuasive application, and a realistic timetable so you’re not scrambling the night before. I’ll also share tactical tips that past successful applicants used — and pitfalls you should dodge. Read on if you want to increase your odds and write a proposal that reviewers can’t ignore.

At a Glance

Why this opportunity matters right now

Climate change is not a future problem for many African communities — it’s a daily reality. That makes research and training that directly improves resilience essential. CReSus is designed to do more than fund a single project: it aims to seed long-term research relationships between Cambridge and African institutions while supporting hands-on training and practical outputs.

A £20,000 Research Catalyst award can fund a pilot study, joint fieldwork, data collection, or an intensive training programme that positions the team for bigger external grants later. The £50,000 Workshop Grant is money for convening, knowledge exchange, or multi-day practical training that builds networks and skills across institutions and sectors. Both options can be the foundation stones for long-term partnerships that produce tangible benefits in communities and policy.

What This Opportunity Offers

This fund pays for two related goals. First, it finances collaborative activity that links Cambridge researchers with African partners to tackle problems tied to climate resilience and sustainability. Second, it explicitly supports high-quality training: short courses, workshops, hands-on lab training, or mentoring that strengthen research capacity in African institutions.

Financially, the two award levels are modest but strategic. A Research Catalyst award (up to £20,000) is ideal when you need enough to launch a pilot: travel for joint fieldwork, stipends for research assistants, pilot equipment, or small-scale data collection. Think of it as seed capital to make the collaboration credible and competitive for larger funders later.

The Workshop Grant (up to £50,000) is about convening and capacity building. Use it to run regional training schools, multi-institutional workshops that co-produce adaptation strategies, or practice-focused sessions where participants leave with tools and plans they will implement. The emphasis is on measurable training outcomes, practical materials, and strengthening institutional ties.

Beyond cash, successful teams gain visibility within Cambridge and the Mastercard Foundation network, which can lead to follow-on funding, mentorship, and invitations to larger consortia. The fund also encourages interdisciplinary approaches: you don’t need to be a climate scientist to apply, but you do need to explain how your work directly connects to resilience or sustainable solutions.

Who Should Apply

This call is for paired teams: one researcher at the University of Cambridge (or, for Research Catalyst this round, NIAB or Wellcome Sanger Institute) and one researcher based at an African university or research institute. Applicants are expected to be at post-doctoral level or above, but equivalent professional experience will be considered — so senior research staff, lecturers, or technical experts with a strong track record can be eligible.

Good matches are collaborations where the Cambridge researcher brings complementary expertise and resources (methods, modelling, lab capacity, or supervisory mentorship) and the African partner brings local knowledge, community access, contextual understanding, and institutional capacity. Strong applications show genuine two-way collaboration, not a Cambridge lead with token input from Africa.

Real-world examples that fit well:

• A Cambridge hydrologist and an African environmental engineer co-design pilot flood early-warning studies and train local technicians in data collection.
• A Cambridge social scientist and an African public health researcher run a workshop to develop community-centred climate adaptation planning tools.
• A Cambridge agronomist and African crop researchers convene a hands-on training on drought-tolerant seed evaluation, with plans for community demonstration plots.

If your project primarily benefits Cambridge students with limited relevance to African institutions, or if it’s an internal administrative initiative, this fund is probably not a fit. The best bets are proposals that deliver practical training outputs, strengthen local research capacity, or produce pilot data directly relevant to African resilience challenges.

Grant Types and How to Choose

Choose Research Catalyst if you need seed funding to test methods, collect pilot data, or run a short, focused training module. These grants suit projects where a clear next step is likely — such as applying to a larger fund with preliminary data or demonstrated training impact.

Choose Workshop Grant if the main objective is a larger convening or a multi-day training series that will bring together participants from several African institutions and stakeholders (policy makers, NGOs, community representatives). Workshop Grants should have clear outputs: training materials, policy briefs, participant evaluation metrics, and evidence of institutional uptake.

Decide based on scope and deliverables. If your project needs travel for two PIs, room and board for participants, teaching materials, and stipends, do the budget math. A workshop with 30 participants is expensive; plan accordingly and justify each cost.

How the Application Process Works (step-by-step)

The Cambridge-based applicant must register through the Cambridge Africa portal using an accepted institutional email (@cam.ac.uk, @niab.com, or @sanger.ac.uk). After logging in, the Cambridge applicant starts the online form and uses the “Invite a 2nd applicant to view/edit this submission” link to bring the Africa-based collaborator into the form so both partners can edit and submit.

This shared editing feature matters. The reviewers expect genuine co-development: both applicants should contribute text for the proposal, budget justification, timeline, and letters. Make sure your Africa-based partner is ready to craft their section and submit supporting documents in good time.

Note: If your Cambridge partner is at NIAB or Wellcome Sanger and you’re applying for a Research Catalyst grant, they are eligible to initiate the application in this round. Confirm institutional eligibility early.

Insider Tips for a Winning Application

1. Tell a concise story where each budget line has a purpose. Reviewers hate budgets that look like shopping lists. Explain how each expense moves the project forward. If you ask for travel money, say who will go, why they must go in person, and what the deliverable will be.

2. Demonstrate genuine two-way collaboration. Describe task-sharing in concrete terms: who will lead fieldwork, who will do analysis, who will train participants, and how responsibilities will rotate. Avoid vague phrases about “collaboration” without specifics.

3. Make training outputs visible. Describe curricula, participant selection criteria, training materials, and post-training follow-up. If you plan a workshop, include a draft agenda and list of target invitees (institutions, ministries, NGOs). Funders want to see that the money will change skills or practice, not just host another meeting.

4. Provide realistic timelines and milestones. Break your project into discrete steps with dates and measurable outputs: e.g., Month 1–2: ethics approvals and community agreement; Month 3–4: field data collection; Month 5: workshop and report. This shows you can manage the award.

5. Build equity into the budget. If you expect the Africa-based partner to host fieldwork, include funds to support their institution directly, such as participant stipends, data collection costs, or small equipment. Equity shows respect and practical support for local capacity.

6. Showcase institutional support. Attach short letters that commit in-kind resources (lab time, office space, or access to instruments). A Cambridge letter confirming supervisory time or access to computing facilities is persuasive; likewise a letter from an African institution showing commitment to host participants or support logistics strengthens the case.

7. Use plain language and avoid jargon. Review panels include diverse experts. If your methods are complex, summarize the approach in plain English and include technical detail in an appendix only if allowed.

8. Prepare a data management and ethics plan. Explain how data will be handled, who will own it, how it will be archived, and how participant confidentiality will be protected. If human subjects are involved, outline consent procedures and local approvals.

9. Reference follow-on funding strategy. Explain how the grant is catalytic — how pilot data or trained cohorts will support a larger grant application or institutional programme. Funders like to see multiplier potential.

10. Pilot test your application internally. Share the draft with at least two colleagues who will critique clarity and feasibility. Time invested here often yields big returns.

Those ten points are not padding; they’re the difference between a well-intentioned idea and an application that reviewers can see actually happening.

Application Timeline (work backward from 15 January 2026)

Start now. Realistically, allow 8–10 weeks of collaborative work to prepare a competitive submission.

• 8–10 weeks before deadline: Agree on project scope with your partner and draft the specific aims and budget. Line up letter writers and institutional sign-offs.
• 6–8 weeks before: Cambridge applicant registers on the portal and creates the draft form. Invite the Africa-based partner to join and co-edit the form.
• 4–6 weeks before: Draft full project narrative and have at least two colleagues review. Prepare detailed budget and justification with your institution’s finance office.
• 3–4 weeks before: Collect letters of support, finalize CVs/biosketches, and finalize ethics/data plans. Make any last adjustments based on feedback.
• 1–2 weeks before: Final proofreading and upload all attachments. Submit at least 48–72 hours before the deadline to avoid technical glitches.
• After submission: Expect confirmation emails and allow time for inquiries from the administration — respond promptly.

Submitting the form is not the end — be ready to provide clarifications quickly if requested.

Required Materials and How to Prepare Them

Prepare the following in advance and save them as ready-to-upload PDFs. The application portal expects both partners to contribute, so coordinate file names and versions.

• Project narrative (clear objectives, methodology, timeline, expected outputs). Keep it focused and avoid unnecessary length.
• Detailed budget with line-item justification showing how requested funds will be spent and why they’re necessary.
• CVs or biosketches for both applicants (highlight relevant experience, publications, and supervisory roles).
• Letters of institutional support (Cambridge department, African host institution). Short, specific letters are better than vague praise.
• Training/workshop agenda if applying for a Workshop Grant; sampling plan or pilot protocols for Research Catalyst.
• Data management and ethics statement (how data will be stored, shared, and protected).
• Any permits or community approval documents you already have (if relevant).
• A one-page impact summary suitable for non-specialists.

Budget tips: don’t omit institutional overheads if required, and be explicit about participant support (transport, per diems). If equipment is requested, justify why it can’t be accessed through host labs.

What Makes an Application Stand Out

Reviewers reward clarity, feasibility, and measurable outcomes. Standouts do three things well: they show clear capacity strengthening, they include a credible plan for continuing the collaboration after the grant, and they demonstrate that outputs will be used by local stakeholders.

A strong application will specify target participants for training, list partner organizations, and include a monitoring plan (how you will measure training success). It will explain how pilot data will feed into a larger research strategy and provide a realistic budget that matches the work.

Scientific or technical excellence matters, but the reviewers are equally interested in social and institutional impact. Projects that plan to produce publicly available training materials, policy briefs, or open datasets tailored for local users will score highly. Show that your work won’t just sit in academic journals — explain who will use it and how.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

1. Vague collaboration: Don’t submit a proposal where the African partner is merely a name on the cover page. Describe roles, responsibilities, and how tasks are shared.

2. Inflated budgets without explanation: Large equipment purchases or travel costs must be justified. If you ask for £50,000, the narrative should show exactly what that will buy and why.

3. Ignoring ethics and data plans: Applications involving communities or personal data need clear ethical safeguards and local approvals. Don’t leave this until after you’re funded.

4. Over-ambitious scope: Propose work you can realistically deliver in the grant period. It’s better to do a focused pilot well than to promise an impossible multi-year program.

5. Late registrations and technical errors: The Cambridge applicant must register with the correct email domain. Start registration early to resolve access issues.

6. Poor follow-through on training plans: Saying you’ll “train participants” is not enough. Provide selection criteria, curricula, evaluation methods, and follow-up mechanisms.

Avoiding these common traps will significantly improve your proposal’s chances.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Who must start the application? A: The Cambridge-based applicant (or an eligible NIAB or Wellcome Sanger Institute researcher for Research Catalyst this round) must register and create the application. They then invite the Africa-based collaborator to co-edit.

Q: Can the Africa-based partner be the PI on the budget? A: The award is structured around paired applicants. Funds will typically flow through the Cambridge-side administrative processes as the system requires Cambridge registration to initiate the application. Discuss budget routing and sub-awards early with both institutions’ finance teams.

Q: Are interdisciplinary teams encouraged? A: Yes. The fund accepts applications from any discipline as long as you justify the linkage to climate resilience or sustainability. Interdisciplinary approaches that combine social science, technical methods, and practical training often do well.

Q: Can graduate students apply as leads? A: Applicants should be at post-doctoral level or above. Graduate students can be collaborators but generally need a senior staff member listed as an applicant or co-investigator.

Q: What constitutes “training”? A: Practical skills transfer, short courses, mentorship programmes, hands-on lab or field training, and workshops designed to strengthen institutional capacity are all considered training. Describe outcomes and evaluation methods.

Q: Will the fund support travel for community participants? A: Yes, if you justify costs and show they contribute to participation and impact. Include per diem and transport costs in the budget and explain participant selection.

Q: When will decisions be announced? A: The portal information typically states decision timelines. If the guideline is silent, expect several weeks to a few months after the deadline. Prepare to follow up with the fund administrators if needed.

Q: Can you reapply if not funded? A: Usually yes. Use reviewer feedback to strengthen a resubmission. Treat a non-award as a learning opportunity, not a final verdict.

How to Apply and Next Steps

Ready to take action? Here’s a checklist to get you over the finish line:

1. Agree the project scope and roles with your Cambridge or Africa partner now.
2. Choose the appropriate award type (Research Catalyst up to £20,000 or Workshop Grant up to £50,000) and draft a one-page project summary.
3. Cambridge applicant registers at the portal using an eligible email address and invites the African applicant to join the form.
4. Prepare the full narrative, budget, CVs, letters of support, and ethics/data plans. Have at least two colleagues review the draft.
5. Upload documents and submit at least 48–72 hours before the 15 January 2026 deadline to avoid last-minute glitches.

Ready to apply? Visit the official application page and register here: https://www.cambridge-africa.cam.ac.uk/register/?group=mcf-oct-2025

If you want, send me a one-paragraph project summary and I’ll flag weak spots and suggest edits for clarity or impact. Good proposals come from teams that plan early, write clearly, and show respect for the partner institution’s needs — do that, and you’re already halfway there.