If you received written feedback, treat it as a map—not as a verdict on your worth. List each comment and decide: revise content, strengthen evidence, or clarify eligibility.
If you received no feedback, compare your prior packet to successful public exemplars only where they are officially shared, and to the current call’s language. Guessing at secret preferences wastes time; matching published criteria does not.
Keep what still holds: accurate timelines, strong referee relationships, and documents that remain current. Rebuild what aged poorly: outdated project descriptions, thin impact claims, and statements that no longer match your recent work.
Watch for requirement changes between cycles. Word limits, eligible expense categories, and mandatory attachments shift more often than applicants expect.
A resubmission readiness check is useful when emotion still colours your reading of the old packet. An outside eye can separate bruised pride from actual structural gaps.
Ask about an audit