Scientific Advisory Council Expectations & Review Process
Grant Proposal Expectations from the SAC
- Coaching Research Grant proposals must be grounded in the current coaching science literature and clearly articulate how the project will extend and advance that scholarship.
- Applications should include a concise but thorough literature review, identify specific gaps or inconsistencies, and explain the theoretical framework guiding your research questions.
- We prioritize studies that investigate the mechanisms of coaching—that is, how and why coaching works—rather than additional effectiveness studies in new populations.
- Proposals must present a rigorous, feasible methodology (design, sampling, measures, and analyses) and demonstrate that the investigative team and setting can deliver high quality research within the grant period.
- SAC reviewers will look for originality, conceptual clarity, and practical implications for coaching practice, training, and policy.
Encouraged Research Areas
- Artificial Intelligence and Coaching
- Mental Health and Wellbeing Coaching
- Leadership and Organizational Coaching
- Other innovative coaching research topics
Review Process
- Confidential Review Process All application materials are kept strictly confidential and are accessible only to IOC staff and SAC members.
- Review Outcomes Proposals may be accepted, invited for revision and resubmission, or rejected.
- Resubmission Policy Proposals that are rejected cannot be resubmitted. However, applicants may submit a new proposal with a different research question or methodology.
For Awarded Grants
- Initial funding released within 90 days of execution of contract
- Remaining funds distributed in phases based on project scope and duration
- Progress reports are required annually on October 1st
- A final written report and executive summary are required at project completion
