  Competitive allocation of research funding is a major mechanism within the
science system. It is fundamentally based on the idea of peer review. Peer
review is central in project selection as peers are considered to be in a
unique position to identify and select the best and most innovative researchers
and research projects. In this study, we assess the practice of peer-review
based project selection. The basic question is "do the best researchers get the
funding"? In other words, do peer review based quality indicators predict
success in receiving funding? The next question to be answered is about the
peer review. Do peer reviewers indeed recognize the best researchers, and
subsequently, is the decision of the research council based on the outcomes of
peer review? Finally, we answer the question whether other factors influence
the probability of receiving funding, such as the role of co-applicants, the
effects of gender, and the effect of the discipline of the application.
