Reflections on the EACL 2026 D&I Grants

Reflections on the EACL 2026 D&I Grants: Supporting Broader Community Participation

By EACL 2026 D&I Chairs Selene Baez Santamaría, Hannah M. Claus (hmc78@cam.ac.uk), Diana Galván Sosa (dg693@cam.ac.uk), Helena Gómez Adorno, Maria Grandury and Sabine Weber

As we wrap up EACL, the D&I committee would like to take a moment to share some reflections on how this year’s subsidy process unfolded. Our goal is to be as transparent as possible about the “why” behind our decisions, especially since this year brought some bittersweet news. The NLP community is currently experiencing a period of incredible and constant growth, with a record number of authors from underrepresented communities getting their papers accepted. While this is a success we should all be celebrating, it has created a real challenge for our collective funding. We are pleased to share that our total D&I budget increased compared to the 2024 EACL edition, but the reality is that this gain couldn’t keep pace with the even greater surge in the number of requests for support.

The Numbers

To give you an idea of the scale we were working with, we received roughly 240 applications. When we looked at who was reaching out for support, the breakdown was quite telling:

Main Conference: Approximately 49% were authors with papers accepted to the main conference and/or findings.
Workshop Contributions: About 32% came from authors presenting at the various workshops.
General Interest: The remaining 19% of applicants were attendees who did not have a paper submission.

At its core, the D&I mission is to support researchers and students from developing countries and marginalised communities. These are the folks who often face the biggest uphill battle when it comes to conference costs. When we look closer at the authors (Main Conference + Workshops) who applied for aid, the geographic diversity really shows why this support matters:

Main Conference Authors: Among those with accepted main conference papers, over 36% were from developing countries¹.
Workshop Authors: For those presenting at workshops, around 50% were from developing countries.

In our selection process, we prioritised first-time attendees, recognising the importance of supporting newcomers to the conference community. After accounting for withdrawals (individuals who were offered a grant but were unable to accept it), we finalised a group of 26 grantees. This group includes 21 authors from the main conference and 5 from the various workshops. When we followed up with those who declined the offer, the primary reason was clear: the grant amount simply wasn’t enough to cover their total travel and attendance costs. This highlights a difficult reality we face regarding the nature of our subsidies and how we distribute our limited resources.

Clarifying Our Process

To understand why funding can feel stretched, it is helpful to first look at how ACL conferences handle financial support. There isn’t just one “pot” of money; instead, three distinct committees manage different types of grants with very specific mandates:

Student Volunteers: This committee provides support strictly for registration and ACL membership fees in exchange for service during the conference. They do not provide travel or accommodation grants.
Student Research Workshop (SRW): This group offers both registration support (including membership) and travel grants, but these are exclusively for students who have papers accepted within the SRW track.
Diversity & Inclusion (D&I): Similar to the SRW, we provide registration and travel support, but extend it to the whole community via two tracks: a general D&I call aimed at authors, and virtual subsidies targeting non-authors.

Because the D&I budget is limited, we always strongly encourage applicants to apply for the Student Volunteers program as well. It is important to understand that being accepted as a volunteer does not guarantee a D&I grant; however, if you are selected for both, it puts us in a much better position to support you.

When a grantee is also a volunteer, their registration is already waived by that program. This allows us to reallocate the D&I funds we would have spent on their registration toward their travel expenses instead. Conversely, if a D&I grantee is not a volunteer, we must prioritise using their awarded funds to cover registration fees first; only the remaining balance can be used for travel. In short, volunteering is the most effective way to maximise the amount of “travel cash” we can provide.

This brings us to a final crucial point: the grants we provide are intended as community support to enable broader participation, not as full sponsorships. These subsidies are meant to help more members of our community attend who might otherwise be unable to participate. In the world of academic funding, a subsidy is meant to be supportive and complementary. It is designed to lower barriers to entry by covering a significant portion of costs, but it is rarely intended to be the sole source of funding for an author’s entire participation. We aim to bridge the gap for those who have some departmental or alternative support but need an extra push to make attendance viable. By distributing our limited resources across multiple grantees, we can support a larger, more diverse community rather than fully funding a smaller number of individuals.

How We Optimised The Grants

Stretching the budget required intense coordination between the Volunteers, SRW, and D&I chairs. We faced a significant logistical challenge because our deadlines were strictly tied to the reviewing cycle. We had to wait for paper notifications, which arrived on January 3, 2026, for the Main Conference and February 2, 2026, for the SRW, before we could finalise who was eligible for travel support.

To ensure we acted as a single, coordinated team, we managed a complex series of overlapping deadlines:

Student Volunteers: The call opened on December 22, 2025, and applications closed on January 23, 2026. Notifications were sent on February 9.
SRW Grants: The call opened on December 23, 2025, and applications closed on February 7, 2026. Notifications were sent on February 16.
D&I Grants: Our call opened on December 23, 2025, and applications closed on February 7, 2026. We set our notification deadline to February 16.

Managing these timelines is a delicate balancing act. We want to give authors as much time as possible to prepare their applications. However, we also have to account for the fact that the review process is entirely manual. Because we cannot predict the exact number of submissions we will receive each year, we cannot easily forecast how long it will take to carefully and fairly evaluate every single request. Despite this unpredictability, our priority remained clear: getting results to everyone before the early registration window closed on February 24. This synchronisation allowed us to see which authors had already secured support via the Volunteer or SRW programs before finalising D&I awards, ensuring that our funding was redirected to those who needed it most.

Logistical Challenges We Faced

Despite our best efforts to sync everything up, we ran into a few situations that made the coordination tricky.

The first issue is simply how workshops are organised. Even though they are part of the main conference, they are essentially “stand-alone” events. This means each workshop committee sets its own submission and notification deadlines independently and is expected to secure their own funding to support participants. For us, this creates a moving target; it’s hard to pick a single fair cutoff date for everyone when some authors are still waiting to hear if their paper was even accepted. While the D&I committee can support workshop authors and we make every effort to do so, our primary responsibility is to main conference participants, which means workshop attendees may face more limited support depending on available resources.

The second challenge was the pressure of the registration calendar. The main conference registration deadline for authors was February 17, with workshops following a week later on February 24. We really wanted to get our notifications out by the 16th to give everyone peace of mind before that first deadline hit. In the end, between the manual review of applications and the sheer volume of requests, we finished and sent them on the 17th.

We know this caused some stress; several authors reached out to ask about their status while trying to register. Similarly, volunteer chairs reported that some applicants delayed responding to volunteer offers while waiting for grant decisions. We want to clarify that D&I grants are subsidies designed to help with costs, not deciding factors for participation. Whether registering a paper or applying for volunteer positions, authors should be prepared to attend regardless of grant outcomes. If you apply as an in-person volunteer, this indicates you have the means to cover your travel costs even without D&I support. We truly appreciate everyone’s patience while we worked through the bottleneck to ensure fairness to every applicant.

Upholding Fairness: The Policy on Late Applications

Regarding the requests we received for late applications, we want to clarify our stance on the established deadlines. Our application window was open for over a month, starting on December 23 and closing on February 7. This timeline was designed to give every author ample opportunity to seek support.

While we understand that individual circumstances can arise, we made the difficult decision to deny all requests for late submissions. Our reasoning was based on the need to keep our process fair. Reopening the form for a few would be a sign of disrespect to the hundreds of authors who prioritised their applications and submitted within the designated window. Fairness is essential to the integrity of the D&I program.

Shared Accountability: A Call for Proactive Participation

To ensure that D&I efforts remain sustainable and fair for all participants, we believe it is essential to foster a culture of shared responsibility. While the committee works to provide support, the success of these initiatives depends on the proactivity and professionalism of our authors, attendees, and workshop organisers.

1. Applicant Responsibilities

The conference utilises multiple channels (including the official website, X, BlueSky, and the LinkedIn group) to announce calls for grants, Birds of a Feather (BoF), and Affinity events.

Self-Management: Authors and attendees are responsible for regularly checking these channels and staying informed about deadlines.
Fairness in Logistics: To maintain a fair selection process, we cannot accommodate late applications. Missing a deadline impacts the entire committee and staff timeline, which is why we must treat deadlines as final.
Following Instructions: Please follow all application instructions carefully. Specifically, wait for committee confirmation before registering for the conference. Registering before receiving our decision creates a reimbursement scenario where transaction fees can exceed the grant amount, forcing us to either deny your otherwise eligible application or ask you to cover the additional fees.
Visa Applications: If you require a visa, apply immediately upon paper acceptance. Do not wait for grant decisions, as visa processing can take months. Remember that D&I grants are supplementary support, not primary funding, so plan your attendance accordingly. Failing to secure your visa on time affects the entire D&I program: if we allocate funds to you but you cannot attend, that support could have gone to another applicant, and by the time you notify us, it is too late to reallocate.
Volunteer Applications: Respond promptly to volunteer offers and do not delay based on pending D&I grant decisions. Applying as an in-person volunteer indicates your ability to attend and cover costs independently. Delayed responses complicate planning for both Volunteer and D&I committees, as chairs must finalise volunteer lists to organise conference logistics. Treat volunteer commitments as independent from D&I or SRW grant applications.

2. Guidance for Authors: Funding Strategies

It is the sole responsibility of the authors to secure the necessary funding to register their paper and ensure its publication in the conference proceedings. Authors should begin planning their funding strategy as soon as they decide to submit a paper to the conference, treating the D&I program as a secondary support mechanism rather than a primary source.

Apply Early: We strongly advise authors to apply for the D&I grant as soon as the call opens. It is significantly easier and more professional to withdraw an application (for example, if your paper is ultimately not accepted or you secure alternative funding) than to request an extension. As our process is strictly manual and standardised, extension requests are generally denied to maintain fairness.
Institutional Support: Before submitting a paper, authors should consult with their home institutions regarding available funding. Clarify whether your institution can provide full support (registration and travel) or partial support.
Presenting Author Designation: Remember that every accepted submission must be linked to at least one “presenting author” who is expected to attend (in-person or virtually).
The Nature of D&I Grants: It is vital to remember that D&I grants are supplementary support that operate as reimbursements. You must plan and pay for expenses upfront, and if successful, we will reimburse a portion of your costs. These grants are not primary or guaranteed funding. Plan for alternative funding sources to ensure your attendance is not dependent on a single grant.

3. Grant Application Integrity: Transparency and Detail

The D&I application process is highly competitive. To ensure a fair assessment, applicants must provide a clear and honest picture of their financial situation.

Substantiated Need: A detailed explanation of why the grant is needed is of utmost importance. Applications that provide no explanation or vague statements (e.g., “I want to attend for free” or simply a flat number like “2000 USD”) do not allow the committee to assess the situation and will likely result in a rejected application.
Financial Transparency: Applicants are expected to break down how much money they need and specifically what it will cover (e.g., airfare, lodging, registration).
The Spirit of Reciprocity: Our community thrives on a “give and take” culture. While the D&I program is designed to support you, we strongly encourage participants to contribute back, for instance by applying as volunteers, serving as mentors during the conference and/or organising BoF or an Affinity Group event. Seeing applicants explicitly state they have no intention of contributing to the community’s logistical needs is contrary to the spirit of mutual support we aim to build.

4. Guidelines for Workshop Organisers

Workshops are vital independent events co-located with the main conference. To maximise the impact of D&I support and ensure a diverse set of participants, we advise organisers to adhere to the following recommendations:

Proactive Coordination with D&I: We strongly recommend that organisers reach out to the D&I committee early in the planning process. This proactive approach is beneficial for:
- Resource Optimisation: If a workshop has its own funding, coordination allows for a “split the costs” model. By having workshop participants apply for D&I grants, both pools of funding can be leveraged to support a higher number of individuals.
- Localised Impact: Proactive outreach allows us to support the local community of the host country more effectively. For example, during the NAACL 2024 conference in Mexico, the LatinX in NLP workshop and Mexican NLP Summer School organisers reached out to D&I early to join forces. This collaboration led to wide-scale support for LATAM students and researchers. In contrast, during the first-ever African edition of an ACL conference, the ArabicNLP school coordinated with us, but the additional outreach from relevant workshops (e.g., AbjadNLP, AfricaNLP) would have resulted in greater opportunities for local support. We strongly encourage workshop organisers to maintain a proactive communication with the relevant committees, as key to maximising funds and increasing participation.
Workshop Advocacy for Authors: Workshop organisers are expected to be the primary advocates for their authors’ funding. While securing external funding is not a prerequisite for workshop acceptance, it is highly encouraged.
Prioritisation: While authors of workshop papers remain eligible for D&I grants, the D&I committee must prioritise authors presenting in the main conference tracks. Main conference organisers should communicate this clearly to their participants during the Call for Workshops and upon acceptance.

5. Professionalism and Respectful Communication

The logistical backbone of a global conference relies on mutual respect and timely communication.

Volunteer Commitment: It is important to recognise that all chairs and committee members are volunteers. We perform this work out of a commitment to the community, often in parallel with heavy responsibilities at our own institutions.
Respectful Inquiries: We are always open and happy to answer questions or clarify processes. However, we expect all inquiries to be handled with a respectful and professional tone. Demanding or aggressive communication is not productive and does not reflect the collaborative spirit of the conference.
Prompt Responses: Just as we strive to help you, we expect applicants to reply promptly to inquiries from the committee. Proactive communication allows us to reallocate resources to others in need if your situation changes.

Acknowledging Support and Community Spirit

While we must address challenges, we also want to celebrate and thank the many members of our community who embody the “give and take” spirit.

Strategic Leadership from the General Chair: We are incredibly grateful to the General Chair for their early and thoughtful organisation. Long before the conference began (over 5 months in advance), they secured a full D&I team by selecting key members from diverse communities. This was not just a matter of timing but of expertise: the committee is composed of individuals who have all served as previous D&I chairs or have extensive experience in other major community efforts. This collective background allowed us to hit the ground running with a deep understanding of the community’s needs.
The ACL Staff: We would like to extend a special thanks to the conference staff. While our committee decides who receives the grants, the staff members are the ones who handle the complex financial management and the distribution of funds. They were tireless in answering every logistical question we had and took on the critical task of following up with each grantee to manage the money. Their operational support turned our decisions into reality.
Local Chairs: We owe a huge debt of gratitude to the Local Chairs. Their proactive efforts in searching for and securing affordable accommodation options for our grantees were instrumental. This logistical victory had a direct impact on our community, as the savings on lodging allowed us to reallocate more funds toward essential travel expenses like flight tickets and visa costs.
Gratitude for Applicant’s Compliance: We extend our sincere thanks to the many applicants who followed instructions meticulously. Your attention to detail significantly lightened the administrative burden on our volunteer team.
Appreciation for Participant’s Positive Engagement: We are deeply moved by the many participants who have expressed their gratitude. These kind words serve as a powerful motivator for the committee and reinforce why we do this volunteer work.
A Note on Reviewer Self-Nominations: We have received several emails from individuals offering their services as reviewers. While we greatly appreciate this proactive desire to contribute to the conference’s academic integrity, please note that the selection and management of reviewers falls under the responsibility of the ACL Rolling Review, not the D&I committee. We encourage these individuals to reach out to the ARR team.
Affinity Group and Birds-of-a-Feather Session Organizers: This edition, 17 sessions were accepted, a remarkable achievement considering that ACL 2026, a much larger conference, hosted 18 sessions. Thanks to these organisers, participants had opportunities to connect around specialised topics and foster collaborations between like-minded researchers.
Mentors: Our heartfelt appreciation goes to the more than 200 mentors who generously volunteered their time to guide over 400 mentees. This scale of participation illustrates the deep commitment of our community to supporting the next generation of researchers.

Final Numbers

Total grantees: 26
Main conference authors: 21
Workshop authors: 5
Birds-of-a-Feather and Affinity Group sessions organised: 17
Mentorship program: +400 mentees & +200 mentors

Final Thoughts and Wishes

EACL 2026 being held in Morocco, therefore being held in an African country for the first time, has significantly motivated African students and researchers to submit papers and organise meet-ups. It is the ACL chapter with the highest number of African participants, which is a big milestone. Finally, researchers who work on similar topics (for instance, NLP for underserved languages²) now have a better chance to come together from various countries and discuss their topics knowing that there are more people facing similar challenges, due to local languages being underserved, too. But this time at a conference that specifically focuses on NLP while also being based in a country that shares our quest for multilinguality. Representation really matters and localising NLP research makes a huge impact.

Usually, with ACL chapters, there is a pattern of where these conferences are being held. In an effort to not only diversify the communities that attend the ACL conferences, but also include a wider range of countries and regions in the consideration of where to hold the conferences, EACL 2026 being in Morocco is a big step forward. This led to not only including a new country, language, and community in the wider ACL community, it also led to more diversity within the organisation of the conference itself. It proved that it is indeed possible to expand the regions of locations for ACL conferences. This D&I committee would like to see an African chapter of ACL in the future, and we encourage the African NLP community to consider it.

Notes

Defined as GDP PPP per capita < $40k (based on 2025 IMF data).
We are using the term “underserved” instead of “low-resource” in order to get away from seeing language as mere data to be extracted. In the same way that language is so much more than just data and needs to be served better by NLP, humans are equally so much more than numbers, which we are trying to show with our D&I efforts.