Fundamentals of Writing Winning Proposals

Fundamentals of Writing Winning Proposals

Soha HassounTufts University

Young Faculty Workshop @ DAC, July 2009

Some slides/content are from a handout by David Morrison, www.grantcentral.com

Overview: The Funding Process• Identify an agency with a mission that matches your

interests, and find a relevant CFP

• Understand the mechanics of the submission process

• Your idea will be presented to the funding agency in the form of a written document, “The Proposal”

• A set of reviewers examines your proposal and makes a recommendation to the funding agency (competitive vs. non competitive for NSF; a score for NIH)

• The program officer makes final decision about funding and funding amounts

You must allot time to:

• Develop your ideas,• Write a competitive proposal, and• Get one or more rounds of critical review

from your colleagues before you submit

David Morrison, www.grantcentral.com

Ideas: How LARGE?

The Levitan Rule“How many PhD theses are expected?”

Budget-driven: How many student-years?– Budget is sometimes set by the program. Use that

as a starting point

Bottom line: Be credible

Innovation in Developing Ideas• Ideas cannot be incremental

• Ideas must be innovative–Does the project employ novel concepts,

methods, or approaches?–Does the project challenge existing paradigms

or develop new methodologies or techniques?

• Ideas must be expanded

Innovation in Developing Ideas

• Based on knowledge– Search the literature thoroughly– Understand what the competition is doing and how

your idea/approach is distinguished – Assess funded grant awards related to your idea– Assess what you can/cannot do

• Innovation is NOT the only evaluation criteria. Each agency has its own

Your Audience:The Mindset of the Reviewers

• Who are they? • What is their expertise ?• Can they evaluate your proposal fairly?• What are they looking for ?

The key to success in grant writing is to engender enthusiasm in the reviewer – who then becomes an advocate for your proposal. Therefore, always write your application for the reviewer, NOT yourself.

--David Morrison, www.grantcentral.com

What Reviewers Look For First

• What’s the title? Is it interesting?• Who is the applicant?• Which institution(s) is the applicant affiliated with?• What’s the basic idea? Is it within my area of

expertise?• Is the application “Reviewer-friendly”?


Reviewer-friendly == Maximally Readable• Readability should take precedence over margin & font

guidelines• No distractions: • Spelling & grammar errors• Inconsistent technical terms and formatting• Jargon, equations, tiny footnotes.

• Illustrations should be meaningful; worth 1000 words.• Key points and impact are obvious• Use key words: e.g. “This proposal is innovative because…”

• Use simple and clear organizationMore is not better!

Make it easy for the reviewers to evaluate your proposal

Simple & Clear Organization

Overview & Objectives (1 page)

Timeline, and other agency-specific required sections

The Narrative (Proposed Research)

Preliminary Work

Relevant Background

Significance (1/2 page)

Summary

Title

What Reviewers Look For Second: Necessary Conceptual Ingredients

1. Identify a problem and establish a “critical need”2. Focus on a particular aspect of the problem3. Describe how you will uniquely/innovatively

contribute to the solution4. Provide context and competitive analysis5. Explain how you will evaluate your results6. Provide compelling preliminary results7. Describe impact/ pay off8. Establish that you (and your team) are qualified to

provide the proposed solution



Timeline, and other agency specific required sections


Preliminary Work

Relevant Background


Summary

Title

Overview and Objectives (1 page)• The “bottleneck” page• The flow of logic must be compelling: Linear progression for a

strong Overview Section

Critical Need

Novelty/Innovation & Expected Outcomes

Specific Aims/Tasks/Goals

Objective

Write this section first

Overview and Objectives Details

Novelty/Innovation & Expected Outcomes

Specific Aims/Tasks/Goals

Long range goal.Objective of this proposal.

Justify WHY you are solving the critical need

Good place to establish

your qualification and mention Prelim Work; Not your bio!

Advocate for your proposal:

Distinguishing qualities.

Not in future tense. “We expect…”

Conceptual aims; use strong verbs

Facts (known and unknowns) that establish “Critical Need”.

Frame the problem


Get an early critique of this page

Example Aim

Identify key parental factors responsible for children’s poor transition from preschool to kindergarten. Based upon collected evidence related to the situation, we will evaluate the extent to which parents command of the English language is a predictive factor of their children’s successful transition to kindergarten.






Preliminary Work

Relevant Background


Summary

Title

“Significance of The Proposed Work” Section (1/2 page)

• Follows the Overview & Objective section• Make it easy for all to identify importance of

your work• Flow:– Substantiate that there is a critical need– Italicized statement of significance, “This project is

therefore significant because ..”– Benefits and impact expected from the critical

need having successfully been addressed

“Relevant Background” Section

• Section provides a critical review of relevant background. Not comprehensive. Section title should be reflective of this: e.g. “Review of Background literature relevant to this

project”

• Flow– Make sure that each major point discussed allows a

conclusion to be reached – Logically build up the stage for the Prelim/Narrative

• Cite contributions of possible reviewers

“Preliminary Work” Section• What is Preliminary Work?

– Could be published prior work (yours or others)Summarize key findings in reference to the problems that you framed; do not cut & paste

– Could be your own preliminary data

• Preliminary work should provide compelling evidence:a) Importance of the problemb) Analysis that identifies key issues that need to be addressedc) Demonstrate your competence

• Set data in context. You should have set the stage in the Overview and background sections

• Too much detail will be harmful

“Narrative Section”Reviewers expect the flow here to match the aims listed in the Overview & Objectives section:

Parallel Aim Flow1. Specific Aim #1 Repeat verbatim

IntroductionWork planExpected outcomes/resultsPotential Problems/alternatives

…. Repeat for other aims





Preliminary Work

Relevant Background


Summary

Title

Title Selection Tips

• List all key words that convey WHAT you want to do and WHY it is important

• Arrange the words into a compelling and informative title that fits the allowed space

“Summary” Section• Very important. Widely read. Sometimes basis for

reviewers to select their reviewing assignments

• Written in plain English

• Written last, but not last minute

• Include key components from Overview and Significance sections to develop advocacy

• Emphasize the relevance/significance to the funding agency (i.e. Intellectual Merit and Broader Impact for NSF)

Useful Hints • Do not sweep issues under the rug• Propose alternate plans• Draft your own collaboration letters• Comprehensively craft your “resources” section, including

listing of colleagues as intellectual resources

• Ask others for sample proposals• Go to a grant-writing workshop• Get a mentor• Team up with more experienced writers and learn form

others

• On contacting the Program Officer• On recommending reviewers

Final Words

• DO NOT GET DISCOURAGED!! The funding agencies cannot fund all “good

proposals” Learn from your mistakes

• Be pro-active in identifying funding and collaborating opportunities

Questions?

Fundamentals of Writing Winning Proposals

Documents

Transcript of Fundamentals of Writing Winning Proposals