Proposal Writing and criteria.pdf

Proposal writing and acceptance criteria

1. Proposal Writing

2. Proposal Writing
•A proposal
•request for financial assistance to implement a project
• Funding
•in whole or in part,
•from government funding agencies,
•charitable foundations,
•businesses,
•individuals,
•other sources

3. Proposal Writing
Proposal writing
• a skill
•knowledge in many disciplines
•If you do not have proposal writing skills,
•No funding required to carry out projects.

4. •Elementsof effective proposal writing include:
•proper formatting,
•content development,
•satisfying program criteria,
•demonstrating economic and social benefits,
•addressing funding agency requirements,
•demonstrating the sustainability of the project’s output,
•selecting qualified consultants,
•monitoring and evaluation provisions,
•and proposal follow up.
•It also involves the proper referencingof other documentation and other sources of information used in preparing the proposal.

5. •You have to play by the Rules
• Get the (most recent) guidelines
• Read the guidelines
• Follow the guidelines
Writing a Grant Proposal is like Playing a
Game

6. Your proposal should demonstrate that your project
will:
•Provide economic benefit to an area or a community
•Have a high probability of success
•Address a strategic priority
•Demonstrate need for financial assistance
•Be economically viable
•Have stakeholder support
•Be consistent with development strategies

7. Proposal Writing – Course Context
Strategic Planning
ProposalWriting
ProjectManagement

8. Proposal Writing – Linkages to Strategic Planning
•Good proposal writing
•essential for anynot-for-profit organization
•strategic need
•Identification
•solution
•Goals of good proposals
•strategic goals
•provide resources to accomplish these strategic goals

9. Why work to perfect the art of proposal
writing?
•Organize your thinking
•Communicate your expertise
•Impress and Conquer
•Get the Job Done!

10. Writing Style
•clear writing àgetting your point
•Unclear writing àhard to understand by reviewer
•Start
•Outline
•important points for each section of the proposal
•develop a single paragraph for each point

11. •Avoid fuzzy or inappropriate use of
words:
The intrinsic labyrinth of wires must be first
disentangled. The liquid contents of container
should then be disgorged via the spout by the
operator.
Clear Writing
What is the writer really saying?
From Grant Resource Training, 2006

12. Proposal Content

13. Proposal Writing – Proposal Content
The content of the proposal varies depending on the
nature of the project and the funding agency(s)
involved. Typical content includes:
•House Keeping Data:
•Executive Summary:
•Project Description:

14. Proposal Writing – Proposal Content
•Project Schedule:
•start and end
•sequence
•Project Background:
•origin and context to reviewer
•why the project is needed?
•logically set out
•reflect any background work & consultations
•Goals and Objectives:
•goal of your project described in the proposal background.
•Goals
•general, long term broad desires
•Objectives
•specific, verifiable, outcomes which flow from goals.

15. Goal
•Overall concept
• more abstract
•Broad statement
•of what you want to accomplish

16. Objectives
• S – Specific
• M – Measurable outcomes
• A – Achievable, attainable
• R – Realistic
• T – Time-bound, achievable
in a specified time period

17. Proposal Writing – Proposal Content
•Partnerships:
•Good partnerships demonstrate community support.
•accessto people,skills, funding,
•in-kind contributions to help with project planning and
implementation.
•Project Management:
•Describethe organizational and management structures
needed to carry out project activities
• Demonstrate that your organization has the people and
systemsto successfully undertake the project.
•Resource Allocation:
•people, cash, equipment, supplies, etc.
•what is required,
•how much, when it is needed, by whom, and where.

18. Proposal Writing – Proposal Content
•Marketing Plan
•To ensure long-term viability of projects
•healthy revenues àself sufficient
•Ydemonstration of that you understand
•intended customers req
•market size
•how to succeed
•Budget:
•Breakdown costs as much as possible
•demonstrate of budget comprehensive
•Ensure that you have not overlooked items.
•Other FinancialInformation:
•nature of your project
•total funding required,
•Cash flow projections, revenue statements, and balance sheets may be required

19. Proposal Writing – Proposal Content
•Economic and Social Benefits
•Demonstration of benefits to target groups
•direct and indirect beneficiaries
•Economicbenefits include:
•Short-term project employment
•long-term employment
•skill development
• increasedtax revenues (if any)
•Social benefits are
•non-financial
•positive outcomes for target groups

20. Main Structure –Research-Based Design
Project

21. Main Structure –Research-Based Design
Project
•Executive Summary
•Hypothesis and Specific Aims
•Background and Significance
•Preliminary Studies
•Research Plan
•Legal and Regulatory Issues
•Timeline / Milestones
•Summary
•References

22. Executive Summary
•A concise, non-technical summary of the entire document
•should describe the motivation for the work
•Highlight the benefit of the work
•Brief summary of the proposed approach
•Nothing should be here that is not in the body of the text
•Space Limit: usually 250-300 words / one paragraph
•Thus, write a one-paragraph summary of what the project will accomplish.

23. Research-Based Project: Hypothesis/Specific Aims
Enumerate your Hypotheses and related Aims:
•Hypothesis I
•Aim 1
•Aim 2
•Hypothesis II
•Aim 3 (etc)
•Remember: You don't necessarily need multiple
hypotheses
•This is the most important part of a Research-based
project proposal
•Space limit: ½ page

24. Background / Significance
•background relevant to the problem at hand
•to convince the reviewer
•discuss what benefits
•Suggested number of pages: 2-3

25. Research-Based Projects: Preliminary Studies
•Relevant scientific or engineering content relevant to your
project
•You don't absolutely need this section
•but it usually makes for a better proposal
•Critical feasibility
•If no preliminary data/ other data in the literature
•don't include this section
•frequently àown preliminary data
•data published by others (appropriately referenced),
•only if you have a very good reason
•communicates your expertise to reviewer
•in critically understanding what is needed for your approach to work

26. Legal and Regulatory Issues
•What special legal or regulatory issues do you have?
•FDA approval needed?
•IRB / IACUC approval needed ?
•societal issues involved?

27. Timeline and Milestones
•Using a table, indicate the timeline for this project
•Describe 2 or three Milestones for the project
•A good milestone is a quantitative endpoint which will
guarantee success for the project
•Set reasonable dates for achievement of your
milestones

28. References: APA Format
Example Formats
•Journal article:
•Coutinho, P. M., Deleury, E., Davies, G. J., & Henrissat, B. (2003). An
evolving hierarchical family classification for glycosyltransferases.
Journal of Molecular Biology, 328(2), 307–17.
•Book:
•Nicol, A. A. M., & Pexman, P. M. (1999). Presenting your
findings: A practical guide for creating tables.Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
•Book chapter:
•Elleuche, S., & Antranikian, G. (2013). Starch-Hydrolyzing Enzymes
from Thermophiles. In T. Satyanarayana, J. Littlechild, & Y.
Kawarabayasi (Eds.), Thermophilic Microbes in Environmental and
Industrial Biotechnology (pp. 509–533). New York: Springer.

29. References: APA Format
Electronic References
●Online periodical:
–Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (2000). Title of
article. Title of Periodical, xx, xxx-xxx. Retrieved month day,
year, from source (give URL).
●Online document:
–Author, A. A. (2000). Title of work. Retrieved month day, year,
from source (give URL)

30. Funding Program Criteria

31. Proposal Writing – Funding Program Criteria
•"marketing"document
•inform the reader and get them into the project
•should not misrepresent the facts
•statements
•untrue, fabricating research, or citing non-existing sources ????
•should capture the readers interest and draw them to the
key points.
•Stress the benefits of the proposal and demonstrate the
proposal has been well thought through.

32. Proposal Writing – Proposal Formatting

33. Proposal Writing – Proposal Formatting
•Formatting is concerned with the look, style, and layout of the proposal.
•It is not merely aesthetics. A properly formatted proposal is pleasing to the eye but it also:
•Adds to the perception that the document is well thought out.
•Enhances the credibility and professionalism of your organization.
•Is easy to read and understand.
•Facilitates the understanding of the proposal content.
•Makes it easy for the reader to find the information they are looking for.

34. Proposal Writing – Proposal Formatting
•Title Page:
•The first page of the proposal and often serves as the cover of the document.
•It should include: date, projecttitle, project location, nameof the organization; and anyrequired information (e.g. proposalreference #)
•Table of Contents:
•Make it easy for readers to find the information they require.
•Each heading should be listed with its corresponding page number.
•Keepit a reasonable length.
•Too may headings can make it unwieldy.
•Appendices:
•Use appendices to avoid crowding the body of the proposal and maintain the narrative flow.
•Typical appendices include:
•materiallists, engineeringdrawings, and lettersof support.

35. Proposal Writing – Proposal Formatting
•Length: The proposal should be focused and concise. The length will usually depend on the amount of resources being requested.
•Lay out: The margins, spacing, fonts, headings, and numbering should be consistent throughout the document.
•Writing: Sentence structure, grammar, and spelling should be checked.
•Footnoting & References: Footnote the source of quotes, statistics, and tables. Reference all sources of information used in the preparation of the document.

36. Developing the Budget

38. Developing the Budget
•Budget
•Must relate to narrative
•Elements of most budgets
•Personnel
•Travel
•Materials/supplies
•Equipment
•Facilities and Administrative (Indirect) Costs

39. Developing the Budget
•Personnel
•Percentage of effort
•Full-time personnel salary reimbursement estimated on the percentage of time and
effort needed for the project
•Fringe benefits
Cost-of-living
•Salaries/wages normally inflated for periods after the first year of an award. Rate
changes; check OSP rate page for current one:

40. Developing the Budget
•Equipment
•Defined as:
•Unit value of $5,000 or more
•Lifespan of two or more years

41. •Other Direct Costs
•Services
•Consultants, professional services
•Printing/Copying
•Materials and Supplies
•Specific supplies needed for project
•Computers/software generally not allowed
Developing the Budget

42. Developing the Budget
•Budget Justification/Narrative
•One- or two-line descriptors explaining the item’s relevance to the project
and how the figure was calculated
•Must address every line item in budget

43. Developing the Budget
•Cost-sharing, or matching costs
•Could be:
•In-kind (salary + fringe benefits, supplies or services purchased by the campus specifically for
the project, etc.)
•Cash (from partnering organization, campus funds, etc.)

44. Developing the Budget
•Indirect costs
•Also known as Facilities and Administrative (F&A)
•Usually added on top of grant request
•Way for university, college and campus to recoup wear and tear, utility usage,
salaries, etc., associate with administering the grant

45. Criteria

46. Grant Layout
•Title of Grant
•Referees
•Co-applicants
•Budget
•Other operating grants
•Non-Scientific Abstract
•Summary of Research
•Details of Research Proposal
•Applicant’s CV

47. Title of Research Project
•Good
•Concise title that gives reviewer a general sense of what you are investigating.
•For example:
•Understanding the role anti-cell death protein BNIP3 plays in brain cancers.

48. Title of Research Project
•Reject
•Too long and technical of a title will not gain the reviewer’s attention or
interest.
•Too short and broad a title will make the reviewer too critical of grant.
•Example:
•Determining the mechanism of action of Bcl-2 family members in regulating apoptotic
signaling complexes within the mitochondria leading to a cure in cancers.

49. Referees:
•Good
•Choose referees in your field of research
•Choose a scientist/colleague that will be objective but not too critical of the
science.
•Reject
•Do not choose close collaborators
•Do not choose competitors in your field with divergent views.
•Do not choose the top scientists in your field since they will not respond and
will be too critical in general.

50. Co-applicants
•Good
•This could be strength if you are a junior investigator with a limited track
record.
•If the investigator lack specific skills, a co-applicant can bring these skills to
the research project.
•Reject
•It is a weakness to add a co-applicant if they just give you a reagent
•Co-applicant will do most of the project in their laboratories.

51. Budget:
•Good
•Give a detailed account of where you will be spending the money.
•Approximately one third of the budget should go to supplies.
•Reject
•Graduate students should not be used in budget support since it is an easy
target for reduction due to alternative funding sources.
•Do not justify spending all the budget on personnel.

52. All other Operating Grants
•Good
•Declare all operating grants.
•Declare 0% or 100% overlap.
•In this granting environment it is reasonable to apply from multiple sources to
get funding.
•Reject
•Do not state 25-50% overlap with CCMB operating grant.
•The review committee going to treat this grant as 100% overlap.

53. Non-Scientific Summary•Good
•This is used for press releases.
•Avoid acronyms
•Clearly state why this project is important.
•Declare the impact this research will have on cancer
or other diseases.
•Give it to a non-research friend to read.
•Reject
•Using technical language is a negative.
•Do not use acronyms even if you define them.

54. Summary of Research Proposal
•Good
•give a short but informative background to justify the research hypothesis
and objectives.
•Clearly state the hypothesis.
•State the objectives and/or aims of this proposal.
•State the impact, significance and innovation in this proposal.
•Define acronyms as much as possible.
•Reject
•Technical and condensed phrasing of the project.
•No clear statement of what is the purpose of this study.

55. Details of Research Proposal
•Order of Proposal:
•Goals or objectives of proposal
•Background
•Rationale and hypothesis.
•Specific Aims
•Rationale
•Hypothesis (optional)
•Approach
•Expected Results
•Pitfalls or Alternative approaches.
•Significance and/or Impact of this proposal.

56. Details of Research Proposal
•Goals and/or Objectives of Research
•Good
•This is usually one paragraph telling the reviewer everything
they need to know about this research proposal.
•This provides the opportunity to gain the reviewers interest
and excitement about this proposal.
•It should contain the background on why this research is
important, hypothesis, and objectives.
•Should state the innovation of this proposal.
•Finally it should in a clear statement demonstrate why this
project is significant and what impact it will have.

57. Details of Research Proposal
•Reject
•No goal or objective statement at the start of the proposal.
•Too technical and condensed will make it hard to read and understand.
•Too short will not give the reviewer the needed information to understand
the proposal.
•Too long will make the reviewer skip to the background and makes the reviewer search for what is important.

58. Details of Research Proposal
•Background:
•Good
•Give the reviewer the needed information to understand
the objectives and approaches in this proposal.
•Structure the background to go from broad information
such as cancer kills Canadians to specific information such
as my protein is increased in solid tumors.
•Build up the background towards answering a specific
question that is unknown.

59. Details of Research Proposal
•Background:
•Good
•There should be section within the background to discuss preliminary data.
•Connect preliminary data to background.
•If limited preliminary data, spend time on the innovation such as using unique resources
at CCMB for this proposal.

60. Details of Research Proposal
•Background
•Reject
•Do not expand background to unnecessary information that does not support the
hypothesis.
•Background should not exceed one third to one half of proposal.
•No preliminary data generally negatively impacts the proposal in two ways.
•No indication that the proposal will feasible.
•No indication the applicant can do the proposed work.

61. Details of Research Proposal
•Rationale and Hypothesis.
•Good
•Clearly state the hypothesis or number of hypotheses that will be addressed in the
proposal.
•Give a rationale why this hypothesis is important to investigate.
•Reject
•Avoid combining the two together. It could be confusing to the reviewer.
•Too long of a hypothesis makes it hard to understand the aim of the research.

62. Details of Research Proposal
•Specific Aims
•Good
•Limit specific aims to 2-3.
•Make sure controls are added to approaches taken.
•Always give what your expected results will be.
•Always give alternative approaches since pitfalls happen.
•Address feasibility if you have not demonstrated that you
can do the experiments proposed.

63. Details of Research Proposal
•Specific Aims:
•Address innovation wherever possible.
•Justify the use of specific reagents or animal models.
•For example:
•If you use a cell line why that cell line
•If you use an animal model why that animal model.
•Confirm results with multiple approaches.
•Make aim 1 less risky compared to other aims.

64. Details of Research Proposal
•Specific Aims
•Reject
•Many specific aims is bad. This is a two year proposal and if it is too ambitious, will
negatively impact on reviewers.
•Avoid to many specifics on experiments.
•Structure aims so that aim 2 is not dependent on aim 1.
•Do not avoid issues within the field of research
•Using cell lines for genetic studies is not the same as primary cancer cells and might yield
misleading information. Tell the review you understand the limitations and how to address it.

65. Details of Research Proposal
•Significance and Impact:
•Good
•Last chance to impress the reviewer on the importance of what you are proposing.
•Give a sense of future directions for this research.
•Why is this proposal innovative?
•Impact on the field and/or on the disease being studied should be stated.
•Reject
•No significance statement.
•Superficial such as this will cure cancer.

66. Applicant’s CV details:
•Good
•List all awards especially awards directly related to your research.
•List all publications in the last five years.
•Abstracts are an easy why to show productivity.
•Give impact factors for publications and citations if any.
•Give ranking of journal in your field of research if possible.
•Reject
•No evidence of research activity or track record.
•All middle authors for publications.

67. General Thoughts
•Reviewers will not be experts in your field of research. Make the
proposal accessible to them.
•Get your proposal read by a colleague or someone in your area of
research. They might find problems that reviewers will find.