Sections of a Proposal

The title of the project is the first thing reviewers read when considering whether to recommend a particular project for funding. The title should be reflective of the proposal as a whole and relevant to the funding opportunity. Some sponsors may limit the length of the title, and others may provide project titles. Try to avoid titles that are too short, too long, or too cute. Choose a title that is specific to your project and avoid titles that may be used by other applicants to the same funding opportunity. Provide enough detail for expert technical reviewers to know what lies ahead, but not so much that generalists in your field will not understand what the project involves.

As a courtesy to reviewers, proposals should contain a table of contents that identifies the sections of the proposal and page numbers. If the sponsor provides guidelines for the table of contents, these should be followed precisely. Some sponsors will provide forms for the table of contents. If a table of contents is not requested or mentioned in the application guidelines, it should be assumed that it will count toward the page limits for the proposal narrative. If a table of contents is not required, it should be omitted if the space is needed for other more critical information in the proposal narrative.

The abstract should provide a summary of the information that is detailed in the proposal. Abstracts areimportant to reviewers, who use them as an introduction to a proposal before they begin reviewing and as a reminder when the project is discussed at a later time. The abstract should contain a synopsis of the project’s goals and objectives and the activities that will be used to meet them. It should be a self-contained ready-forpublication document that is written for a nonscientific audience. Generally, the abstract is limited to one page or less, and many sponsors provide additional word limitations. It should be concise, yet comprehensive. The abstract is the most widely read component of the proposal; therefore, a great deal of attention should be given to its creation.

Abstracts of funded projects are often published on sponsor websites or otherwise made available to potential grantees and the general public. Abstracts may also be used to assign proposals to review panels and may be circulated as a separate item to key funding officials. Abstracts are also used internally for information sharing purposes.

The introduction should be a short and concise preface to the project and its importance. It should describe the University’s and/or department’s mission in relation to the project, establish a background for the project, and encourage the reviewer to read further. If sponsors provide guidelines for an introduction section, these should be followed precisely. Introductions should be limited to one or two paragraphs unless the proposal guidelines
specify otherwise.

The need statement should be clearly defined and demonstrate a thorough understanding of the problem. It should provide credible, documented, and concrete evidence of the problem and should be written with the intention of establishing significance for the problem. It should be both compelling and unique. When appropriate, the need statement should discuss the cause and long-term effects of the problem. The goal of the need statement is to convince the reviewers that the problem is important enough to deserve attention and that an impact on the problem is possible. The need must have an external focus rather than an internal focus on something the applicant needs.

The background and literature review section should establish the current status of the field by referencing and discussing various experts on the subject. It should demonstrate a clear understanding of the subject area and should be written in a manner that is easily understood by an outsider to the field. This section should indicate how the proposed project will advance the knowledge in the relevant field and fill a gap in existing knowledge. A discussion of the investigator’s prior work in the field, if any, should also be included in this section. The background and literature review section is a beneficial section because it helps the proposal writer:

1. Determine the extent to which the topic has been addressed;
   
2. Support the rationale for the importance and innovativeness of the project;
   
3. Demonstrate the relevance of the topic to the existing body of knowledge;
   
4. Identify and describe the theoretical foundation of the project; and
   
5. Determine the best strategy to use in carrying out the project.

The goal of this section is to persuade reviewers of the impact and wider implications of the project. This section should explicitly address how the project addresses an important problem and how scientific knowledge will be advanced as a result of the project. This section often serves as a bridge between the background section and the goals and objectives section. Once the pivotal work leading up to the current project has been discussed in the background section, state explicitly what research questions others have not yet answered about the field and describe how the proposed work will be structured to address these important questions.

This section is sometimes referred to as Specific Aims and is important because it is where investigators describe specifically what will be accomplished as a result of the project they are proposing.

Goals provide an overall purpose and clarify the mission of the project. They should identify what will be accomplished through the project and be clearly connected to the needs statement. The project goal should always be obviously in line with the sponsor’s overall mission and the goals of the relevant funding opportunity.

Objectives state how success will be measured and should be goal-focused rather than budget-oriented. Objectives are closely associated with goals, but are more specific; they focus on outcomes and reflect quantitative or qualitative accomplishments. Objectives should be Simple, Immediate, Measurable, Practical, Logical, and Evaluable (SIMPLE!). Process objectives measure process accomplishments, but are not always an indication for measuring whether the need has been addressed. Outcome objectives reflect quantitative orqualitative accomplishments and give more credibility to the project.

The following questions can be used as a guide to writing outcome objectives:

1. What do you anticipate will change as a result of the successful completion of your project?How much change do you predict as an indicator of your success?
   
2. What measurement indicator will you use to document the change?
   
3. How long will it take to implement the project and measure the change?

This section is usually the longest section of a proposal and should explain in detail how the project will be carried out. It should include a justification of the activities in relation to the goals and objectives. This section’s goal is to convince the reviewer that the project is feasible and has a reasonable plan that is likely to be successful. If appropriate, this section should cite research to justify the selection of methods used in the project. For a service-related project, the methods section should provide a detailed description of the types of services and the plan for providing services. For a research project, this section should describe the research methodology that will be used and establish a clear rationale for its selection. It should describe what variables
were chosen and why, control methods, and data collection.

The goal of the evaluation section is to demonstrate a thorough plan for monitoring project activities and progress toward meeting clearly defined goals and objectives. In the formative phase, the evaluation should address the questions of how well the project is doing and what needs to be corrected or modified. The evaluation should also include a summative phase that addresses the question of whether the project was successful.

Evaluations should be clearly related to the project’s goals and objectives and include both quantitative and qualitative measures. The evaluation should include a description of the sources of data and the method of collection and analysis. A description or samples of test instruments, forms, or questionnaires that will be used to collect data in the project should be included.

If an external evaluator will be conduct the evaluation, his or her credentials, experiences, and roles in the project should be clearly defined in this section. If the project will be evaluated externally, the external evaluator should have substantial input in the design of the evaluation plan because he or she will be responsible for fulfilling the evaluation requirements as they have been outlined in the proposal and because he or she will have substantial experience and expertise in designing and implementing evaluations.

The following are some questions that should be considered in the process of designing a project evaluation:

1. What will be evaluated?

• Purpose and audience
• Performance Targets

2. What information is needed?

• Information needed to answer evaluation questions
• Source of data
• Access to data

3. How will it be collected?

• Method
• Timeline
• Responsible parties

4. How will data be analyzed?

• Analysis process
• Individuals involved?

5. How will results be reported?

• Reporting format
• Audience

6. What resources are needed?

• Roles and responsibilities
• Cost of Evaluation activities
  

Many sponsors will require a plan for disseminating project results. A dissemination plan can often be a selling point with sponsors because it lets them know they can support one project with a broader impact. This section should include a plan to share the results with various stakeholders (i.e., in print and online publications, at professional conferences and training sessions, etc.). Sponsors like to see that funds are being used to advance knowledge in a particular field in innovative ways such as providing free electronic access to reports and materials resulting from their support. Some sponsors will require specific dissemination procedures, such as publishing products in a database maintained by the agency that is available to others at no cost.

The sustainability plan is essentially a plan for sustaining the project after the grant funding ends. Depending on the unique circumstances of each project, possible sustainability activities include assigning other grants to support the project, reallocating funds from other University sources, seeking community involvement and volunteerism, or charging for services. Many sponsors like to see that the benefits of the project will continue beyond their financial support, but sustainability is not relevant for all projects. Agencies do not typically expect that research projects will be sustained without additional support since the portion of the research proposed for their support should be complete by the end of the funding period.

If references have been cited in the proposal, a bibliography should be provided that lists all references. The style recommended by the sponsor should be used, but if no style is recommended, the bibliography should be formatted in the style most common to the field. Unless otherwise noted in the application guidelines, it should be assumed that the bibliography counts toward the page limitations imposed by the sponsoring agency for the narrative section of the proposal.

Sponsors do not always allow appendices. If permitted, appendices should only include information pertinent to the proposed project. Examples include curriculum vitae of key personnel, proposed questionnaires or survey instruments, patents, letters of support, or other directly relevant printed materials. If letters of support are included, they should be from individuals who can convince the reviewers of the need for the project, their support of the project, and your ability to effectively operate the project. Some sponsors will provide a list of specific items to be included as appendices, and others will specifically disallow appendices or certain items from inclusion. Investigators should be aware that including a letter of support with a proposal to a program that does not allow such letters will result in the proposal being returned without review.