General Considerations

• Relates to the purposes and goals of applicant agency
• Strictly adheres to the content and format guidelines of the applicant agency
• Is directed toward the appropriate audience (i.e. those who will review the proposal)
• Clearly addresses the review criteria of the funding source
• Is interesting to read
• Uses a clear, concise, coherent writing style, free of jargon, superfluous information, and undefined acronyms (i.e. it’s easy to read)
• Is organized in a logical manner that is easy to follow
• Uses headings so that information can be found easily
• Calls attention to the most significant points in the proposal through the use of underlining, differences in type, spacing, titles, and appropriate summaries
• Is paginated from beginning to end, including appendix when directly appended to the proposal
• Makes appropriate use of figures, graphs, charts, and other visual materials
• Is so meticulously proofread that it has few (if any) grammatical errors, misspellings, or typos

The Proposal

• Has title that is appropriate, descriptive, and (perhaps) imaginative
• Unless it is brief, has a table of contents that is straight-forward and accurate
• Has a clear, concise, informative abstract/executive summary that can stand alone
• Has clearly stated goals and objectives that are not buried in a morass of narrative
• Follows naturally from previous/current programs or research
• Documents the needs to be met or problems to be solved by the proposed project
• Indicates that the project’s hypotheses rest on sufficient evidence and are conceptually sound
• Clearly describes who will do the work (who), the methods that will be employed (what), which facilities or location will be used (where), and a timetable of events (when)
• Justifies the significance and/or contribution of the project on current scientific knowledge or a given population of people or a body of writing/art and socio economic benefit when appropriate
• Includes appropriate and sufficient citations to prior work, ongoing studies, and related literature
• Establishes the competence and scholarship of the individual(s) involved
• Doesn’t assume that reviewers “know what you mean”
• Makes no unsupported assumptions
• Discusses potential pitfalls and alternative approaches
• Presents a plan for evaluating data or the success of project
• Is of reasonable dimensions (i.e. not trying to answer all of the questions at once)
• Proposes work which can be accomplished in the time allotted
• Demonstrates the individual(s) and/or organization are qualified to perform the proposed project; doesn’t assume that the applicant agency “knows all about you”
• Documents facilities necessary for the success of the project
• Includes necessary letters of support and other supporting documentation
• Includes vitae which demonstrate the credentials required (e.g., Don’t use a promotion and tenure vitae replete with institutional committee assignments for a research proposal)
• Includes a bibliography of cited references

The Budget

• Has a budget which corresponds to the narrative: all major elements detailed in the budget are described in the narrative and vice versa
• Has a budget sufficient to perform the tasks described in the narrative
• Has a budget which corresponds to the applicant’s agency’s guidelines with respect to content and detail

Proposal Titles

Weak: Genetic Diversity in Luidia clathrada
Better: Genetic Diversity in the Starfish Luidia clathrada

Weak: Three Plays by Eugene O’Neill
Better: A Comparison of Female Characters in Three Eugene O’Neill Plays

Weak: Improving Math Education in Elementary Schools
Better: Innovative Instructional Materials to Improve Math Education in Elementary Schools

Weak: Preparing a New Agenda for Minority Education at the University of Iowa (What’s at the University…the agenda or minority education?)
Better: Minority Education: Preparing a New Agenda for the University of Iowa

Weak: Special Studies Directed at the Simplification of Analytical Procedures Concerned with Identification of Blood Proteins
Better: Methods to Simplify Analytical Procedures Used to Identify Blood Proteins

Weak: Uses of Marine Plant Species in Food Production to Bring About Reductions in Food Costs
Better: Uses of Marine Plant Species in Food Production to Reduce Food Costs

Weak: New Perspectives in Learning
Better: New Perspectives in Learning: A Program to Facilitate the Retention and Graduation of Minority Students

Weak: Regulation of K Secretion by the CCD
Better: Regulation of Potassium Secretion by the Cortical Collecting Duct

Weak: CT Versus MR in the Diagnosis of Brain Disorders
Better: Computer Tomography (CT) Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MR) in the Diagnosis of Brain Disorders