Components of a Proposal

Whether it's called an abstract, a project summary or an executive summary, a good abstract summarizes the full proposal, is hypothesis-driven, contains goals and objectives and outlines a solid plan of action. It guides reviewers as they read to pay special attention to what you want them to notice and helps them to recall these points clearly when they think about (and judge) your proposal later on. In general, an abstract should address:

• What you intend to do (the topic of the project, broad goal, specific objectives)
• Why the work is important or needed (what is the problem or the issue to be addressed)
• How you are going to do the work and how will you measure success (methods, procedures, evaluation)
• Who will benefit from the project (what is the target population, group served or studied)
• When the will project take place (dates or duration)
• The significance or the "so what?" of the project (what is the significance, outcomes expected)

Most importantly, search the RFP or the Call for Proposals to determine if the sponsor requires The abstract to include certain elements. Some federal agencies are very specific in the content of The abstract. For example, some may require you to designate the topic, goal, or track of a certain competition, the number of participants to be served and your collaborating partners.

Format

Refer to your RFP for specific formatting including margins and fonts. Abstracts are usually one page and often single-spaced, but the RFP should contain specific formatting information that must be followed precisely.

Tips and Suggestions

• Write The abstract last so it reflects the entire application
• Be succinct and explicit in describing what you propose to do, The abstract is often your first opportunity to capture a reviewer's interest
• Avoid jargon and discipline-specific references as reviewers may include the lay public and professionals who are not experts in your field
• Use all of the space provided
• Do not include proprietary or confidential information as abstracts generally become public information

Specific agency guidance

Many federal agency websites publish The abstracts of awarded projects on their websites, so this will be the public summary of your proposed work. Some agencies have specific requirements for Abstracts. Below are the general requirements for NIH and NSF.

The following is an excerpt from The Art of Grantsmanship, by Jacob Kraicer, Ph.D.

Background and Significance: Current State of Knowledge

• This section should answer three questions: what is known, what is not known, and why is it essential to pursue answers to the remaining open questions.
• Begin with a brief outline of the highlights in the background review. State where your own previous contributions (if any) fit in.
• Then critically evaluate the relevant literature. This section should be considerably more than an uncritical compendium or list of the existing literature.
• Discuss fairly all sides of any controversy, disagreement, and/or discrepancy in published results. Remember, though, that a participant in that controversy may become your proposal reviewer.
• Identify specifically the gaps and contradictions that you will clarify. Carry this into the rationale for your proposal.
• Emphasize the importance and relevance of your proposal in bridging your hypotheses and long-term objectives with the background review.
• Integrate your previous findings within the background to give the reviewers a sense of your relevant contributions.

In many ways, your objectives or "specific aims" (NIH terminology) are the most important portion of your proposal. They allow the reviewer to see, in a brief overview, exactly the work you propose to undertake.

The aims and objectives might be a separate document or they might be a portion of the longer research plan. You should format them precisely as the sponsor specifies. Typically, though, they are organized as follows:

• A brief recap of the problem statement and its importance,
• Define the over-arching hypothesis to be tested, and
• Develop that into 2-4 smaller working hypotheses that will allow you to address the larger question.

One way to develop this section is with four distinct paragraphs:

• Introductory paragraph
  • should begin with a restatement of the problem to catch the readers' attention.
  • follow up with a very brief (1-2 sentences) of the literature, outlining what is already known about the problem
  • should lead the reader to what is unknown about the problem
  • concluding sentence should indicate why this lack of knowledge is important, what we are prevented from doing or knowing or understanding because of this missing information
• The W's paragraph—who, what, when, and where
  • outline the long-term goal of your research, briefly outlining your long-term research plans
  • recap the objective of this proposal, clearly identifying it as a step toward your long-term goals
  • identify this work's central hypothesis as clearly, and with as much focus, as you can bring to it (proposals frequently fail at exactly this point in the process)
  • explain the rationale for the hypothesis
  • finish with an argument as to why this research question and this research team are precisely the right ones to bring to the work
• Getting down to business
  • briefly detail the smaller aims that will allow you to test your central hypothesis
  • cite primary and secondary measures (if possible)
  • Note: These aims should be supportive of each other but not entirely interdependent. If one fails early on, you do not want your entire project to fail. There should still be something you can pull from the research.
• The payoff
  • outline how this proposal (its question, its methodology, its instrumentation, etc.) is innovative (This is another sentence that causes proposals to fail. Please do not confuse "innovative" with new-to-you; a thorough knowledge of the literature is essential here.)
  • outline your expected outcomes, the "so what?," clearly identifying the impact the study will have on the population at large

The Foundation Center describes the following four types of objectives:

• Behavioral - human action is anticipated
• Performance - a specific time frame within which behavior will occur, at an expected proficiency level, is expected
• Process - the manner in which something occurs is an end in itself
• Product - a tangible item results

Most research projects have a beginning and end date and are less likely to have requirements to sustain a part of the research project beyond the end date. Look to the guidelines for any requirements for the project to continue after funding ends.

Some program grants and public service projects are expected to make an impact or to develop an institutional capacity for the implemented project to continue beyond the end date.

Sustainability plan

If sustainability is a required element, describe a plan for how the project will continue, who will be responsible for the maintenance and how the institutional change will enable the project to continue and possibly grow.

The curriculum vitae (CV), literally the "course of life," may also be referred to as a biographical sketch (or biosketch) by some sponsors. Many sponsors have specific formatting and page-length restrictions.

Whose biosketch or vita should be included in a grant proposal?

The primary answer is which ones are required by the sponsor. Beyond requirements, you should consider which additional ones are permitted by the sponsor.

If sponsor guidelines permit, CVs of personnel playing a significant role in the project may be included. This would include all professional personnel involved in the project: associated faculty members, major collaborators from other institutions, postdoctoral research associates, and so on. Also included are Subcontract PIs and co-PIs, Consultants, Collaborators, or Evaluators. In short, anyone who is making a substantial contribution to the project deserves, and ought, to have his/her vita included when possible.

Why is the biosketch or vita so important in the proposal process?

Among the most important factors considered by reviewers in rating a proposal are the past track record of the applicant and the ability of the applicant to perform the studies outlined in the proposal. The competence of the people proposed as researchers has much to do with whether or not the project will yield meaningful results. The biographical sketch is the only way by which reviewers can evaluate the researcher's competence and often must serve as his/her only credential. The Reviewer often examines your CV immediately after reading your project description--that is when he or she mentally decides who you are, professionally. In addition to an understanding of your research achievements and credentials, the Reviewer may be trying to determine: Are you also a collegial citizen of the university? Are you professional? Do you take your teaching seriously? Are you well-rounded? Are you broadly or narrowly educated? Are you disciplinary or interdisciplinary? The CV should reveal a professional persona appropriate to the granting agency and the type of award.

What is a typical format?

The biosketch or CV included in a grant application is a different document than the resume you would prepare to apply for a job or the academic CV you maintain to document your full professional career. The sponsor usually limits its length, sometimes to as little as 1-2 pages. There may be very detailed instructions for the format and contents of the CV. The reviewers need to be able to find the information they need quickly and easily, which means it needs to be where they expect to find it and in the format they expect. Even when the sponsor does not specify the format, the biographical information should be limited in scope and carefully prepared and should focus on information relevant to your research career.

NSF and NIH samples

Sample bio sketches for NSF and NIH are included under Related Resources at the right. These two sponsors have very specific and strict requirements regarding what can be included.

Why is a facilities statement important?

While it is understandable that PIs spend the bulk of their proposal-writing time and effort on the research plan, sponsors are increasingly looking to the "supporting documents" that typically accompany a proposal as they make their evaluation. PIs are often expected to provide a facilities statement which documents institutional capacity and the availability of the resources required for the project. As reviewers make difficult decisions among many equally strong and important projects, they look to these statements to assess which projects have the strongest institutional support. Therefore, boilerplate language is no longer sufficient.

Facilities statements used to include, for example, the size of a faculty member's office, the office equipment available, etc. Certainly, these resources should still be noted if they are relevant to the scope of your work. However, sponsors generally expect you to have access to these resources, so it is important to highlight additional or unique resources that are available for carrying out your project.

Remember that nothing in the facilities statement has a dollar value assigned to it, and all resources identified must be specific to the work you are proposing. Everything included should support the argument that the institutional capacity to support the research and the administration of the award is well in place.

NIU resources

Below are some descriptions of NIU resources and capabilities that might be included in the facilities statement. Your Pre-award Staff Contact Research Development Specialist can assist you with identifying organizational resources and crafting a strong facilities statement.

1. Existing Equipment
   There is no need to list every single item in a lab or office. In this section, though, you should indicate that you have the basic equipment to conduct the research, particularly if you are not asking for obviously required equipment in the grant budget. Reviewers will want to know that you can complete the research as described if they give you the award. Early-career investigators should certainly reference, without quantifying, any start-up package associated with the development of a lab or research setting.
2. Facilities
   Basic scientists might need to include the scientific glassblowing services, the machine shop that will fabricate specialty items, the analytical lab with its shared instrumentation, and/or the electronics shop. Other resources may include access to the University's high-performance computer cluster for analyzing large amounts of data, Digital Convergence Lab, and/or the Research Methodology Service unit. Your Research Development Specialist can assist with identifying additional campus resources that may be appropriate for your particular project.
   
   The Research Methodology Service is a specialized service unit at NIU that helps faculty to strengthen research design and data analysis. If the research plan involves complex analysis, management of large or complicated data sets or a particularly esoteric form of analysis, use of the RMS may strengthen your proposal.
3. Carnegie classifications
   Look up NIU's classification. We are currently classified as Research-High and have an impressive Engagement classification as well. If either of these classifications is important for your work, PIs should certainly consider mentioning them. However, one should always check these classifications before including them in a proposal. The Carnegie Foundation changes its classification system from time to time; it would not strengthen a proposal to use an out-of-date classification marker.
4. Grants management or statement of fiscal responsibility
   Federal proposals typically need not include a statement about grant management; the existence of such services is covered in the standard certifications. Foundations and state-level sponsors, though, may well ask for an indication that there is the institutional ability to manage an award in compliance with the appropriate regulations. You might consider adding this language: "Northern Illinois University is committed to supporting externally funded faculty research. As part of that support, Sponsored Programs Administration (post-award) exists to assist faculty members with the administration of externally funded grants. Sponsored Programs Administration (post-award) is staffed with professional Grant Administrators who are knowledgeable of Federal and private agency regulations as well as NIU and State of Illinois procedures, PeopleSoft Human Resources, Procurement, Accounts Receivable and General Ledger systems." If additional language is required, contact your SPA Research Development Specialist.
5. Agency-specific guidance
   NSF and NIH have very specific requests and requirements for the Facilities and Other Resources statements. Below includes some guidance to prepare a statement for each agency.
   

   NIH

   NSF

   Facilities and other resources. Information in this section is used to assess the adequacy of the organizational resources (inclusive of physical, intellectual, and human resources; exclusive of major equipment – see below) available to perform the proposed research. Identify the facilities to be used (laboratory, animal, computer, office, clinical, and other). If appropriate, indicate their capacities, pertinent capabilities, relative proximity and extent of availability to the project. Describe only those resources that are pertinent to the proposed project. Provide any information describing other resources available to the project (i.e., machine shops, electronics shops, etc.) and the extent to which they would be available to the project. Address how the research environment will contribute to the probability of success of the proposed research. Also note any unique features or resources that would contribute to the probable success of the project proposed (e.g., access to undergraduate student research assistants for a R15 application, time dedicated to research in the applicant's institutional appointment). For an Early Stage Investigator, describe the institutional investment (start-up funding, course release, graduate assistants, etc.) in the success of the investigator. If facilities and resources outside of NIU will be used to carry out the project, describe those facilities in a separate section of the document. Your RDS can provide template/sample documents and language to support the development of this statement. Equipment. Briefly describe major items of equipment (e.g., computer cluster, electron microscope, centrifuge, etc.) available for the project, together with their location and pertinent capabilities, if appropriate. Only include equipment that will be necessary to conduct the project being proposed. If equipment outside of NIU will be employed for the project, describe it in a separate section of the document.

   Facilities, equipment, and other resources. This section is intended to demonstrate that you already have adequate organizational resources available to perform the proposed work. List only those things that are directly relevant to the proposal. If you are requesting one or more items of equipment in the proposal, do not list them in this section. Instead, describe them in the project description, and provide a brief description of how they will supplement or interface with the existing equipment listed here.

Some sponsors request a letter of support or a letter of commitment (depending on the type of collaboration that is being presented or is being required).

Before attaching such letters to your proposal, check the guidelines to make sure the sponsor allows letters to be included. Some sponsors may not allow an Appendix to be included except for required documents as specified in the guidelines.

General differences between letters

Letters of support

• Letter writer advocates for your project
• Referred to in the text or the project narrative
• How does the project fit with the mission/goals of their organization
• Presents type of support

Letters of commitment

• Evidence of interest in the project from participants
• If the project is funded, they are ready with their contribution
• What they will contribute
• They will participate at the time you need them
• Will usually indicate concrete actions they are committing to provide during the project.

Agency specific guidance

What is current and pending support?

Most if not all grant funders will request a statement of "current and pending support" (also referred to as "other support"): a listing of projects which are currently funded or for which funding is pending. Such information is typically required for each key person named in a proposal.

Why is it requested or required?

Most sponsors require that this information is submitted with the proposal; however, some (i.e., the National Institutes of Health and other PHS agencies) do not request current and pending information until an award seems likely. Sponsors require current and pending support statements for two reasons:

1. To ensure that key personnel has sufficient time available to devote to the proposed project.
2. To ensure that the proposed project does not significantly overlap with other projects currently receiving federal funding (i.e. scientific overlap).

Type of information requested; format

While formats and required information elements vary by sponsor, in most cases, a current and pending statement must include the title, sponsor, status (i.e., "current" or "pending"), start and end dates, amount of funding and time commitment for each project listed. Some sponsors (e.g., USDA) require that an award or proposal number be listed, and some (e.g., NSF) want the location where each project is being performed. Sponsors usually want to see the time commitment shown as a number of person months; however, some still want to know the percentage of effort.

Who completes current and pending forms?

SPA keeps a record of all pending and awarded external funding proposals. Using these records, your Research Development Specialist can (given enough time) compile a list of currently awarded and pending externally funded projects, customized to the format and information requirements of the particular sponsor to which you are applying, and send the document to you for review.

PIs are responsible for reviewing the information carefully for accuracy prior to proposal submission.

General

• Abstract Killers: How Not to Kill a Grant Application, Science
• The Art of Grantsmanship, by Jacob Kraicer, M.D., Ph.D.
• Why Academics Have a Hard Time Writing Good Grant Proposals, by Robert Porter, Ph. D.
• Demystifying Grant Guidelines by Richard Kaplan
• Social Science Research Council: The Art of Writing Proposals
• Foundation Center’s Proposal Writing Short Course
• Ten Simple Rules for Getting Grants, Bourne & Chalupa
• Grant Writing Tip – Statement of Need
• How to Write an Effective Letter of Support
• Examples of sample support letters
• Sample biosketech NSF/NIH
• 2013 NSF changes, including to Facilities and Resource Statement

Budget

• Budget Justification Job Aid (PDF)
• NIU F&A Rate Agreement (PDF)
• Person Months/Percent Effort Conversion calculator
• Agency budget guidance NSF/NIH
• NSF budget template (Word)
• Budgeting F&A (Indirect Costs)

Agency-specific

• SPA's curated agency guidance
• NSF - Introduction to Transformative Research
• NIH - How to Write a Research Project Grant Application
• NIH - resources for applicants (includes helpful videos)
• Department of Labor - A Sustainability Planning Guide
• EPA grant resources