General Grant Writing Tips for Success

Adopted from NIFA guidance.

Developing the Proposal:

  • Read the RFA
  • Develop idea to fit within program priorities
    • Consider eligibility
    • Consider relevance, review criteria
  • Write project description for particular program, reviewers, review process, etc.
  • Describe all elements if project is integrated
  • Complete all paperwork, get signatures
  • Submit on time

Improving the Proposal:

  • Obtain a successful proposal from a successful colleague
  • Review abstracts of recently funded projects in the programs of interest
  • Obtain critical reviews from colleagues before you submit
    • Ask a colleague in your research, education, or extension area to review the proposal for clarity and logic, including scientific and education methodology
    • Ask a colleague outside your research area to review the proposal for clarity, logic, and significance
  • High risk proposals need high potential impact - need to sell it but admit risk

Successful Proposals:

  • Excite the reviewers
  • Are easy to read and understand
  • Have an appropriate literature review
  • Have clear rationale & objectives that fit program priorities
  • Clearly stated hypotheses or research questions – for research proposals
  • Clearly stated learning objectives and expected outcomes/impacts for education and extension portion of the project (What will be different as a result of the proposed work?)
  • Have specific objectives, methods, work plan, etc. for research, education, and extension components – for integrated proposals
  • Have well-communicated importance of topic and potential contributions of work
  • Contain a detailed project description - methods, sample selection, analysis, educational program delivery, instructional materials development, etc.
  • Have a discussion of expected outcomes • Address potential pitfalls, including short-comings of data and amelioration plans
  • Contain a good plan for dissemination of results and use of research results in education programs
  • Appropriate expertise of the Project Director(s)
  • Critically reviewed by colleagues before submission
  • Follow the submission rules!!!

Reasons for Lower Ratings:

  • Project of little or no relevance to sponsor mission and/or program priorities
  • Insufficient preliminary data or evidence from literature
  • Exceeds page limit, poorly written, unclear objectives or hypotheses
  • Poor record of results (e.g., publications) from previous funding
  • Experiments or objectives not cohesive, different functions aren’t integrated
  • Low scientific merit, basic flaws in logic, demonstrates lack of scientific understanding
  • No hypotheses, research questions, or learning objectives
  • Not innovative, little new information gained
  • Inappropriate methods or methods too vague
  • Not as exciting as other proposals (i.e., worth funding, but ran out of funds)
  • Project Director(s) not qualified