Santa Clara University

1. General Considerations

Writing a project proposal is an exercise in persuasion. Proposal reviewers want to know the answers to the following questions:

• Does the proposal relate to the sponsor's area of support?
• How is the work planned, how much will it cost, and how long will it take?
• What are the applicant's qualifications for doing the work, what preliminary work has he or she done in the area, what already has been done in the area, and why should the agency fund the proposed work?
• What will be done with the results?
• How will the results be evaluated?

A well-written proposal is precise, sharply focused, and never overlong. The purpose of the proposal should be stated succinctly, otherwise the reviewers may not be convinced that the project is worthwhile.

When an agency has application forms, they should be used and followed meticulously. If responding to an RFP or program solicitation, a specific format may be required. In this case, that format should be followed and care taken that all the items are covered. If there is any confusion about how to proceed, SPO should be contacted for assistance.

 

2. Proposal Format

In the absence of any instructions or a required format, the following is suggested:

Title Page, Facilities & Equipment
Abstract, Personnel
Table of Contents, References
Introduction, Bibliography
Background, Budget
Project Description, Appendices
Evaluation

 

3. Title Page

Many sponsors have their own format for a title page which is usually self-explanatory. In the absence of a required format, the page should summarize the proposal information and provide the endorsements required by Santa Clara University.

Title Page (sample):

SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY
[Department]
Santa Clara, California 95053

[TITLE OF THE PROJECT]

[start and end dates of performance period]

[amount requested]

Submitted to:

[Sponsor's Name]
[Sponsor's Address]

[date prepared]

Principal Investigator:
Approved by:

[Name] John Smith
[Appointment Title] Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs
[Telephone Number] 408/554-4533

Administrative Officer:

Linda Campbell
Director of Sponsored Projects
408/554-4408

 

4. Abstract

Every proposal should include an abstract, which is a concise summary (approximately 200 words) of the projects's major objectives, procedures to be used and its significance. Prepared after the proposal is written, the abstract is designed to give the reviewer a quick overview of the project and should be on a separate page at the beginning of the proposal.

 

5. Table of Contents

The table of contents is prepared for the convenience of the reviewer if a proposal has many sections. List only the major sections of the proposal and give page numbers where each section begins. If a proposal is very long the table of contents may be supplemented with a list of illustrations, figures, or tables.

 

6. Introduction

An introduction is needed only in very long, complex proposals. The introduction should assist the reviewer -- often the initial administrative reviewer, who may direct the proposal to the agency's proper study section -- in grasping the full significance of the proposed project. Therefore, the introduction should be clear to an informed layman. It should place the project problem in a context of common knowledge and show the importance of the research.

 

7. Background

The background section should present strong evidence to the reviewer that the work of the proposal needs to be done and reflects the principal investigator's competence in the project's field. Important previous works by others, as well as the PI's own work, in the project's field should be cited. However, caution should be exercised when attacking the work of another in the field. That person might be a reviewer.

 

8. Project Description

The project description is the heart of the proposal and should be prepared with special care. It should be a comprehensive explanation of the proposed project, not addressed to lay people but to specialists in the field. This section may be broken down into three subparts -- objectives, significance, and plan of work.

• Objectives -- Objectives specify the outcomes of the project, the end products. Measurable objectives become the criteria by which the effectiveness of the project is judged. This may include an estimated timetable of expected results. These are precise statements in contrast to goals which describe long range benefits.
• Significance -- The proposed project's contribution to current knowledge in the field, its relation to work in progress elsewhere, and its place among the long- term goals of the principal investigator should be stated clearly and emphatically.
• Plan of Work -- This section should include a broad design of the work to be undertaken and detail methods and procedures. The plan of work should reinforce the budget requested. Management and staffing plans are also critical components for projects involving multiple investigators and/or collaborations with investigators at other institutions.

 

9. Evaluation

An evaluation section may or may not be required depending upon the type of project being proposed. An evaluation section usually is required when the project involves the development of training materials and programs rather than basic research. An evaluation may be done by "insiders" or by "outsiders". Regardless of who does the evaluation it should indicate:

• Who will be performing the evaluation
• How evaluators will be selected
• Evaluation criteria
• Data gathering instruments
• Any test instruments or questionnaires
• Data analysis process
• How the evaluation will be used for program improvement
• The evaluation reports to be produced.

 

10. Facilities & Equipment

Available facilities and special equipment that will be important to the project should be described. Any additional facilities and equipment to be acquired under the project, either by the University or the sponsor, should be described in detail. The importance of these items to the success of the project should be clear.

 

11. Personnel

This section should identify the principal investigator, co- investigators, the number of students and support staff, and briefly describe their roles in the project. The biographical sketch for each key project person should be on a separate page and should include name, education, experience, professional affiliations and honors, and list of publications published in the past five years and those in press.

 

12. References

If three or fewer references are cited, they may be included as footnotes in the text itself. If greater than three, they should be indicated by sequential foot-noting in the text and the list of references included at this point. Standard footnoting style should be followed.

 

13. Bibliography

This section is optional, but can serve the purpose of informing the reviewer that the principal investigator is familiar with pertinent literature in the field beyond that cited in the proposal. Standard bibliographic format should be followed.

 

14. Budget

The budget is an indicator of the magnitude of the project and serves to identify the cost of the project to the sponsor. The budget also serves as a further measure of the principal investigator's capabilities since there must be a reasonable correlation between the project as described and the PI's assessment of the various cost elements.

The budget should reflect total costs. Most sponsors, initially, want realistic budget estimates even though they may be higher or lower than the average amounts the sponsor customarily funds for a project. If the project is worthy of support, a sponsor will help fit it into its funding capabilities. Some sponsors, of course, announce specific funding limits that may not be exceeded.

 

15. Appendices

Appendices may be used to include data of peripheral benefit to the research (e.g., preprints of articles, subcontract data, letters of support, tabular data, and graphs). The use of appendices is recommended, particularly when a sponsor limits the length of the proposal to a specified number of pages. However, it is important to recognize that some agencies may not copy appendices when circulating proposals to reviewers. If the information is essential to the proposal, it should be in the narrative.