The Grant Review Process: Surviving the 8 Minute Test

The memory of writing my first proposal brings me chills and laughter. I was told that the grant was highly competitive and that only the few and favored received grants. Nevertheless, I could be one of the chosen if I worked very hard and explained everything I wanted in great detail. I wanted to start from the beginning, not exactly knowing what the beginning was. Should I start at the left or should I go to the right? Then I thought it was not about that at all, it was about being correct. In my mind, I would explain everything, and then explain more to let them know that I knew what I was talking about. They would understand that I was correct. I couldn’t help but wonder who they were, but it didn’t matter. Who I was and the great idea that I had were the points requiring my attention. And anyway, how would I figure out who they were? My grant was going out to a funding source and this faceless organizationwould decide my fate. I had to hope for the best, because my job depended on it. My university paid for me to come to Washington to speak with the program officer of the grant for which I was competing. Walking in her office, she seemed so gigantic and important. My fate was in her hands and I am certain my naiveté was evident, but so was my determination and good idea. That encounter yielded the knowledge necessary to survive the 8 minute test. And yes, I was funded and kept my job.

What Did She Teach Me?

My trip to see the program officer started off with the incredible news that the fate of my grant would be decided during an 8-minute panel discussion. I distinctly recall my initial indignation and bewilderment. I had spent six months working on this proposal; how could they understand everything in this sliver of time? She asked me to consider how many proposals they had to read and assess before making the decision on whose proposal to fund. Imagining a panel of experts who could discern the excellence and merit of my proposal in the blink of an eye made me more apprehensive. She advised me to simply think of them while I was writing, but I had no idea who they were. If I didn’t know who they were, how could I write for them? She told me to find out who they were, which would make my task harder. I needed to project success for my idea and think of them at the same time to win the grant. An arduous test for an experienced grant writer, much less for a person new to the process – but the program officer was right. In turn, what follows is my advice.

Reviews Before Submission

Once you have finished your proposal, give it to two of your most critical trusted colleagues to review. They will be able to give excellent feedback on your idea. Then, add a naïve reader. If he or she does not understand fifty percent of your proposal, there’s a good chance that some of your reviewers who are not as well-versed in your subject will feel the same way. Finally, an editor should review your proposal to ensure that the structure and grammar are perfect. Once you have gone through each of above steps, your proposal will be ready for prime time and the review process.

The Grant Review Process

To effectively survive the 8-minute test, you must know the review criteria by which you will be judged and who is reviewing your proposal. In some cases this is easy, but in others, where the process is blind, it is extremely difficult. In the case of the latter, you can ask the administrator in charge of the process what the experience and expertise of the reviewers will be.

Now imagine you are the reviewer with 25 proposals to read and evaluate in a very limited amount of time. You have finally come to your last proposal, and your head is swimming with information, approaches, and goals from the other 24 competitors. You would like nothing more than to be done with your reviews, so this final proposal had better make your life as easy as possible. If a good idea is hidden behind dense and difficult prose and content, you might not have the patience to give it the same treatment as the first proposal you read. Given these circumstances, how can you or any other applicant succeed in winning the grant?

• The abstract will be the very first page the reviewer will see and probably read twice. This is your first – and possible last – chance to make an impression. You need to demonstrate the totality of your plan, and that you have that innovative, attainable, and achievable project. The abstract is the most important part of your proposal; thus, afford it the time and effort it deserves.
• The next most important component is your need statement. Reviewers will seek this out if your abstract is compelling. However, if this section does not convince your reviewer that your idea is worth funding, the process will go no further.
• Address the “So what?” question forcefully, and at the beginning. This is common sense advice that few people heed. The importance of your project must stand out immediately for your proposal to be successful.
• The narrative should be easy to read and understand. Use topic sentences, short paragraphs, and avoid verbose prose. Simple declarative sentences are your best bet for this section. Think Hemingway, not Joyce.
• Illustrate as much as possible. It is difficult for a reviewer to read word after word, without losing interest and perspective on what your proposal is saying.
• Remember your reviewers have a very short window to review your proposal and worse yet, an even shorter window for the panel discussion. The easier you make it for the reviewers to understand your idea, the greater your chances of being funded.

The more reviewers who champion your proposal, the easier it will be to pass the 8-minute review process. If they all agree on excellent, then you have nothing to fear, but if some agree on excellent and others disagree, the decision could go either way. It is this scenario that you want to avoid, and you can if you wear the evaluator’s hat. I now serve as a reviewer and wished that the proposals in front of me had the same teacher I did. It also surprises and saddens me to note that the writing is geared only on the request – and like me many years ago, they wear only one hat.

• About
• Latest Posts

Mathilda Harris

Director at Grant Training Center

Over the past 18 years, she has written grants, conducted capital campaigns, developed strategic plans for grant procurement, and assisted individuals and institutions to write winning proposals for various donors.

Latest posts by Mathilda Harris (see all)

• Challenges Facing Grant Writers in Today`s Environment - April 15, 2024
• Can AI Write your Grant Proposal? - January 8, 2024
• Three Essentials for Grant Success: Ingredients, Preparation, and Presentation - December 11, 2023