Read Previously Funded Proposals

Read previously funded proposals or abstracts for the agency to which you are submitting your grant. The National Endowment for the Humanities and the National Endowment for the Arts offer complete sample applications of previously funded proposals on their websites. Knowing what a good grant looks like helps in crafting your own grant application.

Read the Guidelines

Carefully read the application guidelines. They contain valuable information, including how to assemble your grant, the review criteria, types of activities supported, and all the necessary details that need to be followed in order to be funded. Many grants are eliminated during the first phase of the review process simply because the guidelines were not followed.

Know the Audience

Know the audience for whom you are writing. Are the reviewers specialists in your field, or are they familiar with your area, but not necessarily experts? Will panels be interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary? Will the funding agency send your proposal to individual outside experts or will the review take place in-house? Knowing your audience is key to knowing how to write your proposal.

Talk to the Program Officer

Contact and ask questions of the Program Officers at the funding agency. Often, they will review a two or three page concept paper of your proposal and give important advice. These should be submitted at least six weeks prior to the grant deadline, so that the staff will have time to reply, and you will have time to make any necessary alterations to your project.

Address Four Key Questions

A proposal should clearly answer four main questions: 1. What are you going to do? 2. How will you do it? 3. Why is it significant? 4. Why are you the right person to do it?

Plan the Work

A clear plan of work gives the readers a sense of where you have been, where you are now, and what you plan to accomplish. If you received previous grants to support your work- mention them. The fact that other funding agencies feel your work is important gives strength and credibility to your project.

Think Big

It is important to think big. Emphasize the forest, not just the trees. Speak of the larger themes and methodologies and avoid getting lost in the details. Clarity and conciseness are important. The reviewers should not have to dig through a mass of details or a discourse that seems impenetrable. At the same time, your grant needs to maintain a strong focus. Think carefully about what you can accomplish in the grant period. Your project should be ambitious, but it should not be unrealistic. If you promise too much, the reviewers will notice.

Convince the Reviewers

Explaining the significance of your grant is very important. Clearly articulate what contributions your work will make to scholarly and humanistic knowledge. Here is where it helps to think big. Explain why anyone should care about your project. Can it pass the “so what” test? What difference will it make? Don’t assume the self-evident importance of your research. There may be various projects similar to yours during a particular grant cycle. Why is yours better than the others? You need to explain why your project deserves the grant.

Showcase Your Expertise

Clearly demonstrate that you are especially qualified to do this project. Do you possess unique skills essential to conducting your project? Showcase your expertise. If you have a strong publication record, let the reviewers know. A strong track record on other projects offers good evidence that you will complete the work in a timely fashion. Explain what function your project is likely to play in your professional development.

Being Persistent is Important

Funding agencies have a limited amount of funds to support grant requests. Often, some excellent grants are not funded because of budgetary limitations. If your project does not receive funding, it is important to contact the Program Officer and find out why it was rejected. Knowing why you were not funded will help strengthen your application for the next deadline. Persistence is key.

No magic formulas exist, but a successful applicant knows that there are specific steps that need to be followed to increase your chances of being awarded the grant. The steps listed above will certainly help increase your probability of success.

The post How to Write a Successful Humanities Grant appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

1. Failure to follow submission guidelines

Many Federal agencies, including the NSF, will return proposals without review. The simple reason given is that the guidelines were not followed. Few events are as frustrating as losing a grant competition because the margins on your proposal were a quarter-inch too wide or a mandatory section was missing. This is perhaps the easiest flaw to address in a rejected proposal. Researchers must become students of the Request for Application (RFA) to ensure their applications do not stop at this stage.

2. Poorly written proposals

Proposals that make the reviewers question the author’s credibility as a researcher are fatal. Poorly written proposals, including mistakes such as poor grammar and misspellings, can detract from your idea. If you have a good idea, you must present it in the best possible light to beat the competition. Ideally you can have your proposal professionally reviewed and edited. Alternatively, you should send it to a naïve reader and a grammarian. Each will provide necessary information that pertains to the readability and communication of your ideas to the reviewers.

3. Failure to immediately address the purpose of the proposal

The first sentence of the first paragraph should be what the proposal is about. Unfortunately, it is not unusual to not see the purpose of the research until several sentences into the first paragraph. Since the ratings of your proposal often depend on the ease of finding the information about your request, you must be obvious and direct. It is imperative that you begin the first paragraph with: “The research objective of this proposal is…”

4. The scientific investigation is not methodical, repeatable and verifiable

The probability of reaching your objectives depends on your methodology. You must be able to clearly state how your project will unfold, and describe how you will conduct your research. Success also depends on your project being repeatable by other researchers. With the wave of rescinded grants and questionable research results making their way into mainstream news, accountability and complete objectivity are absolute necessities. Your research must be verifiable. In other words, can you show that the results you claim are true?

5. Not stating the research objectives appropriately

The statement of your research objective should lead you directly to your methodology. If it does not, you don’t have a clear statement of your research objective. To quote the NSF, the acceptable ways to state a research objective are:

1. The research objective of this proposal is to test the hypothesis H.
2. The research objective of this proposal is to measure parameter P with accuracy A.
3. The research objective of this proposal is to prove the conjecture C.
4. The research objective of this proposal is to apply method M from disciplinary area D to solve problem P in disciplinary area E.

At the end of the day, it is important to understand that a research proposal submitted for funding is not a manuscript, a paper for publication, nor a novel. It is a request with clear objectives and methodology. Also, adhering to the RFA guidelines may require sections that are not directly related to your research, such as Broader Impacts and the inclusion of underrepresented groups. Selling your idea depends on remembering that you have to convince the reviewers of the need for your research in the clearest, most understandable, and logical manner. As the NIH asks us to remember: “Think of yourself as a used car salesman, selling a used car to a group of seasoned used car salesmen.”

The post Why Did My Research Proposal Fail? appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.