STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES IN FUNDED AND UNFUNDED PROPOSALS

WHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS OF A FUNDED PROPOSAL? WHAT MAKES A GOOD PROPOSAL?

• A CAREFULLY READ PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT

The program announcement gives the most current information available. Everything that is needed to prepare proposals is in the program announcement. There are no hidden agendas. Proposals are funded in a competitive system based on merit and promise.

• VERY CLEAR ON WHAT THE PROPOSAL HOPES TO ACCOMPLISH

A good proposal stems from a good concept.

The PI is clear on the kind of information or results he/she is seeking. How significant is this? Who could benefit from my findings? How important is this? What impact would it have?

• THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND THE PLANS AND PROCEDURES FOR ACHIEVING THE GOALS INNOVATIVE, WELL-DEVELOPED, WORTHWHILE, AND REALISTIC. THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ARE CLEARLY STATED

· THE CONTENT OF THE PROJECT IS UP-TO-DATE AND CLEARLY APPROPRIATE FOR THE IDENTIFIED LEARNING PROBLEM.

• UTILITY OR RELEVANCE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT. WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL OF THE PROJECT TO IMPROVE STEM EDUCATION?

A strong proposal has a good review of the literature on the topic. Information is

provided on what the research says about the area proposing to address.

References are cited.

• CAPABILITY OF THE PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR (s) IS CONSIDERED. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE PROJECT PERSONNEL HAVE THE NECESSARY EXPERTISE TO ACCOMPLISH THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

You need staff that have experience and training in the area you are proposing.

• THE NATIONAL IMPACT AND COST EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROJECT ARE CONSIDERED

Do the anticipated results have significance that has potential for being of application and interest to a broader audience?

• EVALUATION (If Required) AND DISSEMINATION PLANS

The plans for dissemination and communication of results appropriate and adequate to reach a broad national audience are clearly delineated.

• INTELLECTUAL MERITS AND BROADER IMPACTMUST ARE ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED

• LETTERS OF COMMITMENT TO THE PROJECT ARE PROVIDED WHEN SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS, SEVERAL INSTITUTIONS. OR CONSTITUENCIES OUTSIDE THE ACADEMIC COMMUNITY ARE INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT. IT IS IMPORTANT AND IT WOULD STRENGTHEN YOUR PROPOSAL TO HAVE THESE GROUPS INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING OF THE PROPOSAL.

• ALL PARTS OF THE PROPOSAL CONFORM TO FORMAT REQUIREMENTS, i.e., TARGET DATES, FONT SIZE, PAGE LIMITS, PROGRAM OBJECTIVES, BUDGET LIMITS.

SOME SUGGESTIONS

• A good proposal begins with a clear idea of the goals and objectives of the project. A good project begins with a sense of why it will be a significant improvement over current practice.

• The project summary (abstract) is the first thing that reviewers and NSF staff read. It should be written clearly and concisely. In the space allotted, it should outline the problem, the objectives and the expected outcomes, project activities, and the audience to be addressed

• Don’t use all of your pages discussing the need and not leaving enough space for the design and assessment/evaluation. NSF grants provide funds based on merit, not just on need.
• If possible, have someone not connected with the proposal read and comment on a draft of your proposal-with sufficient time allowed for changes prior to the submission of your proposal. This person can help identify omissions or inconsistent logic before reviewers see the proposal.
• Make certain that the proposal is cost effective. A big mistake a person makes is when large requests are made for salaries and little in participant cost.
• See if the program requires a preliminary proposal. If it does, do not hesitate in sending one. If it doesn’t, write a short concept paper and contact one of the program directors to discuss your idea with her/him. A preliminary proposal can be very helpful because you get back the reviews and they will be helpful in preparing the full proposal. In the ESIE programs, ratings of encourage and discourage of a full proposal is recommended. If your proposal gets a discouraged recommendation, that doesn’t mean that you cannot submit a full proposal, it means that you have a lot of work to do to get it in the highly competitive mode. If the proposal is not funded, consider the reviews of the panel and the comments from NSF staff objectively and seriously. Consult NSF staff if necessary and, unless the feedback indicates otherwise, submit a revised or new proposal the following year. Many awards made in the programs have been for proposals that were revised thoughtfully and resubmitted after having been declined initially.
• To gain expertise in NSF’s proposal review system, volunteer to serve on a program review panel. Each Division compiles names of appropriate individuals who can serve as reviewers.

• Give yourself enough time to prepare a quality proposal. Don’t wait until a few months before the proposal is due and begin writing. And by all means, don’t wait until the day the proposal is due to send it in via fastlane.

WEAKNESSES IN AN UNFUNDED PROPOSAL

• Lack details. Not specific enough. The project proposes to develop hands on materials-(create, test and evaluate the effectiveness of manipulatives, experiments and resource materials).
• Vague, project not clearly defined
• Budget highly salaried
• Insufficient information about the research design (project proposes to address the impact of systemic integration of teacher induction and sustained professional development).
• Inappropriate professional staff
• The intellectual merits and broader impacts weren’t well defined.
• The research aspect is not clearly defined
• Project is more of a teacher enhancement project than a TPC program (For a TPC Proposal)

It has been my pleasure to share this information with you and I hope it has been informative and helpful. I look forward to further dialogue with you and to receiving proposals from all of you in the future.

Dr. Julia V. Clark

Program Director

Division of ESIE

National Science Foundation

4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 885

Arlington, VA 22230

(703) 292-8613

Fax: 703-292-9044

E-mail: jclark@nsf.gov