Grant Proposals – Common Mistakes

A list of review criteria for our drafting workshop:

SIGNIFICANCE:

Is the proposal significant, exciting or new?
Does it have a compelling rationale?
Will it have a large enough impact?

APPROACH:

Is the proposal ambitious enough? (not too much work and not too little work)
Is there a clear goal or focus?
Does it have a clear future direction?
Is it bogged down with experimental details?
Does it have sufficient preliminary data to establish feasibility? (is the lit review strong?)
Does it acknowledge potential pitfalls?
*If you’re writing for research money: does the project have appropriate controls, is it testing the hypothesis, and does it have correlative or descriptive data? Does it discuss alternative models or hypotheses?

INNOVATION:

Is the project innovative?

INVESTIGATION:

Does the project have appropriately experienced researchers?

ENVIRONMENT: 

Does the project have institutional support and/or collaboration?

BUDGET:

Did you do the math right and does it meet the financial constraints of the grant for which you’re applying?

DIRECTIONS:

Did you follow the formatting requirements for the proposed grant?