Write compelling grant proposals for academic research, creative projects, and nonprofit initiatives. Covers federal (NSF, NEA, NEH), foundation, and institutional grants with attention to narrative, budget justification, and review criteria. Triggers on grant writing, funding proposals, research funding, or fellowship applications.
Secure funding through compelling proposals.
| Type | Examples | Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| Federal | NSF, NIH, NEA, NEH | Large awards, rigorous process, public benefit |
| Foundation | Ford, Mellon, MacArthur | Mission-aligned, relationship-based |
| Corporate | Google, Adobe, Microsoft | Product/brand alignment, shorter timelines |
| Institutional | Internal grants, seed funds | Lower amounts, faster decisions |
| Crowdfunding | Kickstarter, Experiment | Public-facing, momentum-based |
Before writing, assess alignment:
| Factor | Question | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Mission |
| Does your work serve their goals? |
| Critical |
| Scope | Is your budget in their range? | Critical |
| Eligibility | Do you meet requirements? | Critical |
| Track Record | Have they funded similar work? | Important |
| Timing | Does your timeline match? | Important |
| Competition | What's the funding rate? | Consider |
One page maximum. Must stand alone.
Structure:
- Problem/opportunity (2-3 sentences)
- Proposed approach (2-3 sentences)
- Expected outcomes (2-3 sentences)
- Broader impact (1-2 sentences)
Establish the problem:
What is the problem?
↓
Who is affected?
↓
What are current approaches?
↓
What gap remains?
↓
Why now?
Effective patterns:
| Element | Definition | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Goal | Broad intended impact | "Improve digital literacy among seniors" |
| Objective | Specific, measurable outcome | "Train 200 seniors in basic computer skills by Dec 2025" |
| Activity | What you'll do | "Conduct 20 workshops at community centers" |
SMART Objectives:
Describe HOW you'll achieve objectives:
For each objective:
1. Activities planned
2. Timeline/sequence
3. Personnel responsible
4. Resources required
5. Rationale for approach
Methodology credibility:
| Type | Question | Methods |
|---|---|---|
| Process | Did we do what we said? | Activity logs, attendance |
| Outcome | Did it work? | Pre/post tests, surveys |
| Impact | What changed? | Long-term follow-up, indicators |
Evaluation components:
Year 1
Q1: [Activities]
Q2: [Activities]
Q3: [Activities]
Q4: [Activities]
Year 2
Q1: [Activities]
...
Milestones:
- Month 6: [Milestone]
- Month 12: [Milestone]
- Month 18: [Milestone]
See Budget section below.
For each key person:
[Name], [Title]
Role: [Specific responsibilities]
Qualifications: [Why they're suited]
Time commitment: [% FTE or hours]
Demonstrate ability to execute:
How will this work continue after funding?
- Revenue streams
- Institutionalization
- Partnerships
- Scaled approach
| Category | Includes |
|---|---|
| Personnel | Salaries, benefits, consultants |
| Equipment | >$5K items typically |
| Supplies | Consumables, materials |
| Travel | Conferences, fieldwork |
| Contractual | Subcontracts, services |
| Other Direct | Participant support, publications |
| Indirect | Overhead (varies by institution) |
PERSONNEL
PI Name, 2 months summer salary $XX,XXX
Graduate Student, 12 months $XX,XXX
Fringe Benefits (XX%) $X,XXX
Subtotal: $XX,XXX
EQUIPMENT
[Item description] $X,XXX
Subtotal: $X,XXX
SUPPLIES
Research supplies $X,XXX
Computing $X,XXX
Subtotal: $X,XXX
TRAVEL
Domestic (X trips) $X,XXX
International (X trips) $X,XXX
Subtotal: $X,XXX
OTHER DIRECT COSTS
Participant stipends $X,XXX
Publication costs $X,XXX
Subtotal: $X,XXX
TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $XXX,XXX
INDIRECT COSTS (XX%) $XX,XXX
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $XXX,XXX
For each line item:
[Item]: $X,XXX
[Why needed]: This [item] is necessary for [specific project activity]
because [rationale]. The amount is based on [calculation/quote/rate].
Remember:
Use headers, white space, bold:
**Problem**: Clear statement of the issue.
**Approach**: How we'll address it.
**Outcome**: What will result.
| Weak | Strong |
|---|---|
| "We hope to..." | "We will..." |
| "This may lead to..." | "This will produce..." |
| "It is believed that..." | "Research shows that..." |
| "Various methods..." | "Three specific methods: A, B, C..." |
| "Significant impact..." | "40% reduction in..." |
Every claim should answer:
Intellectual Merit
Broader Impacts
Common themes:
Key elements:
Key elements:
Key elements:
| Mistake | Fix |
|---|---|
| Not following guidelines | Read guidelines 3+ times |
| Vague objectives | Make SMART |
| Misaligned with funder | Research thoroughly |
| Budget doesn't match narrative | Cross-check both |
| Missing required elements | Use checklist |
| Jargon overload | Define terms, simplify |
| No preliminary work | Show feasibility |
| Weak evaluation | Be specific and realistic |
| Last-minute submission | Build in buffer |
| Week | Activities |
|---|---|
| 1 | Read guidelines, assess fit, outline |
| 2 | Draft statement of need, goals |
| 3 | Draft methods, timeline |
| 4 | Draft evaluation, sustainability |
| 5 | Develop budget and justification |
| 6 | Complete first full draft |
| 7 | Internal review, revision |
| 8 | Final polish, submit early |
references/budget-templates.md - Detailed budget formatsreferences/funder-profiles.md - Major funder informationreferences/boilerplate-library.md - Reusable sections