"It is easy to built a philosophy," said Charles Kettering, "It does not have to run." He could not say the same about proposal.

A proposal does have to run, and fast, usually with a heavy luggage rack of complicated ideas. More often, it must run in competition with other equally ambitious proposals. Thus, the task is one of assembling the necessary components to make proposal that runs and reaches the target ahead of others.

The job is more than simply presenting facts you want to communicate. You must present facts persuasively. You must convince an expert reviewer that you know what you are talking about, that what you are talking about is an idea that deserves an affirmative response, that you are the best choice for the project under consideration.

Whether or not you should bother to do proposals at all is a serious question unless you can give it the necessary attention.

Maybe the golden Rule for those preparing grant proposals will be a statement made by American Press Institute managing editors at Columbia University:

"Write unto others as you would be written to."

This rule lies on the importance of accuracy, clarity, realistic self-appraisal, methodical presentation, and clear speaking.

Anyone who has tried seriously to arrange words in a proper order that communicates arguments and ideas to someone else already know that there is no substitute for diligent effort.

Is that all? All you need do is put right words in right order to convey your meaning, and you have a proposal suitable for review. Of course not, the purpose of the proposal is to convince a government agency, foundation, company, or other organization that an investment of money should be made in you and your project. So you have to convey meaning and also make a sale.

Request for proposals, RFP, normally gives detailed instructions concerning what elements to include in a proposal. You should follow all instructions exactly.

The elements required in a proposal may vary from one RFP to another. This fact makes following rule a law as absolute as gravity: Read the instructions. Read them carefully. Takes notes. Then read them through again. The RFP instructions are your recipe, and you cannot afford to omit ingredients.

In addition to details on procedures and formats, you will have to know how many copies of the proposal to submit where to send them, and when proposals are accepted.

Many proposals will be required to contain most if not all the following elements in the final proposal package:

1. Cover letter
2. Title page
3. Table of Contents
4. Proposal summary or abstract
5. Introduction
6. Statement of the research problem or program
7. Objectives and expected benefits of the project
8. Description of the project
9. Timetable of the project
10. Key project participants
11. Project budget
12. Administrative provisions and organizational chart
13. Alternative funding
14. Post-project planning
15. Appendices and support materials
16. Bibliography and reference

All the elements in the proposal are not equal, but each is important and should receive careful treatment; and each element should be consistent with the proposal as a whole. The elements should be neatly arranged and together should offer an attractive appearance. What the proposal says is the primary concern, but reviewers will find difficult not to judge proposals in part on their appearance and graphic attractiveness. Good taste and simplicity are the best guides for the physical treatment of the proposal.

The proposal instructions may not require cover letter; but if they do not prohibit such a letter, use one with copies of the proposal you submit.

The cover letter can introduce you, start establishing your credentials for the project, and add any useful details not included in the proposal. The cover letter is the first thing to read and commencement of your selling effort.

The title page or proposal cover sheet is a form provided by the recipient of the proposal. Items commonly included on the title page are:

1. title
2. submitted by (name and location)
3. submitted to (name and location)
4. principle investigator for the project
5. proposed cost
6. proposed duration of the project

If the proposal instructions specify a preferred format for the table of contents, obey without deviation and shape your proposal accordingly.

The proposal summary is a prominent element demanding thoughtful preparation. The proposal summary is likely to be the last element of the proposal that you write. The summary may be the most frequently read than other sections of the proposal- a fact that justifies special care.

If the instructions provided do not impose a limitation, you should restrict the summary to a single page.

The summary should include a clear statement of your project program, the research objectives, the anticipated results and benefits, and your qualification to achieve the objectives. A successful summary will arouse the reader’s interest and make him want to know more about the project.

This element provides background information on the project and yourself. The introduction can help confirm your qualifications, experience, and recourses to perform quality research of the type proposed.

An effective introduction gives a few lines of history about your organization; and it briefly covers your goals and accomplishments, your success in related research, your proven ability.

Here we are coming to the heart of the proposal. This is element that reviewers consider with special care, because it identifies the nature of the problems that the project will solve or it present the rationale for the particular program intended to be carried out in the project.

The statement of the problem is the place in the proposal to show a pressing need for the project and link this need with experience, activities, and history of your organization.

When the project is completed, what will the results be? You should list these results as the primary and secondary objectives of your project. Primary objectives are major goals, secondary objectives are specific components of a primary goals.

The objectives should be concrete, attainable results that can be measured.

You should not make promises you cannot afford to keep. Reviewers are generally highly experienced people in their fields, and they tend to reject proposals with objectives that are unrealistic and out-of-line.

The statement of each objective should include expression of the benefits that will come from accomplishment. Objectives and benefits are inseparable twins. Objectives are the intended goals of the project; benefits are the advantages and reasons it is important to reach goals.

The statement of the problem, the objectives, and the description of the project are the three main elements of the proposal. If one of these elements falls short, the proposal is likely to fall short.

The description of the project is central element of the proposal. The description explains in detail exactly how you will achieve the objectives within time frame for the project.

The description includes your work plan, methods and procedures, the rationale for the approaches taken and projections of accomplishments to be achieved.

In the proposal description, you have to show that you have made up your mind, reached decisions, know what you are doing and planning to do.

Timetable must show when each task will start and when it will end. The timetable also serves you as a continuing check on progress.

The timetable schedule is generally depicted graphically in the proposal on a time-line display or chart.

3 example: PERT-type display, and GANNT chart

The identities, education, experience, and qualification of the personnel involved in carrying out the project are always essential ingredients of a proposal. The funding organization not only must know what will be done in the project and what objectives will be reached, but also who will do the work.

The length of resume may be restricted by the instructions to a specific number of pages. Even if such restrictions are not given, applicants should avoid submitting massive resumes. A two to three pages resume should work best.

The funding agency wants its money’s worth, and this is accomplished only with realistically budged project that does not waste funds but also does not compromise the quality.

Budgets are usually negotiable.

The proposal should identify what administrative provisions have been made for the smooth functioning of the project. The proposal should promise regular progress reports and indicate when each report will be submitted. The purpose of this proposal element is to give reviewers a clear idea of how you will manage the project, monitor the progress of tasks, achieve and keep up project momentum toward its objectives.

You can look alternative funding wherever it might be private or public sectors. Such alternative funding sources may add prestige and strength to your proposal.

Government agencies and foundations tend to favor those that show promise of future life, further growth, and self-sustaining performance in the after-grant era.

Staff resumes, organization history, product brochures, summaries of successful projects previously completed, letters of support and recommendation, amplification of proposal elements for technical specialists, and others are examples of support materials that may be included with the proposal as appendices.

Read the instructions of the proposals, appendices are not allowed with some grant proposals. If the RFP instructions authorize the inclusion of appendices, you should selectively take advantage of the opportunity. But think carefully about what is added and know exactly why it is added. An appendix thrown in for no good reason is a deadweight not a support.

Writing a review of the literature is not an easy matter. You must do three things:

1. Describe the work which has been done, being critical where necessary;
2. Summarize the main facts and conclusions;
3. Point out those areas of the field, which are still inadequately covered.

The review of literature is normally undertaken in two stages.

The first involves a general overview of the relevant area using secondary sources, such as textbooks. Secondary sources are useful because they combine knowledge from many primary sources into a single publication. You can find different theories, number of different measures, etc., the effect of demographic variables on dependent variables, and the effect of other variables. Once this initial review has been completed it is useful to write a summary of the material samples, outlining major theories, relevant studies and their results. This may help to clarify the major issues and provides foundation for further reading.

Once the problem has been isolated, a more specific review involving primary sources can be undertaken, for example, journal articles. In the process of detailed review of the literature, you will learn what has been done. You will also learn the methods, measures, subjects, and approaches used by other researchers.

Perhaps the most difficult thing in reviewing literature is deciding what should and should not be read. Unfortunately, there is no formula that can help make this decision. Obviously, you should read all studies that are closely related to the research problem.

A useful way to produce a logical and systematic account is to:

1. Start with the most recent studies in the area and gradually work backwards. Recent studies will most likely contain findings, methods and ideas from earlier pieces of research
2. Always read the abstract first, as it will help you to decide whether the article is relevant or not.
3. Organize the large amount of material you will gather during the review. Record each piece of information on a bibliography card. The bibliography card should carry the author’s name, date of publication, the title of the book or journal; title of the article, brief summary, details of the sample, techniques of measurement and summary of results.