Proposal Development

Proposal Components

Proposal components are funder-dependent and sometimes unique to the individual funding opportunity. OSPR has boilerplate language and templates on file to assist with supplemental documents.

Common Proposal Components:
  • Project Abstract / Summary
  • Proposal / Project Narrative: Statement of Need
  • Budget and Budget Justification – Budget development is a collaborative effort between the PI/team and Pre-Award.
  • Curriculum Vitae / Resume / Biographical Sketch: SciENcv
  • Facilities and Other Resources
  • Data Management Plan: DMP Tool 
  • Letters of Commitment / Support 
    • Letters of support take time to prepare—request them as early as possible.
    • Some funding opportunities require letters of commitment from collaborators, while others require institutional letters of support.
    • OSPR will assist with the process if letters are required from your chair, dean, vice president for research, provost or president.

Letters of Intent (LOI), Pre-applications, Pre-proposals, and Concept Papers

Funders often require or request a preview of applicants ahead of a full proposal deadline. Some are required, and some are strongly suggested. Sometimes the LOI or pre-proposal is a first step to be invited by the funder to submit a full proposal and other times the funder is simply trying to get an idea of how many proposals to expect. OSPR routes these, so please contact us before submitting one.

Subawards

A subaward/subcontract is a formal agreement through which another institution performs a substantive and intellectually significant portion of the work under TU’s sponsored award.

If TU is the lead on a project, it is important that the partner institutions get their materials to TU no less than five business days before the proposal deadline so that we are able to meet our internal review deadline and successfully submit the proposal. OSPR will coordinate with the other institutions’ grant contacts to ensure proper and compete documentation.

Please note that the final budget for routing will need to incorporate the final budgets from all subrecipient institutions. 

If Towson University will be a subrecipient on a proposal to another university/institution, it is likely that TU’s deadline will be at least one week earlier than the funding opportunity deadline to allow the lead institution finalize its documents. OSPR will route TU’s proposal portion the same as if it was not a subrecipient.

Compliance Areas

The PI is responsible for adhering to applicable federal regulations if the proposed work involves human subjects, animal subjects, biological safety or international research.

Refer to the OSPR Compliance topic pages for additional information:

Working with the Towson University Foundation (TUF)

Some foundations and corporations require that grants be awarded to a 501(c)(3) organization. In such cases, the Towson University Foundation (TUF) will be the primary applicant on behalf of the University and will collaborate with the OSPR to develop the budget and route for internal approvals.

The Institutional Engagement Team has provided guidance documents to assist faculty to assess project readiness and prepare for submissions to private funders. 

Important Tips & Tricks 

Grant writing should be logical, persuasive, concise, clear, and not overly technical.

In the case of government funding, you are asking the agency to dedicate taxpayer money to your project. Why is yours more deserving than others?

Project goals should be realistic in relation to the proposed project period and budget.

  • Peer Reviewing is Arduous — grab their attention early and sell your idea!
  • Aim to address what you’re proposing and why it’s important in the first page or two.
  • Be organized and utilize effective signposting.
  • Follow the funding opportunity/sponsor guidelines for section organization.
  • Write clear headings and use sub-headings, short paragraphs and other techniques to make the application as easy to navigate as possible.
  • Use diagrams, figures, and tables — with appropriate legends — to assist reviewers in understanding complex information.
  • Use bullets and numbered lists.
  • Indents, bold print and colored text add readability and reduce reviewer fatigue.
  • Establish a working timeline for all proposal components.
  • If possible, allow time to circulate drafts to trusted colleagues and mentors for review.
  • No URLs! Most funders prohibit links, but this is sponsor specific.

Specific – be precise about what you hope to achieve
Measurable – quantify your objectives
Attainable – attempting too much? Feasibility is VERY important to reviewers.
Realistic – are you both able and willing to work toward this objective?
Timely – by when will the objectives be reached?