# Writing Principles for Competitive Proposals Framing, specificity, reviewer psychology, and readability — the practices that separate funded proposals from merely competent ones. ## Writing Principles for Competitive Proposals ### Clarity and Accessibility **Write for Multiple Audiences**: - Technical reviewers in your field (will scrutinize methods) - Reviewers in related but not identical fields (need context) - Program officers (look for alignment with agency goals) - Panel members reading 15+ proposals (need clear organization) **Strategies**: - Use clear section headings and subheadings - Start sections with overview paragraphs - Define technical terms and abbreviations - Use figures, diagrams, and tables to clarify complex ideas - Avoid jargon when possible; explain when necessary - Use topic sentences to guide readers ### Persuasive Argumentation **Build a Compelling Narrative**: - Establish the problem and its importance - Show gaps in current knowledge or approaches - Present your solution as innovative and feasible - Demonstrate that you're the right team - Show that success will have significant impact **Structure of Persuasion**: 1. **Hook**: Capture attention with significance 2. **Problem**: Establish what's not known or not working 3. **Solution**: Present your innovative approach 4. **Evidence**: Support with preliminary data 5. **Impact**: Show transformative potential 6. **Team**: Demonstrate capability to deliver **Language Choices**: - Use active voice for clarity and confidence - Choose strong verbs (investigate, elucidate, discover vs. look at, study) - Be confident but not arrogant (avoid "obviously," "clearly") - Acknowledge uncertainty appropriately - Use precise language (avoid vague terms like "several," "various") ### Visual Communication **Effective Use of Figures**: - Conceptual diagrams showing research framework - Preliminary data demonstrating feasibility - Timelines and Gantt charts - Workflow diagrams showing methodology - Expected results or predictions **Design Principles**: - Make figures self-explanatory with complete captions - Use consistent color schemes and fonts - Ensure readability (large enough fonts, clear labels) - Integrate figures with text (refer to specific figures) - Follow agency-specific formatting requirements ### Addressing Risk and Feasibility **Balance Innovation and Risk**: - Acknowledge potential challenges - Provide alternative approaches - Show preliminary data reducing risk - Demonstrate expertise to handle challenges - Include contingency plans **Common Concerns**: - Too ambitious for timeline/budget - Technically infeasible - Team lacks necessary expertise - Preliminary data insufficient - Methods not adequately described - Lack of innovation or significance ### Integration and Coherence **Ensure All Parts Align**: - Budget supports activities in project description - Timeline matches aims and milestones - Team composition matches required expertise - Broader impacts connect to research plan - Letters of support confirm stated collaborations **Avoid Contradictions**: - Preliminary data vs. stated gaps - Claimed expertise vs. publication record - Stated aims vs. actual methods - Budget vs. stated activities