GEOG 695B Professional Development
PROPOSAL WRITING
1. Where to submit your proposal? Finding a program
A. National Science Foundation
Graduate Research Fellowships
SBE Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grants
What kinds of research has this program funded before?
 General awards search - topic, institution, NSF organization
 DDRIG search
 Program managers
B. SBSRI: SBS Research Institute
Funding database
SBSRI funding (also check out proposal-writing workshops)
C. Other sources of funding
NASA Space Grant Program
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/education/programs/national/spacegrant/home/index.html
Social Science Research Council: SSRC Fellowships and Grants
http://www.ssrc.org/fellowships/
Fulbright Funding
http://www.iie.org/fulbright
Inter-American Foundation (IAF) Dissertation Fellowship: Dissertation fieldwork in Latin
America and the Caribbean
http://www.iaf.gov/index.aspx?page=96
American Institute of Indian Studies Fellowships
http://www.indiastudies.org/research-fellowship-programs/
The Aspen Institute
http://www.aspeninstitute.org/
Lincoln Institute of Land Policy: Research and Fellowship Support
http://www.lincolninst.edu/education/fellowships.asp
The Wenner-Gren Foundation Grant
http://www.wennergren.org/programs/
EPA STAR NCER Fellowships
http://www.epa.gov/ncer/fellows/
1
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Grants
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/topics/grants
Open Society Foundation Grants
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/grants
The Society of Woman Geographers Fellowship
http://www.iswg.org/?doing_wp_cron=1386792021.9741480350494384765625
(*Marissa Isaak 2013, Brittany Davis, Erika Wise, Sarah Smith past recipients from the UA)
American Association of University Women (AAUW) Fellowships and Grants
http://www.aauw.org/what-we-do/educational-funding-and-awards/
State Wildlife Grants (SWG)
http://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/GrantPrograms/SWG/SWG.htm
Internal resources (University of Arizona)
Graduate College Office of Fellowships
http://grad.arizona.edu/ofce/application-support-programs
See also UA Office of Nationally Competitive Scholarships
http://www.honors.arizona.edu/ONCS which has some resources for grad students
Institute of Environment
http://carson.arizona.edu/content/scholarship
http://www.dev.environment.arizona.edu/content/climate-society-graduate-fellows-program
Travel grants: http://www.environment.arizona.edu/graduate-student-travel-awards
Confluence Center
http://www.confluencecenter.arizona.edu/graduate-fellowships
Water Sustainability Program
http://wsp.arizona.edu/education/student_fellowships
Tinker Field Research Grant
http://las.arizona.edu/tinker
GPSC Travel Grants
http://gpsc.arizona.edu/travel-grants
McGinnies Graduate Scholarship in Arid Lands Studies (open to any UA student)
http://www.snr.arizona.edu/mcginnies
2. Reading and Interpreting a Request for Proposals (RFP)
2
In the calls for proposals, this document (often called a ‘solicitation’) is where you find
information on the program, its goals, and what kind of research it seems to fund (which may
vary from year to year). This information is absolutely critical for determining if your proposal
idea is a good fit, and how to specifically target and tune your proposal to address the RFP
details. Read the fine print, as all the details you need to know should be here (deadlines,
program goals, funding mechanisms, contacts, award information, $ amounts, eligibility,
proposal preparation and submission guidelines, budget guidelines, allowable costs, university
indirect costs, etc.) Some examples:

National Science Foundation: Geography and Spatial Sciences Program (GSS) program
solicitation

NOAA Climate Program Office grants, Climate and Societal Interactions 2014 call for
proposals

SBSRI examples
3. Writing a Proposal
Typical proposal components:
There often is explicit guidance on what you need to include. Depending on the specific
program, these can include:
 Project summary*
 Description (problem statement, hypothesis, justification of need)
 Goals and objectives
 Research plan
 Time line for work
 Prior work and or qualifications
 Linkages and leverage
 Cited literature
*see review process below
The nuts and bolts parts typically include (pay attention to instructions, proposals have been
returned or declined because they don’t directly comply with these requirements):
 Bio sketches or CV
 Current and pending support
 Data management plan
 Facilities
 Budget (pay attention to what expenses are allowed and what are not)
 Budget justification.
3
Also look for and pay attention to information on page limits, formatting, fonts. In general, try
to include schematic diagrams, tables, bullet-point lists, etc. to break up what can otherwise be
page-after-page monotony of slabs of dense text. Make it easy (and provide mnemonics) for the
reviewers, who are often asked to evaluate a dozen or more proposals, which can easily run to 50
pages each with all the ancillary “nuts and bolts” listed above.
Strategies – this document is different from a paper; it is a sales job!
Ask grad student friends and colleagues to see copies of past proposals (successful or not) with
review comments received, especially for the same programs you’re applying to.
And make sure to have someone knowledgeable on the subject matter read your proposal early
on in developing it, and shortly prior to submission.
4. Proposal Submission
The most important thing in this process is to be cognizant of deadlines at the SGD, UA, and
granting agency. Make sure you give yourself plenty of time to meet the deadlines. For a large
NSF-style proposal, your title, project summary or abstract, budget and budget justification are
the elements you will need to provide with the most lead time, as these are the parts that need to
be approved via an official (now online) routing process that involves budget checking,
signatures by SGD Director, SBS Dean’s office, and office of Vice President for Research,
before Office of Sponsored Projects will “release” it for you to upload (or they may have to be
the ones to upload). It is a good idea to give the SGD business manager a heads up as soon as
you know you plan to submit a proposal.



SGD proposal information
UA Sponsored Projects
Online proposal submission process (Fastlane, Grants.gov)
5. Proposal Review Process
The process varies, but commonly involves outside reviewers who may not be familiar with your
particular field of research. A typical NSF review process includes 3-8 outside reviewers, a
review panel, a recommendation to approve from the program manager, and formal approval by
the contracts office.
Review criteria: these are often explicitly stated, so look for these and make sure to directly
address them (with sub-sections or bold/italics identifiers to make it easy for reviewers).
A good set of guidelines are the NSF review criteria of Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts
(see examples below/attached, which we will review during the 12/12 seminar.)
4
A. Review Criteria
The National Science Foundation strives to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit-review
process for the selection of projects. All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of two
National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will
employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and
activities. For example, proposals for large facility projects also might be subject to special
review criteria outlined in the program solicitation.
The two merit review criteria are listed below. The criteria include considerations that help
define them. These considerations are suggestions, and not all will apply to any given proposal.
While proposers must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address only
those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being considered and for which the
reviewer is qualified to make judgments.
What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?
NSF Grad Fellowship:
The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge.
Panelists evaluating applications submitted to the Graduate Research Fellowship Program may
consider the following with respect to the Intellectual Merit Criterion: the potential of the
applicant to advance knowledge based on a holistic analysis of the complete application,
including the personal statement, relevant background, future goals, graduate research statement,
strength of the academic record, description of previous research experience or
publication/presentations, and references.
Standard NSF Research Proposal:
How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its
own field or across different fields? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to
conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of prior work.) To
what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially
transformative concepts? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? Is there
sufficient access to resources?
What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?
NSF Graduate Research Fellowship:
The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the
achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.
5
Panelists may consider the following with respect to the Broader Impacts Criterion: the potential
of the applicant for future broader impacts as indicated by personal experiences, professional
experiences, educational experiences and future plans.
Standard NSF Research Proposal:
How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching,
training, and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of
underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent
will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation,
networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and
technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?
Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are
directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are
complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and
activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include,
but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and
underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM);
improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific
literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals
in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased
partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased
economic competitiveness of the US; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.
6