Chapter 5 : Preparing a Proposal

Conceptualizing and Organizing the Research Idea

1. Align project goals with sponsor priorities (defined in the Notice of Funding Opportunity      - NOFO). Alignment with the NOFO is essential to ensure relevance, increase competitiveness, and demonstrate a clear fit with the funder’s mission and intended outcomes. To ensure the strongest alignment to the funding opportunity and compliance with proposal requirements, it is a best practice to consult the NOFO multiple times throughout the proposal development process.
2. Conduct preliminary literature and feasibility assessments.  This establishes a strong foundation for the project’s rationale, identifies critical knowledge gaps your research will address, and demonstrates awareness of current knowledge and innovations. It also ensures that the proposed work is both novel and feasible, allowing you to refine your research questions, design methodologies and timelines, and anticipate potential challenges/hurdles.
3. Form collaborative teams (internal or external). Collaborative, multidisciplinary teams—both internal and external—maybe critical for securing grant funding and ensuring research impact. Teams can show interdisciplinary expertise and strengthen the competitiveness and scalability of proposed projects. When working as a collaborative team, specific considerations should be made.      For a useful guide, consult “Strategies for Planning, Developing and Writing Large Team Grants” by Mike Cronan
4. Outline project objectives. These should be coupled to expected (measurable) outcomes, methodology, and roles of specific team members and expertise.
5. Notify ORSP of Your Intent to Apply. Once you have identified a grant that is a good fit and that you are interested in applying for, connect with The Office of Research and Sponsored Programs (ORSP). Principal Investigators (PIs) or Project Directors (PDs) interested in submitting a proposal to an external funding agency are urged to contact ORSP as soon as the decision is made to submit a proposal to ensure that ORSP and other pertinent offices can identify all administrative and compliance requirements early in the process to avoid last-minute corrections and compliance issues that may lead to submission of an incomplete, non-compliant proposal, or a missed deadline and, potentially, proposal rejection.ORSP will collaborate with principal investigators to prepare budgets, complete required forms, solicit the required approvals, and execute the grant submission processes.

The Concept Paper

Write a Concept Paper (White Paper). A grant proposal concept paper is a brief, high-level overview of a proposed project intended to outline the idea and demonstrate its relevance, feasibility, and alignment with a funder’s priorities. It typically includes key components such as the project’s purpose, objectives, significance, proposed methods, anticipated outcomes, and a rough budget estimate. Concept papers are often used to solicit feedback, communicate the project to potential collaborators or other stakeholders, secure internal approval, or gauge interest from potential funders before developing a full proposal.

Contacting Your Program Officer

Contact the Program Officer to determine whether a white paper is required or recommended for your funding opportunity of interest.  Often, for funding programs run by the NSF, DOE or DOD, full proposals will not be considered if white papers have not been approved first. The percentage of applicants receiving funding are greater for PIs who contact their program officer.

Developing Your Proposal

Overview of Proposal Development

Successfully developing a competitive federal grant proposal requires careful planning, strategic alignment, and access to the right tools and support. At CSUSB, the Office of Research Development and Office of Research and Sponsored Programs play a central role in guiding faculty through this complex process by offering several proposal development resources. These include assistance in identifying suitable funding mechanisms, accessing proposal templates, refining project narratives, and receiving expert editing support through partnerships. In addition, there are frequent webinars and workshops to build proposal-writing skills. This section includes descriptions of key resources as well as essential proposal components.

Proposal Development Resources

The Office of Research Development at CSUSB offers help in finding and aligning funding mechanisms, some proposal templates, proposal development, proposal editing (via Hanover Research) as well as annual webinars and workshops. Contact the Office of Research Development directly if you are interested in this assistance. In addition, there are several open databases with examples of funded proposals across various federal mechanisms.

Databases of successful proposals

Open Grants - all types of grant proposals

NIH Grants, more NIH Grants

NSF Grants

The Office of Research Development maintains a repository of donated proposals for CSU-BIOTECH grants, written by CSUSB faculty.  If you are interested in this resource, contact Jason Burke at the Office of Research Development.

Overview of the NSF Proposal and Award Process

NIH - Write Application

New Faculty Guide for Competing for Research Funding

Strategies for Planning, Developing and Writing Large Team Grants

Webinars and Workshops - Office of Academic Research

The Office of Academic Research offers webinars and workshops on a regular basis.  Upcoming dates and times are advertised through email announcements. Below is a list of recurring workshops.

Proposal Main Components

Proposal Narrative

Adhering closely to grant proposal narrative requirements is essential to ensure compliance, competitiveness, and clarity for reviewers, as even strong proposals can be disqualified or penalized if they fail to follow required formats or address specific criteria. While major federal agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) both require structured narratives that include elements like project goals, significance, methodology, and broader impacts, they differ in format and emphasis: for instance, NSF requires a 15-page Project Description with a clear section on Broader Impacts, whereas NIH typically uses a Research Strategy (limited to 12 pages) divided into Significance, Innovation, and Approach.

The First Page: Specific Aims/Project Summary

The first page of a federal research grant proposal—typically the Specific Aims (NIH) or Project Summary (NSF and others)—is critically important because it serves as the reviewer’s first impression and concise roadmap of the entire project. It must clearly articulate the problem being addressed, the project’s goals and significance, the central hypothesis or research questions, and the approach to be used. A compelling, well-written first page not only grabs attention but also sets the tone for the proposal, helping reviewers quickly grasp the project’s value, feasibility, and alignment with the funder’s priorities. Many guidelines for approaches to constructing first pages are available - contact the Office of Research Development for guidance relevant to your funding opportunity.

Research Approach/Plan/Methodology

The research approach/research plan/methodology section is one of the most critical parts of a competitive grant proposal, and often constitutes the bulk of the proposal. This section outlines how the project will be carried out to achieve its goals, demonstrating both the rigor and feasibility of the proposed work. A strong plan builds reviewer confidence by clearly detailing the design, procedures, data collection, analysis strategies, preliminary data and potential pitfalls with contingency plans. This section shows that the investigator has a well-thought-out, systematic plan for producing meaningful results. It is the key factor in determining the proposal’s scientific merit and likelihood of success.

Timelines and Milestones

These are important for a competitive federal grant proposal because they demonstrate the project's feasibility, logical progression and deliverables (publications, etc). This helps reviewers visualize how the work will be accomplished within the proposed funding period, and informs on accountability through sufficient planning and time management. Clearly defined milestones that align to stated objectives and outcomes are benchmarks for measuring progress and success that strengthen a proposal’s feasibility.

Broader Impacts (NSF) / Outreach Plans

Broader outreach in federal research proposals is important because it demonstrates how the project will benefit society beyond advancing academic knowledge, aligning with agency missions to promote education, equity, and public engagement. For example, the National Science Foundation (NSF) defines Broader Impacts as the potential of a project to contribute to desired societal outcomes—such as increasing STEM participation, enhancing infrastructure for research and education, or improving public scientific literacy—alongside intellectual merit. Including strong broader impacts strengthens a proposal’s relevance, community value, and funding competitiveness.

Useful external resources for developing NSF broader impacts.

Guidance for Involving Undergraduates in Research Proposals

For some common federal research grant mechanisms, it may be essential to a competitive application to include a well-developed and comprehensive plan for involving undergraduate students in the research.  Depending on the mechanism, this plan may be score-driving and might constitute a significant component of the proposal.  For example, in the August 2025 changes to the NIH R16 NOFO, the following statement was added:

This NOFO has three objectives: (1) provide support for meritorious research conducted by eligible full-time faculty investigators who are at institutions with limited NIH Research Project Grant funding; (2) strengthen the research capacity of these institutions; and (3) provide students with opportunities to participate in high-quality biomedical research.

Typically, for the NIH-R16, the last ½ page, or more, of the 6-page research strategy is dedicated to the:

"Student Involvement Plan" that describes how students will be involved and supervised in conducting hands-on, rigorous research, including their participation in the execution, analysis, and reporting of the research.

Below is an outline of items to consider addressing as part of the student involvement plan and throughout the proposal as a whole (roughly in order of importance).

Research Training Components

• Number of students - who will be involved in research and their level of involvement (hours per week), who they will work with, and tasks they will perform related to the goals of the experiment.  Duration of student involvement (AY, summer, intersessions).
• Transferrable skills. Are they learning specialized, transferrable skills relevant to the mission of the funding organization or mechanism (i.e. biomedical research)?  Are these skills important for workforce development? Are the skills something they would not be able to gain otherwise (if this proposal is not funded)?
• Safety/Compliance Training. Briefly mention the plan for appropriate research safety compliance training for students. This may include: IRB, CITI, biohazardous material handling and disposal, rigor and reproducibility (statistical analysis), animal handling / IUCAC, EHS Lab Research Training Module(s), OSHA, Specific Training by the PI, etc.
• Data analysis, writing and manuscript preparation. Will students be involved in any and all of this (who will train them)? Will students be co-authors on published manuscripts describing the research findings? Is it appropriate to create publishing agreements with students so that they understand the contribution required to be listed as a co-author?
• Schedules.  Have you created schedules for experiments, or experiment types, that fit with busy undergraduate schedules (if working during the academic year?). Are there independent, time-manageable projects that are practical for undergraduate students balancing lab work, course work, jobs, and family?
• Clear outcomes.  What are the specific outcomes for students?  Are they measurable?  Is an assessment necessary or warranted? Broadly, will student training contribute to strengthening the research capacity of the institution, and/or contribute to economic transformation of the Inland Empire? Consider for assessments:

Council for Undergraduate Research Assessment Tools 

Feasibility of Student Involvement

It can be important to justify how students will be incentivized to engage in research.

• Budget Justification. Did you budget to pay students? This ensures student involvement as part of the project, and can go a long way to assure reviewers of your stated student training outcomes.  Likewise, budgeting student travel and conference attendance is important, if this is what you propose for your students.
• Research Credit. If students are involved in research during the academic year, are they taking research for course credit? Is research part of an honors program or does it contribute to larger recognition? If so, this assures reviewers of continued student involvement.  Students are busy people, and it is not often convincing to say that they will be productive simply as volunteers.

Recruitment

How will you recruit students to your lab/project?  Some brief mention of this is often expected.

• Recruit from classes – which classes do you recruit from and how?
• Recruit from outreach activities – Does your department have outreach to get students involved in research?  Are you involved in other outreach programs that you use to recruit students?
• Campus databases - The Office of Student Research and Innovation (OSRI) maintains a research and creative activities database that can be used to broadly recruit students from across campus.
• Recruit fairly, or as according to current funding institution priorities.

Broader Scientific Training and Exposure to Scientific Culture

It is increasingly important to demonstrate this as part of a comprehensive research training plan (as space allows), as it can lead to meaningful school or career outcomes for students. 

•  Attendance at conferences. What are the planned conferences that the students will attend or present findings at each year? Are they getting exposure to national society conferences or general national/regional research conferences appropriate for undergraduate students such as ABRCMS, NCUR, SACNAS, or SCCUR?
• Mentorship in Career Paths. Students often ask: how is this experience contributing to my future goals? Consider helping students by annually discussing Individual Development Plans (one example here).
• Weekly research group meetings can provide chances for students to practice presenting findings, instruction on how to conduct analysis, experience reading the literature, personal mentorship from the PI, as well as other valuable research training.
• Meaningful collaborations. Collaborations within CSUSB or external-to-CSUSB research groups can help students gain broader perspectives about research and provide insight into graduate programs.  Will students travel to visit collaborators, assist in data collection with collaborators, talk to other research lab members? These can be valued experiences, if there is a budget for it.

Institutional Resources Support Undergraduate Research

Demonstrating that institution has built-in resources to support student research, and history of doing so, can be impactful. For example, one might plan to have students present at the annual “Meeting of the Minds” campus research symposium.

• The Office of Student Research and Innovation (OSRI) has several programs that can enhance the student research experience: local annual research conferences such as the Meeting of the Minds and the CSUSB Research Competition; assistance in employing students; student workshops; student travel grants; and many others! These are several examples of programs that illustrate the supportive environment for student research that exists at CSUSB. Look closely at OSRI opportunities, as certain programs may be more important for your specific proposal and outcomes.
• The Science Success Center (within the College of Natural Sciences), provides outreach activities for getting students involved in labs, career panels, and resources on IDPs.
• CSU-wide Opportunities – the CSU may be one of the best institutions for undergraduate research. CSU affinity groups like CSU Biotech, put on annual student research conferences that provide our students unique, highly supportive environments to gain access to research culture and interact with other researchers and professors.  The CSU research competition is another great opportunity for students of any discipline to present their research to the larger CSU community. There are many other examples. 

Your Profile as a Mentor

This is an important component for reviewers evaluating the likely success of student research outcomes. Often this is presented as part of the biographical sketch (within the personal statement section).  Here, it may be useful to mention the following:

• Number of students mentored during your career
• Outcomes of previous funding on student success (students in graduate programs, students included on publications, etc.)
• Where students have presented work recently:
  • a)         highlight conference presentations
  • b)         Make a footnote (*) of undergraduate student and/or graduate student co-authors on cited papers.
• Is it a goal of your program to help prepare students for graduate school?

Supplemental Documents

Overview. This section emphasizes that every component of a grant proposal—including supplemental documents like biosketches, current and pending support, data management plans, and institutional letters—should be treated as a meaningful reflection of the project’s quality. It outlines key requirements and tools (such as SciENcv and DMPTool) to ensure that proposal materials are thorough, compliant, and demonstrate strong institutional commitment, researcher qualifications, resource availability, and plans for sustainability, mentoring, and data sharing.

Serious Consideration. When preparing supplemental documents, or similar documents (such as the budget justification narrative), consider these words of wisdom: “Thinking of any component of a project description as boilerplate is a recipe for failure. After all, proposals represent the quality of your ideas. If a solicitation requires a sustainability and commitment statement, then that statement should be grounded in your ideas of how best to sustain the project’s goals and objectives after the grant period.” Mike Cronan “Strategies for Planning, Developing, and Writing Large Team Grants.”

Biosketches

Introduction to Biosketches. NIH and NSF biosketches are standardized documents used in grant applications to summarize an individual’s qualifications, experience, and contributions relevant to the proposed research. These biosketches help reviewers evaluate the expertise, productivity, and suitability of key personnel involved in a research project, ensuring that the team has the necessary qualifications to carry out the work successfully. The NIH biosketch includes sections such as Personal Statement, Positions and Honors, Contributions to Science, and Scholastic Performance. It highlights how an investigator’s background makes them well-suited for the proposed project. The NSF biosketch follows a similar format but emphasizes appointments, products, and synergistic activities that demonstrate broader impacts and collaboration.

Templates and instructions for the NIH Biosketch

SciENcv (Science Experts Network Curriculum Vitae) is an online tool developed by the NIH in collaboration with other federal agencies to help researchers create and maintain biosketches and support documents (like Current and Pending/Other Support) for federal grant applications. It is replacing traditional biosketch formats because it ensures standardized, compliant, and easily updated documents across agencies like NIH and NSF, reducing administrative burden and improving accuracy and transparency.

The scheduled roll out for May 2025 has been postponed indefinitely for NIH.

SciENcv is currently required for NSF.

Instructions for getting started with SciENcv

Current and Pending Support / Other Support

Overview. Many funders require researchers to disclose current and pending support, in order to identify any potential overlap in funding or effort.

For NIH, Other Support includes all resources—whether federal, non-federal, domestic, or foreign—that are available to a researcher in support of or related to their research efforts. This includes not only active and pending grants or contracts but also in-kind contributions such as lab space, equipment, or personnel support, regardless of whether they are paid through the applicant institution. Full disclosure of foreign affiliations, support, and participation in talent programs is required. NIH mandates the use of updated format pages, and may request supporting documents, such as translations of foreign contracts. Other Support must be submitted during the Just-in-Time (JIT) process and in progress reports (RPPRs) when changes occur.

As of Oct 1, 2025 - NIH has a guidance requiring PIs to take some training on Other Support.

NIH Other Support Guidance

NSF requires disclosure of all current and pending sources of support—including federal and non-federal, domestic and foreign—for any ongoing projects or proposals that involve a time commitment. Investigators must disclose in-kind contributions that support their research as well. As of October 2023, NSF mandates that investigators use the SciENcv platform to generate standardized Current and Pending Support documents, which must also be certified for accuracy. These disclosures are submitted at the time of proposal and must be updated throughout the award lifecycle as needed.

NSF Current & Pending (Other) Support

Facilities, Equipment & Other Resources

Overview. The Facilities, Equipment & Other Resources document in federal grant applications describes the institutional resources available to support the proposed research project, including lab space, instruments, computational tools, and personnel support. It is used by reviewers to assess whether the applicant has access to the necessary infrastructure to successfully complete the project, and it should detail resources without assigning monetary value. These documents should really be written by the PI as part of the grant proposal process. It is important for the PI to cater their application to include equipment and facilities that are relevant to their work.

NIH Instructions for Facilities and Other Resources, and Equipment

NSF Instructions for Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources

Additional Instructions and Template (External)

Data Management and Sharing Plan

Overview. A Data Management and Sharing Plan (DMS) is a required document for most federal grant proposals that outlines how research data will be collected, stored, shared, and preserved. Its purpose is to ensure transparency, reproducibility, and long-term accessibility of data generated by federally funded research.

NIH Instructions for DMS Documents & Examples

The NIH requires that Investigators:

• Plan and budget for the managing and sharing of data
• Submit a DMS plan for review when applying for funding
• Comply with the approved DMS plan (or revise and seek approval, as needed)

NSF Instructions for DMS with Specific Directorate and/or Division Guidance

The DMPTool is a free, online platform that helps researchers create data management plans (DMPs) tailored to the specific requirements of federal and other funders. It provides templates, guidance, and institutional resources to simplify the process of writing effective and compliant DMPs.  Caution: The DMPTool output is not designed to comport with federal page/formatting standards and may require manual reformatting.

• DMPTool Templates by Agency and Mechanism

Grad Student / Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan (NSF)

Overview. The NSF requires a Grad Student or Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan as part of grant proposals that include funding for paying grad students or postdoctoral researchers. This one-page document outlines how the principal investigator will support professional development, including training, career counseling, and guidance on responsible research conduct. The goal is to ensure high-quality mentoring that prepares researchers for successful independent careers in academia, industry, or other sectors.

NSF guidance on the Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan

Mentoring Plan Description from the PAPPG (NSF)

Institutional Letters of Support

Overview. Institutional Letters of Support are important components of federal grant applications as they formally demonstrate the commitment of the applicant's institution or partnering organizations to the proposed project. These letters often affirm access to resources, commitment to cost sharing, commitment to release time and providing replacement instructors, or support for key personnel and project goals. Their presence is critical to the credibility of the application as it proves that the institution is invested in the project's success.

Different funding agencies and funding mechanisms may require different and customized institutional letters of support.  Work with the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs to ensure that the proper individuals at the institution can provide these, and importantly, that the content of the letters of support comport with the guidelines in the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for the specific mechanism of interest.

Other Additional Documents

Other agency-specific documents may be required.

NIH: Additional documents that may be required

• Project Summary / Abstract and Project Narrative
• Bibliography and References Cited
• Multi-PI plan
• Human, Clinical, Animal and Select Agent Research
• Resource Sharing Plan
• Reviewer Request or Reviewers not to Include

NSF: Additional documents that may be required

• Project Summary
• Collaborators and Other Affiliations
• Synergistic Activities
• Reviewer Request or Reviewers not to Include

Proposal Checklists

Once you decide you may be interested in submitting a proposal, contact ORSP and they will assemble a customized proposal checklist to assist you in preparation.  This will provide you guidelines on the additional documents you will need to prepare.

Checklist for NSF Grant Proposals (CSUSB) EXAMPLE ONLY