GEH1040/GEK1065 Exploration in Musical Production

Writing Grant Proposals 1

Semester 2 AY15/16

Tutorial Before you come to class, please read the tutorial materials.
Preparation

TOPICS
 Definition of grant proposals
 Elements of grant proposals

Definition of grant proposals

Grant proposals are a persuasive document with the primary aim of convincing the funding
organizations to support the ideas proposed by the applicants. Once accepted, the grant proposal
becomes a contractual document between the recipient and the funding organizations where the
recipient is accountable for accomplishing the intended outcomes for all stakeholders, ensuring that
funds are appropriately used, and maintaining a proper reporting structure.

Funding organizations usually look for proposals that best represent their respective philanthropic
goal(s). While novel ideas will gain the attention of the funding organizations, how the objectives
are met and the extent of the impact are among the immediate considerations of the funding
organizations. Because of this, grant proposals should primarily be sensitive to addressing the
philanthropic goal(s), requirements, and spirit of the funding organizations. Grant proposals should
demonstrate that ideas have been well thought through, clearly articulated, and concisely and
professionally presented.

Task 1 – U-Sparks Grant

The U-Sparks Grant is a funding opportunity at NUS that supports the pursuit of arts, culture and
sports. Individuals or groups who apply for funding may receive up to S$10,000 funding amount.

Browse through the aims, objectives and requirements of the U-Sparks Grant. Think about the
activities, projects and events that the halls and various student groups have organized.

a) List a few that you feel may address the objective(s) of the U-Sparks Grant.
b) What are some features of these activities, projects and events that are aligned with the aims
and objectives of the U-Sparks Grant?

The U-SPARKS funding grant aims to assist students in initiating and organizing meaningful sports, arts
and cultural activities that promote active participation from the community. These activities should
aim to promote sporting lifestyle, arts appreciation and cultural understanding among NUS
community and beyond. Each successful application receives up to SGD$10,000.

Objectives:
1. To build a culture of active participation in sports, arts and cultural activities
2. To aid students in initiating and organizing sports, arts and cultural activities that promotes
active participation from the community
3. To support students who wish to test new ideas or develop new initiatives that will add
vibrancy and benefit the campus community and beyond

[Retrieved from http://www.nus.edu.sg/osa/images/osa/downloads/background_osa-usparks.pdf]

Elements of grant proposals
Typically, a grant proposal has the following rhetorical moves:

Summary Introduction Justification Statement of need

Budget Impact Design Intended outcomes

Summary
The proposal summary is one of the most important sections of a grant proposal. It may be the first
touch point between the applicant and the grant reviewers. It therefore should be carefully crafted
to provide a positive initial impression of the ideas presented and the applicant (and organization).

The summary should capture the essential point(s) of the proposal in a succinct manner while not
losing the essence of the proposal. It should communicate the relevant information critical for the
grant reviewers to make a favourable decision.

The summary is usually around two to three paragraphs.

Introduction of applicant (and organization)

This is a section where the applicant makes credible references to his/her track record in carrying
out similar projects. If the applicant is representing an organization, the credibility and track record
of the organization should also be highlighted. In the case where there is no prior experience, the
applicant may rely on experience in other transferable areas to present a convincing case. The
applicant may also indicate measures in which he/she could compensate for the lack of experience
in implementing similar projects. In short, grant reviewers want to be convinced that the individual
or team has the competencies and capacity to successfully implement and sustain the project.

Some useful key information and documents are as follows:

 a brief statement of the philosophy or goals of the applicant (and organization)
 track record and accomplishments of the applicant (and organization), if available
 projects that have been carried out and success/impact indicators
 a brief biography statement of the applicant (and key members in the organization or
organizing committee)

The introduction should be brief with highlights of competencies and accomplishments relevant to
the demands of the proposed project. More detailed information may be provided in the appendix,
if required.

Justification and Statement of need

The statement of need describes an identified problem/gap/initiative that the project attempts to
address for an intended audience. Both the statement of need and justification should be well-
supported, demonstrating that careful background research and alternatives have been considered.
More importantly, they should be in line with the philosophy or goals of the funding organizations.

2
Depending on the context and what is required by the funding organization, the applicant may
integrate “justification” and “statement of need” into one section. It should be concise, namely
between a few sentences and around two paragraphs.

Intended outcomes
Intended outcomes refer to objectives that the proposal and specific activities intend to achieve.
Details useful to be mentioned include methods to be employed in order to achieve the intended
outcomes, and concrete indicators of the extent to which the outcomes are reached. Grant
reviewers usually look for a clear articulation of a solid and realistic implementation framework
where the intended outcomes can be measured, taking into consideration time and resources that
are available to the applicant (and organization).

While the length of this section may not be long, careful thought must be demonstrated.

Project description/design
This section describes the project and provides information on its implementation. Grant reviewers
are keen to see how the proposed activities are able to draw out intended responses or behaviours.
An action plan with timeline, and key measurable output are usually expected.

Relevant information includes the following (CFDA, n.d.):

 A graphic representation (e.g., flow chart) of interrelated parts with a description of how
each part is connected and resources required (i.e., human power, equipment, facilities,
support services).
 A diagram showing project design.
 Purposeful highlight of novel and innovative features of the proposal which no one else may
offer.

Project impact/evaluation/reflection
An extension of “intended outcomes”, project evaluation refers to the identification of and
establishment of methodology to measure the output in a clear and, if possible, measurable way. It
should explain clearly how the project may be beneficial to different stakeholders and how these
benefits can be manifested. For impact that is challenging to ascertain in a quantitative manner,
qualitative feedback could be collected.

Evaluation may come in two forms: first, an evaluation of the outcome; second, an evaluation of the
process. The former is more concerned with the degree to which the project has fulfilled its
proposed and desired objective(s). The second is a review of the manner in which the project was
conducted. This could entail a closer look at the action plan and operational issues.

Evaluation designs are best done before the start of the project. This will help to focus the project.
In addition, it assists the development and collection of appropriate data. In situations where
extensive evaluation is not feasible, a critical review of the project may be proposed.

Budget
A well thought-through and well-prepared budget supports justification for appropriate expenses
that are consistent with the intent of the project. Grant reviewers are keen to see that money is
spent for causes that advance the spirit of the funding organization. They may also be equally keen
to see sustainable aspects of the project.

3
In fact, writing grant proposals can be likened to building a case. Each section of the proposal is an
attempt to relate to the building of the case. Similarly, each section acts to further the argument for
the case. If any idea is not clearly expressed or any argument unsubstantiated, the proposal may be
considered weak and may risk rejection.

As shared by Hansen (2013), here are six reasons why grants are rejected.

1. The proposal does not meet all the technical grant requirements.
2. The proposal is not responsive to the guidelines.
3. The project to be funded is poorly developed.
4. The proposal is written or organized poorly.
5. The team or resources are inadequate.
6. The evaluative plan is inadequate.

[Retrieved from http://www.thegranthelpers.com/blog/bid/118144/Six-Reasons-Why-Grant-Applications-Get-

Rejected]

In summary, this short section provides an overview of some key features of a successful grant
proposal. The real lesson is in the doing and in learning from feedback given by (grant) reviewers.

Task 2 – Critique
You are one of the grant reviewers of the NUS Community Engagement Fund (CEF). The recent call
for applications has just ended. You have been tasked to evaluate one of the proposals and make
recommendation on whether to approve the request.

a) Share your recommendation (with explanations) with the panel of grant reviewers.
b) What comments would you give the applicant?

Here’s some basic information about CEF. More details can be found at the website.

NUS Community Engagement Fund

Fund Purpose The Community Engagement Fund (CEF) provides financial assistance to
support NUS students in organising
 Community engagement projects.
 Events and programmes that will strengthen the culture of
volunteerism and community engagement in NUS.
The CEF may be used to launch a new project or strengthen an existing
one.
Assessment Criteria  Extent to which project meets or addresses goal(s) and objective(s)
 Cost effectiveness
 Potential impact - in terms of reach, impact to beneficiary (if any),
impact over an extended period of time
 Extent to which project demonstrates innovativeness
 Extent to which project demonstrates sustainability
 Extent to which project contributes to students’ learning journey
Funding Quantum Capped at $10,000 or 70% of project expenditure, whichever is lower.
Submission *new* For projects proposed to start between March 2016 and December
Deadline(s) 2016, please submit the grant inquiry here by 21 February 2016.
Click here for a preview of the grant inquiry form.
Grant Please contact Ms Sandelyn Lua at sandelyn.lua@nus.edu.sg.
Administrator(s)

[Retrieved from http://communityengagement.nus.edu.sg/main/be-informed/funding-opportunities]

4
Proposal

Justification and Statement of need

Orchard Secondary School has 276 students, of which 59 have been determined to be at risk in their
reading performance for a variety of reasons including learning disabilities, such as attention deficit
disorder (ADD) and dyslexia, or other economic and language-based difficulties. If these students are
not given an opportunity to improve their reading skills, as studies show, they are more likely to be
truant and drop out of school.

Introduction to applicants
Jennifer Tan is a Year 3 student studying Social Work at the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at the
National University of Singapore. Jennifer has been participating and leading community engagement
projects that work with underprivileged students both locally and in ASEAN countries. One of these
projects involved teaching literacy skills to primary school students at one of the schools in Singapore.
Most of these students experience severe reading difficulties. Jennifer is proficient in learning
technology, including computer hardware and software.

Jennifer is supported by two team members from Faculty of Science (majoring in mathematics),
Faculty of Engineering (majoring in Computer Engineering). Both have had some experience in
community engagement activities.

The team is keen to work with classroom teachers in helping the students and in providing support at
home, in collaboration with the parents and local community centres.

Intended outcomes
We aim to enable at risk students and students with learning and reading disabilities to improve their
reading skills to the point where they can succeed in school and develop the reading skills that will
prepare them for high school and post-secondary education. Studies have shown that poor readers,
who are reading at a grade level or more behind, are more likely to be disruptive in the classroom,
truant from school, and at risk of dropping out of high school. We therefore wish to provide a
measurable increase in reading speed, comprehension, and reading attention span. Firstly, the
intention is that the students will double their reading speed and increase their reading skills by one
to two grade levels by the end of the school year. Thus, we aim to enable poor readers through the
use of assistive reading technology to access the general curriculum. We also intend to provide
learning disabled students with a multi-sensory reading alternative that will help them increase their
reading speed to the point that they can read on their own. Finally, we wish to help learning and
reading disabled students stay in their regular classrooms with their peers, so that they can continue
learning in a non- restrictive environment.

Project description
The Read to Succeed! project will enable at risk students to improve their reading skills through
utilization of five computers equipped with scanners and assistive reading software. Students using
this innovative reading system will be able to utilize all their classroom materials, including textbooks
providing them access to the general curriculum. The students will increase their reading speed and
comprehension, which will help them obtain classroom subject proficiency. Included in the Read to
Succeed! project will be a day of training for the reading specialist and classroom teachers on the
features and use of the Kurzweil 3000 software.

Impact and evaluation of project

Standardized reading tests will be conducted at the start of the Read to Succeed! project and again at
the end of the school year to determine increases in reading speed and comprehension. Additionally,
those students with ADD will be tested to determine increased reading attention rates.

5
Task 3
If you were to apply for the U-Sparks Grant, brainstorm key points that you could include in the
following sections of the proposal:

1. Introduction to applicant

2. Justification/Statement of needs

3. Intended outcomes

4. Design

5. Impact

References
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (n.d.). Developing and writing grant proposals. Retrieved
from http://njms.rutgers.edu/research/orsp/DevelopingAndWritingGrantProposals.htm.

Hansen, M. (2013). Six reasons why grant applications get rejected. The Grant Helpers. Retrieved
from http://www.thegranthelpers.com/blog/bid/118144/Six-Reasons-Why-Grant-
Applications-Get-Rejected.

Porter, R. (2007). Why academics have a hard time writing good grant proposals. The Journal of
Research Administration, 38(2), 37-43.