Preparing and Writing Research Proposals: © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona M. Kleine, IUFRO-SPDC Update 2004

Preparing and
Writing
Research Proposals
© C.P.P. Reid,
Univ. Arizona
M. Kleine, IUFRO-
SPDC Update 2004
Contents
• Introduction
• The Need for Scientific Research
• Identifying and Prioritizing

Research Needs
• Identifying Sources of Research

Funding
© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona
M. Kleine, IUFRO-SPDC
Update 2004
Contents (cont‘d)
• Research Proposal Procees
• Pre-planning
• Writing the Proposal Pre-planning
• Writing the Proposal

Update 2004
Contents (cont‘d)
• Writing Techniques and Appearance

of Proposal
• Post-Proposal Writing
• Group Research

Update 2004
The Need
for
Scientific Research

Update 2004
Objectives of this
session

Update 2004
Review the basic
components of scientific
research.
Examine the scientific

method in practice.

Update 2004
Examine the relationship
among research, tech-
nology and production.
Consider the value of the

research endeavor to
education
Update 2004
Basic Components of the
Scientific Method
Empirical Evidence
Logical Reasoning
Skepticism

Update 2004
Primary Literature
Secondary Literature
Textbook Science
Reliable
Knowledge

Update 2004
Initial Experimental and Observational Data
No Discarded
by Peers
Primary Literature Yes
No Discarded
by Peers
Secondary Literature Yes
No Discarded
by Peers
Yes
Textbook Literature
Update 2004
The Scientific Method
in Practice

Update 2004
Step 1.
Identify a significant problem
or ask a meaningful question
in such a way that there is a
conceivable answer.

Update 2004
Step 2.
Attempt to answer the
question posed in step 1
above by gathering relevant
information and making
observations.

Update 2004
Step 3.
Propose a solution to the
problem or answer to the
question as a scientific
hypothesis.

Update 2004
Step 4.
Test the hypothesis to allow
corroboration and
establishment of validity.

Update 2004
Step 5.
Accept, reject, abandon, or
modify the hypothesis.

Update 2004
Step 6.
Construct, support, or cast
doubt on a scientific theory

Update 2004
The Scientific Method in Practice
Step 1: Identify Significant Problem

or
Ask Meaningful Question
Step 2: Attempt to Answer Question

or
Pose Solution to Problem
Step 3: Propose Solution to Problem

or
Answer to Question
as a Scientific Hypothesis
Continued ... © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Update 2004
The Scientific Method in Practice (cont’d)
Step 4: Test Hypothesis to Allow

Corroboration
and
Validity
Modify Step 5: Accept, Reject, Abandon, or Modify Hypothesis
Reject
Abandon Accept
Step 6: Construct, Support, or Cast Doubt

on a Scientific Theory

Update 2004
Research, Technology
Development and
Production

Update 2004
Technology
Technology:
Systematic application of scientific
knowledge to practical tasks.

Update 2004
Technology
Pure research, technology

development, and production
and marketing have substantial
overlap in time.

Update 2004
Use of Graduate
Research Assistants

Update 2004
Pros
Training of future scientists
Hands-on research
Financial support for graduate

students
Low cost to Principal

Investigator
Update 2004
Incentives for graduate
enrollment
Increased research capacity
New science in graduate

curriculum

Update 2004
Cons
Narrow focus of graduate
experience (reduced breadth)
Possible delay in completing

graduate program

Update 2004
Goal-oriented research results
May not contribute to scientific

merit as viewed by reviewers

Update 2004
Identifying and
Prioritizing
Research Needs

Update 2004
Objectives

Update 2004
Examine the need and
approach for defining
realistic research problems
Recognize the need and

establish methods for
stakeholder input into
identifying research problems
Update 2004
Examine the need for
determining in advance the
resources needed to
conduct a research project

Update 2004
Defining Problems
Example 3.1
Statement of the Problem:

Insect Z.z. defoliation of Species 4
Reason for choosing this topic:

a) commercial value
b) tree damage
(cont‘d on next slide) © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona
Update 2004
Reason for choosing this topic: (cont‘d)
c) percent of species A in commercial

forests of region
d) recreation impact
e) need for control measures
f) etc.

Update 2004
Example 3.2
Restatement of the Problem

Reasons:
a) species A is a commercially valuable tree
species
b) insect defoliation is resulting in growth
reduction and death of trees
(cont‘d on next slide)

Update 2004
c) species A is the dominant tree species in
45% of the commercial forests in region Y
d) defoliation is reducing the recreation

value in the parks in the region
e) there are also current control measures

for controlling insect Z.z on species A
f) etc. © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Update 2004
Example 3.3
An A BUT B Statement:
There is a need to prevent defoliation of large
areas of tree species A by insect Z.z in region
Y, BUT, there are no effective and
economical control measures for this insect.

Update 2004
Key Stakeholder
Groups and Their
Functions in Forest
Research
Update 2004
Stakeholders are defined as people,
groups, or organizations that have a
claim on the research organization’s
(and individual researcher’s)
attention, resources or output, or are
affected by that output.
Lundgren,et al., 1994

Update 2004
Funders and Legislators
Evaluate budget and

funding requests for
research programs
Provide funds for research

Update 2004
Higher-level Administrators
and Policy Makers
Prepare and justify budget
requests
Administer laws, regulations
Allocate appropriations
Update 2004
Research Managers
Plan and manage research

programs
Prepare and justify budget

requests for specific research
projects, programs, activities
Update 2004
Research Scientists
Plan and do research
Disseminate research
findings

Update 2004
Research Disseminators
Disseminate new knowledge

and technologies resulting
from research
Provide feedback from users

to scientists
Update 2004
Users of Research Results
Adopt and adapt research

results
Implement new technologies

Update 2004
Civil Society / (General Public)
Receive wanted and

unwanted effects from
the use of research results
Affect funding decisions

Update 2004
Stakeholder
Analysis

Update 2004
Stakeholder What do they Criteria they According
want from use to evaluate to these
the the criteria,
researcher? researcher's how is the
performance. researcher
performing?
National - Research for - Reports Unknown in
government sustainable - Feedback this example
forest de- from other
velopment agencies and
- Focus on citizens
resource use - Publications
with pro-
tection
- Problem
solving

Update 2004
the the criteria,
performing?
Ministry of - Applied - Useful results Unknown in
Natural Research - Relevant this example
Resources Support results
- Publications

Update 2004
the the criteria,
performing?
International - Specific - Progress Unknown in
Research research reports this example
Donor activities - Evaluations
Organizations - Reports and - Publications
results - Useful results
- Well-conducted
studies

Update 2004
Identifying Sources
of Research
Funding

Update 2004
Objectives

Update 2004
Show the importance
of understanding the
goals, purposes, and
perspectives of potential
research sponsors

Update 2004
Emphasize the need
to determine if potential
sponsors have specific
requirements for:
eligibility to seek funding
collaboration and
cooperation
matching funds
Update 2004
Stress the need to follow
the guidelines and formats
of the sponsor

Update 2004
Recognize that some
sponsors value basic
research over applied
and vice versa

Update 2004
To appreciate that different
research approaches are
necessary to government,
private foundations, and
corporate sponsors

Update 2004
The Research
Proposal

Update 2004
The Research
Proposal Process -
Introduction

Update 2004
Objectives

Update 2004
Introduce the important
steps leading to the writing
of the research proposal
Introduce the major

components of a research
proposal
Update 2004
Basic Steps in Successful
Fund-seeking
Identify of a potential sponsor
Contact key people for

assistance in planning
Write a well reasoned proposal

Update 2004
Background Documentation
Concept
Provides the basis for fitting into the
philosophy and mission of the
funding organization

Update 2004
Program
What you propose to do. Nature of
the project and how the research will
be carried out. (outcome, timetable
staffing)
Expenses
Best estimate of the resources that will
be needed to complete the research

Update 2004
General Components of a
Research Proposal
• Executive Summary
• Statement of Need
• Project Description
• Budget
• Organizational Information
• Conclusion
Update 2004
The Research
Proposal Process -
Pre-Planning

Update 2004
Objectives

Update 2004
Provide steps in establishing
contact with a potential sponsor
Provide suggestions on specific

questions that should be asked to:
program officers
grantees
past reviewers

Update 2004
Researcher Sponsor
Expertise and Mission,

Capability Purpose, Goals
Guidelines and
Organization’s
Eligibility
Mission
Requirements
Concept
Development
Sponsor Contact and Feedback
Other contacts: Past Reviewers,

Grantees
Project Proposal
Development and
Preparation

Final Proposal M. Kleine, IUFRO-SPDC
Update 2004
Suggest how to refine the focus
and concept of the proposal
Indicate the content of a

pre-proposal

Update 2004
Questions to
Program Officer of
Sponsor
Update 2004
If your project concept doesn’t fit
current priorities -- possible
modifications? Other sponsors
interested?
What is the sponsor’s current

budget for grant program?

Update 2004
Awards on the basis of special
criteria, such as geographic region
or type of organization?
One-time-only support? Allow

renewals or other funding
opportunities in the future?

Update 2004
Any unannounced programs or
unsolicited funds to support
research?
Most common mistakes found in

proposals submitted to you?

Update 2004
What would you like to see given
more attention to that is not being
currently met by applicants?
Willing to review a pre-proposal of

2-3 pages that succinctly develops
the research concept?

Update 2004
Willing to recommend a previously
funded proposal to read for idea of
format and style?
Should proposal be written for

reviewers with non-technical
backgrounds?

Update 2004
Provide names of past reviewers
who might be contacted?
Standard Reviewer’s Evaluation

Form or Panel’s Evaluation Form
used?

Update 2004
Questions to
Previous Awardees

Update 2004
Call or visit the sponsor before
writing the proposal?
Who was most helpful on the

sponsor’s staff in assisting you?

Update 2004
Use any special advocates on
your behalf?
Would the sponsor review a

pre-proposal or proposal draft
prior to final proposal?

Update 2004
Any hidden agenda items related
to the sponsor’s program?
What materials or information was

most useful in developing your
proposal?

Update 2004
Did the sponsor make a site visit
prior to deciding on funding your
project?
How did initial budget request
compare to the final budget
awarded?

Update 2004
Even though successful, what
would you do differently next
time?

Update 2004
Questions for
Previous Reviewer

Update 2004
How were you selected to be a
reviewer?
Did you review proposals at the

sponsor location or some other
location?

Update 2004
Was a particular evaluation or
scoring system used?
Were you given instructions to look

for certain characteristics or
specific items in the proposals?

Update 2004
Having been a reviewer, would you
write proposals differently based on
your experience?
What did you find to be the most
common mistakes made in the
proposals?

Update 2004
How many proposals were you
required to review at any one time?
How much time did you have to

review each proposal?

Update 2004
Was there a staff review by the
sponsor following your review?

Update 2004
Focus on Sponsor’s
Priorities and Interests

Update 2004
Show how topic (focus) has appeal
to a broad audience or end users
Emphasize area with good

potential for publications or other
tangible end products

Update 2004
Ensure topic is not perceived as
‘old topic’ with little relevance
today, or already researched
Consider obvious cooperation and

collaboration that topic would
encourage

Update 2004
Demonstrate how the topic will
extend into other areas
Avoid development of research

methods per se or descriptive work

Update 2004
Avoid topic that is not important
to your geographic region
Relate topic to ‘big picture’

problems important to your
particular region

Update 2004
Show topic contributes to science
in general, or even better, to
general public
Ensure topic can be addressed

with realistic budget

Update 2004
Demonstrate precise understanding
of topic and the need or problem
Ensure to convey that problem

is feasible to solve through your
research

Update 2004
Show the relevance of topic
to your own organization’s
goals

Update 2004
Writing the
Proposal

Update 2004
Objectives

Update 2004
Provide details on
the writing of the major
components of a research
proposal

Update 2004
Indicate for each
major component of
the proposal the
Purpose
Suggestions on
content
Update 2004
Provide a solid and
appropriate model for the
writing of most research
proposals

Update 2004
Basic Components
of a Research Proposal
Summary/Abstract
Statement of Problem or Need
Project Description
Budget

Update 2004
Basic Components
of a Research Proposal (cont’d)
Budget Explanation/Justification
Special Considerations
Curriculum Vitae
Appendices

Update 2004
Key Components
of the
Research Proposal
Summary
Update 2004
Your credibility
The problem or need
you wish to address
The research objectives

Update 2004
The procedures and
methods to be used
The cost of the project
The likely outcomes and

benefits to be derived
Update 2004
Example of a
Good Abstract

Update 2004
Example 7.1
The Summary - Capturing the Essence of the Proposal
The problem
Ipecac (Cephaelis ipecacuanha) is a small perennial shrub
which in the past grew abundantly under shady areas of tropical
rain forests of Southeast Brazil and was employed by native
Brazilians who taught the medicinal properties to European
settlers. The ipecac drug has achieved worldwide usefulness
as an amoebicide and as a vomitive agent because of its
pharmacological active isquinoline alkaloids.
However, overharvesting of wild plants in Southeast Brazil and
negligence in replantiv ipecac plants after uprooting has led to a
severe decline of native ipecac populations.

Update 2004
.
Research objectives
Based on my previous investigations on biological
biodiversity of a number of medicinal plants in Brazil
(including work with a false ipecac), and the develop-
ment of an effective genomic DNA extractive tech-
nique, I propose to evaluate the native populations of
ipecac in Southeastern Brazil as part of a concerted
effort to preserve and maintain sustainable production
of the ipecac drug.

Update 2004
Specific objectives:
1) Locate endemic populations of ipecac in Southeast Brazil

and characterize morphological traits,
2) Describe local environmental and climatic conditions of
populations,
3) Genetically evaluate existing variability within and among

populations, using RAPD markers,
4) Determine the levels of alcaloids and assess divergent

biochemical patterns within and among each population, and
5) Establish a core collection of C. ipecacuanaha

characterized morphologically, biochemically, and genetically.
Update 2004
Procedures and methods
Standard environmental parameters will be measured
in the field including soil physical and chemical
characteristics, vegetation density, and photosynthetic
active radiation (PAR) at the ipecac canopy.
Morphological measurements will include shoot height,
number and length of nodes, flower color, shoot base
diameter, and anatomical characteristics of leaves. Also
root volume, root color, and root weights will be collected.

Update 2004
Leaf samples will be used in genomic DNA extraction
and amplified by polymerization chain reaction (PCR)
with random primers, according to random amplified
polymorphic DNA (RAPD) methodology. Alkaloids will
be analyzed by HPLC procedures currently in use.
Establishments of plants in the greenhouse will be
done by a combination of sexual and asexual
propagation techniques.

Update 2004
.
Likely outcomes
The anticipated outcomes of this research include:
1) Identification of environmental conditions associated

with plant development at specific locales,
2) The amplitude of the gene pool within each ipecac

population,

Update 2004
3) The establishment of a core collection of ipecac
that is thoroughly characterized for a number of
factors and that will provide material for
improvement through breeding, and
4) The training of a professional cadre with

appropriate laboratory resources that can continue
to investigate novel ways for preservation and
rational use of ipecac and other medicinal plants.

Update 2004
Key Components of the
Research Proposal
Introduction -

Update 2004
Clearly establish who you
are
Describe your organizational

goals

Update 2004
Refer to the sponsor’s
purpose and priorities as
related to the research
Establish your credibility in

the project topic area

Update 2004
Lead logically to the
next section, the problem
statement

Update 2004
Key Component of the Research
Proposal
The Problem Statement -

Update 2004
Demonstrate a precise
understanding of the
problem or need
Clearly convey the focus

of your project

Update 2004
Show the relationship of
your project to a larger set
of problems or issues and
justify your emphasis
Establish the importance and

significance of the problem

Update 2004
Justify why this problem is
of particular interest to the
sponsor
Demonstrate that it is
feasible to solve the
problem

Update 2004
State the outcome of the
research in terms of human
needs and societal benefits

Update 2004
Example 7.5 - Statement of Consequences
Rather than stating “no research has

dealt with the role of insect A on foliar
damage of tree species B ...“,
state that “over 10,000 hectares of
defoliation of tree species B in provice X
has resulted in Y economic loss to the
region. Although suspected as a primary
defoliator in the area, insect A ...“ This
could then be followed up with the
possible benefits that would result from
studying some defined aspect of insect
A‘s role.
Update 2004
Proposal
Project Description -

Update 2004
Subsections
Objectives
Experimental plan
Dissemination
Facilities and equipment
Literature cited

Update 2004
Types of Objectives

Update 2004
behavioral - anticipate
that some particular
human action will occur.
performance - a particular
behavior will occur at an
expected proficiency level
over a specified time frame
Update 2004
process - manner in which
something occurs is an end
in itself.
product - end product is a
tangible item.

Update 2004
Examples

Update 2004
Example 7.6
Behavioral Objective
Charcoal producers will be

so pleased with a new, more
efficient kiln that they will stop
cutting in a protected area.

Update 2004
Example 7.7
Performance Objective
Inoculation of Cassia siamea

with a Glomus sp. will increase
survival 15% after outplanting
on poor sites.

Update 2004
Example 7.8
Process Objective
Determining how timing of fertilizer

applications and hormone treatments
affect flowering in a species with low
or irregular seed production will lead
to increased seed production at
predictable intervals.
Update 2004
Example 7.9
Product Objective
Defining limits on temperature

and moisture content of VAM
inoculum will lead to inoculum
that is usable by farmers with
backyard nurseries.
Update 2004
Statement of Objectives
Suggestions

Update 2004
Clearly describe your project’s
objectives, hypotheses, or
research questions
Signal the project’s objectives

without being buried in
unnecessary narrative

Update 2004
Show that the objectives are
important, significant and timely
Comprehensively describe
the intended outcomes of the
project

Update 2004
State the objectives, hypotheses,
or questions in a way that they
can be evaluated or tested later
Show why your project’s

outcome is appropriate and
important to the sponsor

Update 2004
Hypothesis
Development - Example

Update 2004
General statement but too broad:
(not testable at this stage without
further definitions)
“Outplanting seedlings with a

full complement of rhizosphere
microorganisms results in
better field survival.”
Update 2004
More specific with specific
organisms defined: (perhaps
testable with further details, but
doesn’t really address a “why”
of expected outcome)
“Outplanting Glyricidia seedlings

with both nitrogen-fixing and
mycorrhizal root symbionts
results in better field survival.”
Update 2004
Specifically states why increased
survival is expected (testable
under defined conditions)
“Since Glyricidia seedlings often
are outplanted into poor, highly
degraded sites, colonization of
nursery stock with rhizobial strain X
and mycorrhizal fungi Y results in
increased field survival after 1 yr.”
Update 2004
If this were stated as a null hypothesis for
statistical analysis it might look like this:
“Even though Glyricidia seedlings often

are outplanted into poor, highly degraded
sites, colonization of nursery stock with
rhizobial strain X and mycorrhizal fungi Y
will NOT result in increased field survival
after 1 yr.”
This is stating that a researcher testing field
performance will find no difference between
colonized and non-colonized seedlings.
Update 2004
Experimental
Plan

Update 2004
Experimental Plan
• Describe the research project in detail
• Experimental design
• Statistical analysis
• Evaluation
• Methods and material
How ?
When ?
Why ? © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Update 2004
Time and Task Chart
SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES
2002/2003 2004
Activities Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov
to & & & & & & & & & & & &
Dec Feb Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec Feb Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec
1. Phenological
observations
2. Seed collections
3. Germination test
4. Mating system study
5. Gene flow study
6. Short-term population
dynamics study
7. Preparation of planting
stock using seeds
8. Publication of results

Update 2004
Dissemination
of Results

Update 2004
Dissemination of Results
Let others know about the project
Acknowledgement of the support by the

sponsor

Update 2004
Mode of dissemination (book,
journals, video etc.)
Costs of dissemination
Use of the results

Update 2004
Facilities &
Equipment

Update 2004
Facilities & Equipment
List all the facilities and equipment
Indicate which of the facilities need to

be funded by the project

Update 2004
Available facilities (laboratories, field
sites, service facilities, computers,
library etc.)
In-kind contributions by third parties

Update 2004
Literature Cited

Update 2004
Examples
LITERATURE CITED
Aldrich, P.R. & Hamrick, J.L. 1998. Reproductive dominance of
pasture trees in a fragmented tropical forest mosaic. Science
281:103-105.
Appanah, S. & Chan, H.T. 1982. Methods of studying the
reproductive biology of some Malaysian primary forest trees.
Malaysian Forester 45: 10-20.

Update 2004
Proposal
Budget -
Update 2004
Preparation of
Proposal Budget

Update 2004
Budget
Direct costs
• Personnel, materials & supplies, equipment, travel,
support services, computer use and publications
Indirect costs
• Percentage of direct costs to cover administrative
overheads
“Hard“ cash contributions
In-kind contributions

Update 2004
Questions
to Consider

Update 2004
Will your budget -
provide sufficient resources to

carry out the project?
include a budget narrative that

justifies the major items of the
budget?

Update 2004
Will your budget -
be in the format required by the

sponsor and your organization?
provide enough detail that the

reviewer can easily see the way
the items were calculated?

Update 2004
Will your budget -
show a clear relationship between

the budget items and the research
activities?
include any attachments or
appendices to justify unusual
requests?

Update 2004
Will your budget -
identify evaluation and

dissemination costs?

Update 2004
Worksheet for
Determining Personnel
Expenses for Research

Update 2004
Item Description Expense
(Annual basis)
Principal Primary 2 months of salary
Investigator responsibility = $10,000
for research Benefits (20%) =
and $2,000
supervision 1 month cost-
share by institute
(this will be time
commitment of
25%)

Update 2004
(Annual basis)
Co- Secondary 1 month of salary =
Principal responsibility $4000
Investigator for research Benefits (20%) =
and $800
supervisor 1 month cost-share
of GRA by institute
(this will be time
commitment of 16%)

Update 2004
(Annual basis)
Graduate Half-time Graduate research
Research graduate assistantship
Assistant student for stipend = $8,000
field research

Update 2004
(Annual basis)
Parttime Hourly wages 2 asst X 60 days X
Field for 2 months in $40/day = $4800
Assistants summer for two
technicians to
collect plant and
soil samples

Update 2004
(Annual basis)
Secretarial To assist in 2 months of salary =
Support correspondence, $3500
Benefits (15%) =
manuscript $525
preparation,
ordering
supplies, travel
arrangements

Update 2004
(Annual basis)
Office Two scientist Provided by
Space offices, department
secretary, GRA;
estimated to
be 10% of
department
space

Update 2004
(Annual basis)
Indirect Institute has set Salary + benefits =
Costs a rate of 40% $33,625
(overhead) of direct costs IDC = X0.4 = $13,450
Cost-share
contribution of IDC
= 2 months salary +
benefits
($5000 + $1000 +
$4000 +$ 800) X
0.4 = $4320
Update 2004
Budget
Explanation/Justification

Update 2004
Budget Justification
• Provide reasoning for the budget items
• Explain the basis for the fringe benefits

used for personnel
• Explain indirect costs

Update 2004
• Provide examples of the major material
items
• Specify the kind of transportation
• Explain the basis publication and

dissemination expenses

Update 2004
Curriculum Vitae

Update 2004
Example 7.13
- A Sample Curriculum Vitae
for Research Proposals

Update 2004
Curriculum Vitae Comments
Name: Dr. Jose C. Lopez Self explanatory
Title: Associate Research

Scientist
Address: Include identity of

Department of Silviculture who you work for
Forest Research Institute with complete
(Street address or PO Box) address. Include
(City, Province, Country) appropriate contacts
(Postal Code) by phone, email or
(Telephone number) other means.
(FAX number)
(Email address) Cont’d ...
Update 2004
… continued
Education: List your most recent

University X, D. For.,1988 degrees first and
- Forest Ecology then list in reverse
University X, M.S.,1984- chronological order.
Forest Ecology Make it clear from
University Y, B.S., 1978 - which institutions
Forest Management
your degrees were
conferred. Show
year degree received
and area of specialty
Cont’d ...

Update 2004
… continued
Employment: List chronologically.

Forest Technician, Level 7, Only show work
Provincial Forest Service, experience that
(1978-1981) contributes to your
Graduate Research Assistant, research capabilities
Department of Forestry, or understanding of
University X, (1984-1988) the issues.
Post-doctorate Associate,
Institute of Forest
Management, Federal Forest
Service, (1988-1990)
Assistant Research Scientist,
Department of Silviculture,
Forest Research Institute
(1990 - 1998)
Associate Research Scientist,
Department of Silviculture, Cont’d ...
Forest Research Institute, © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona
(1998 - present) M. Kleine, IUFRO-SPDC
Update 2004
… continued
Honors and Awards: Show any awards,

Outstanding Graduate Dissertation, distinctions or honors
Department of Forestry, that give evidence of
University X, 1988 your professional
Certificate of Merit for Research abilities and
Performance, Forest Research achievements.
Institute, 1992
Outstanding Research Paper,
National Association of Forest
Management, Annual
Conference, 1994
Elected Regional President,
National Association of Forest
Management, 1994-1996
Cont’d ...
Update 2004
… continued
Professional Activities: List those professional

Silviculture Certification activities that relate to
Standards Committee, your proposed topic of
National Association of Forest research. In this case,
Management, 1990-1992 if your research pro-
Workshop Co-Chair, Silvicultural posal is in the area of
Systems for Sustainability, forest ecology and
International Forestry silviculture, it would be
Congress, 12-13 August, of little value to list a
1995 professional activity
On-site Research Review Team, that related to securing
Institute of Genetics, Federal new members for the
Research Council, 20-25 National Assoc. of
January, 1997. Forest Mgn.
Cont’d ...
Update 2004
… continued
Publications: Last 5 years; 12 of This is a very critical part

career total of 2 book chapters and 19 of the CV. Some sponsors
refereed articles): may only allow you to list
Lopez, J. C. 1998. Silvicultural systems recent publications and
of subtropical plantations. Agroforestry not total career publica-
(In Press). tions. If restricted to
number of publications,
Lopez, J.C. 1997. Light quality impacts select carefully to high-
on seedling establishment under XXX light those most relevant
canopies. J. Silviculture 20: 143-150. to your proposed research.
Be accurate and con-
Lopez, J.C. and D.L. Jones. 1997. sistent in your format.
Changes in LAI of species XXX in Do not list papers in
plantations over the rotation length. preparation or submitted
Ecology 35:12-17. unless accepted for
publication (i.e. In Press).
(Continue with listing of © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona
publications) Update 2004
Appendices

Update 2004
“… reviewers may not read beyond
the main proposal, and … if the
appendices appear lengthy …
reviewers will avoid reading through
them, especially if they are limited in
time.”

Update 2004
Tips on
Writing Techniques
and
Appearance of Proposal

Update 2004
You have finalised your
proposal:
• Hard-hitting research need;
• Concise set of objectives;
• Critical methodology for achieving the
objectives;
• Necessary budget;
• Cleverly summarised in a well-worded,
exciting abstract.
Update 2004
What else is there left to do?

Update 2004
Objective

Update 2004
Suggestions and tips on
writing style and mechanics

Update 2004
Tips on Writing Techniques and
Appearance of Proposal
Types of Readers
Fonts and Styles
Proofreading
Transitional tools

Update 2004
Reading Style Writing Technique
White space
Skimming Headings
Ragged right margins

Update 2004
Bold type
Search
Lists
Reading
Examples

Update 2004
Transitions
Critical
Type style
Reading
Line spacing

Update 2004
Writing Examples

Update 2004
Lack of “White Space”
Following the prescribed fire treatment, plots will be forced
into a visibly eroded state using a rainfall simulator. All
erosion sub-plots will be treated with the same amount and
intensity of simulated rainfall as determined by trial runs and
other simulation experiments in the region. If a rainfall event
occurs following the burn treatment, and it is significant
enough to initiate an erosional event, then the rainfall
simulation will not be applied. Since the study site is
relatively small, it is reasonable to assume that the effects
of a given rainfall event would be uniformly distributed.
Plots will be surveyed for sediment loss throughout the life
of the study. A collection catchment will be established on
all plots to monitor both runoff and sediment loss. ...
Update 2004
Use of Added “White Space”
Following the prescribed fire treatment, plots will be
forced into a visibly eroded state using a rainfall simulator.
All erosion sub-plots will be treated with the same amount
and intensity of simulated rainfall as determined by trial
runs and other simulation experiments in the region. ...
Plots will be surveyed for sediment loss throughout

the life of the study. A collection catchment will be
established on all plots to monitor both runoff and sediment
loss. ...

Update 2004
Use of Headings
Erosion Treatment
All erosion sub-plots will be treated with …
Plots will be surveyed for sediment loss throughout

the life of the study. A collection catchment …
Surface Infiltration Measurement

Changes in infiltration rates will be evaluated using a
disk permeameter (infiltrometer) ...

Update 2004
Use of Left and Right
Justified Text
and intensity of simulated rainfall as determined by trial runs
and other simulation experiments in the region. …
disk permeameter (infiltrometer) where disturbance effects on
the sorptivity (S) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (K),
a function of water content, are evaluated (Bouwer 1986,
Green et al. 1986, ...
Update 2004
Use of Left Justified and
Right Ragged Text
and intensity of simulated rainfall as determined by trial runs
and other simulation experiments in the region. …
a function of water content, are evaluated (Bouwer 1986,
Green et al. ...
Update 2004
Use of Underlined Headings
Erosion Treatment

a function of water content, are evaluated ...

Update 2004
Use of Bold Headings
Erosion Treatment

a function of water content, are evaluated ...

Update 2004
Lists
2. Sectoral Policies
• Achieving sustainable forest management in accordance
with ITTO Guidelines,
• Maintaining and developing its wood-based industries,
• Fulfilling her obligations stipulated under the International
Convention on Biodiversity Conservation of which she is
one of the signatories, and
• Developing a National policy and Strategies for the
conservation and sustainable development of biodiversity.

Update 2004
Transitions
• Addition
– Also, again, and, and then, in addition, moreover, besides, next, further,
furthermore, equally important, finally, likewise, first, second, third, last
• Example
– for example, for instance, thus, as an illustration, namely,
specifically, in particular, that is, incidentally

Update 2004
• Result
– therefore, thus, consequently, so, accordingly, as a result, hence,
otherwise, then, that caused, that produced
• Summary
– as a result, hence, in short, in conclusion, as a consequence,
finally, to sum up, therefore, in summary, at last

Update 2004
Fonts
Type Faces and Point Sizes

Update 2004
Serif Typefaces Sans Serif Typefaces
(12 point size) (12 point size)
Times New Roman Arial
Courier New Univers
(10 point size) (10 point size)

Times New Roman Arial
Courier New Univers

Update 2004
Post-Proposal
Writing

Update 2004
Objectives

Update 2004
Indicate the need for
internal review prior to final
submission of a proposal
Suggest follow up
procedures if the
proposal is rejected
Update 2004
Provide common reasons
why proposals are
rejected

Update 2004
Common Reasons
for Rejection

Update 2004
The science was not
completely sound.
The methodology or
approaches in the
experimental section
were unclear or vague.
Update 2004
The investigators were
inexperienced in the
experimental design or
the methodology, i.e.
reviewers not convinced
that investigators were
capable of accomplishing
objectives.
Update 2004
The proposed research
did not fit the mission or
purpose of the grant
program of the sponsor.
The research plan was
not focused.
Update 2004
The literature review was
incomplete and failed to
establish that the proposed
research was new and
significant and not
repetitive.

Update 2004
The objectives did not give
heed to the socio-economic
situation of the country or
region and thus may not be
applicable.

Update 2004
The proposed budget did
not match the proposal
work plan.

Update 2004
Is it research or development?
The proposal was not

perceived as research.

Update 2004
Group Research
- to understand the whole
• multi- and inter-disciplinary
• several institutions, scientists
• one administration
• synergy

Update 2004
Administration
Duties
Discussion
Sponsor
• one PI
• management
• need
• duties © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona
Update 2004
Project Organisation
Project Partners
Direct
Regional Coordinators
Beneficiaries
.
Intermediate
Implementation Implementation Implementation
Agencies in Beneficiaries
Agencies Agencies
Latin America (Facilitators
in Asia in Africa & Promoters)
Pilot Pilot Pilot Pilot
Case 1 Case 2 Case 1 Case 2
Pilot
Pilot Case
Case 1
1 Pilot Case 2
West Africa
West Africa East Africa
Forest Comm.
Forest Industry Comm... Forest Comm.
Dept.
Dept.
Industry Reps.
Reps. Dept.
Industry
Reps. Target Groups
Forest
Environ. Nat. Res. Environ.
Environ.
NGOs Nat. Res. Nat. Res. Stakeholders
NGOs Inst. NGOs Inst.
Inst.

Update 2004
Regional
RegionalCoordinators
Coordinators
Regional project
Regional implementation
project implementation
CATIE FAO (RLC/

FAO (RLC /
FORNESSA APAFRI
Central Chile)
Chile)
Africa Asia Pacific
America South. Am.
South. Am.
Pilot cases at
Pilot cases at
national level
national level
WestAfrica
West Africa SouthAsia
South Asia
Central South
America America
East/South
East/South Southeast
Africa
Africa Asia
Project
Project Advisory
Project advisory Services
services Project Coordination
coordination
FAO
FAO
ICRA (FON / Rome) ETFRN IUFRO
(FON/Rome)
© C.P.P. Reid,
Univ. Arizona
M. Kleine,
Supporting
SupportingPartners
Partners IUFRO-SPDC
Update 2004
Example of Review Criteria
International Foundation for Science (IFS)
• Applicant Qualifications and Feasibility of

Project
– Applicant‘s training and experience
– Available and requested resources
– Realistic goals and time plan

Update 2004
• Scientific Quality
– A well-formulated hypothesis based on up-to-

date knowledge of the problem and science
– A statistically and/or logically sound design of

experiments or plans for trials and observations
– Relevant and up-to-date methods for sampling,

laboratory work, measurements, etc.

Update 2004
• Relevance of Results to:
– Development applicability
– Scientific knowledge
– National priorities

Update 2004
Best wishes with your
grant applications !
© C.P.P. Reid,
Univ. Arizona
M. Kleine, IUFRO-
SPDC Update 2004

Preparing and Writing Research Proposals: © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona M. Kleine, IUFRO-SPDC Update 2004

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preparing and Writing Research Proposals: © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona M. Kleine, IUFRO-SPDC Update 2004

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preparing and

• The Need for Scientific Research

• Identifying and Prioritizing

• Identifying Sources of Research

• Writing the Proposal Pre-planning

• Writing the Proposal

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

• Writing Techniques and Appearance

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Examine the scientific

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Consider the value of the

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Step 1: Identify Significant Problem

Step 2: Attempt to Answer Question

Step 3: Propose Solution to Problem

Continued ... © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Step 4: Test Hypothesis to Allow

Modify Step 5: Accept, Reject, Abandon, or Modify Hypothesis

Step 6: Construct, Support, or Cast Doubt

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Pure research, technology

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Financial support for graduate

Low cost to Principal

Increased research capacity

New science in graduate

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Possible delay in completing

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

May not contribute to scientific

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Recognize the need and

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Statement of the Problem:

Reason for choosing this topic:

c) percent of species A in commercial

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Restatement of the Problem

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

d) defoliation is reducing the recreation

e) there are also current control measures

f) etc. © C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona

Evaluate budget and

Provide funds for research

© C.P.P. Reid, Univ. Arizona