Management Information and Software Tools For Grant Administrators

Federal Catalog of Domestic Assistance

About Grant Community
What's New?
Grant Management Software

Federal Grant and Financial Assistance Programs 

Function or Type of Program

  Client/ Program Beneficiary

  Department or Agency 

Federal Grant Audits  
Congressional Budget Studies 
Federal Financial Assistance By State and County 




The Basic Components of a Proposal

There are eight basic components to creating a solid proposal package: (1) the proposal summary; (2) introduction of organization; (3) the problem statement (or needs assessment); (4) project objectives; (5) project methods or design; (6) project evaluation; (7) future funding; and (8) the project budget. The following will provide an overview of these components.

The Proposal Summary: Outline of Project Goals

The proposal summary outlines the proposed project and should appear at the beginning of the proposal. It could be in the form of a cover letter or a separate page, but should definitely be brief -- no longer than two or three paragraphs. The summary would be most useful if it were prepared after the proposal has been developed in order to encompass all the key summary points necessary to communicate the objectives of the project. It is this document that becomes the cornerstone of your proposal, and the initial impression it gives will be critical to the success of your venture. In many cases, the summary will be the first part of the proposal package seen by agency officials and very possibly could be the only part of the package that is carefully reviewed before the decision is made to consider the project any further.

The applicant must select a fundable project which can be supported in view of the local need. Alternatives, in the absence of Federal support, should be pointed out. The influence of the project both during and after the project period should be explained. The consequences of the project as a result of funding should be highlighted.

Introduction: Presenting a Credible Applicant or Organization

The applicant should gather data about its organization from all available sources. Most proposals require a description of an applicant's organization to describe its past and present operations. Some features to consider are:

- A brief biography of board members and key staff members.

- The organization's goals, philosophy, track record with other grantors, and                    any success stories.

- The data should be relevant to the goals of the Federal grantor agency and                    should establish the applicant's credibility.

The Problem Statement: Stating the Purpose at Hand

The problem statement (or needs assessment) is a key element of a proposal that makes a clear, concise, and well-supported statement of the problem to be addressed. The best way to collect information about the problem is to conduct and document both a formal and informal needs assessment for a program in the target or service area. The information provided should be both factual and directly related to the problem addressed by the proposal. Areas to document are:

- The purpose for developing the proposal.

- The beneficiaries -- who are they and how will they benefit.

- The social and economic costs to be affected.

- The nature of the problem (provide as much hard evidence as possible).

- How the applicant organization came to realize the problem exists, and what                    is currently being done about the problem.

- The remaining alternatives available when funding has been exhausted.                    Explain what will happen to the project and the impending implications.

- Most importantly, the specific manner through which problems might be                    solved. Review the resources needed, considering how they will be used                    and to what end.

There is a considerable body of literature on the exact assessment techniques to be used. Any local, regional, or State government planning office, or local university offering course work in planning and evaluation techniques should be able to provide excellent background references. Types of data that may be collected include: historical, geographic, quantitative, factual, statistical, and philosophical information, as well as studies completed by colleges, and literature searches from public or university libraries. Local colleges or universities which have a department or section related to the proposal topic may help determine if there is interest in developing a student or faculty project to conduct a needs assessment. It may be helpful to include examples of the findings for highlighting in the proposal.

Project Objectives: Goals and Desired Outcome

Program objectives refer to specific activities in a proposal. It is necessary to identify all objectives related to the goals to be reached, and the methods to be employed to achieve the stated objectives. Consider quantities or things measurable and refer to a problem statement and the outcome of proposed activities when developing a well-stated objective. The figures used should be verifiable. Remember, if the proposal is funded, the stated objectives will probably be used to evaluate program progress, so be realistic. There is literature available to help identify and write program objectives.

Program Methods and Program Design: A Plan of Action

The program design refers to how the project is expected to work and solve the stated problem. Sketch out the following:

- The activities to occur along with the related resources and staff needed to                   operate the project (inputs).

- A flow chart of the organizational features of the project. Describe how the                   parts interrelate, where personnel will be needed, and what they are expected                   to do. Identify the kinds of facilities, transportation, and support services                   required (throughputs).

- Explain what will be achieved through 1 and 2 above (outputs); i.e., plan for                   measurable results. Project staff may be required to produce evidence of                   program performance through an examination of stated objectives during                   either a site visit by the Federal grantor agency and or grant reviews which                   may involve peer review committees.

- It may be useful to devise a diagram of the program design. For example,                   draw a three column block. Each column is headed by one of the parts                   (inputs, throughputs and outputs), and on the left (next to the first column)                   specific program features should be identified (i.e., implementation, staffing,                   procurement, and systems development). In the grid, specify something                   about the program design, for example, assume the first column is labeled                    inputs and the first row is labeled staff. On the grid one might specify under                   inputs five nurses to operate a child care unit. The throughput might be to                   maintain charts, counsel the children, and set up a daily routine; outputs might                   be to discharge 25 healthy children per week. This type of procedure will                   help to conceptualize both the scope and detail of the project.

- Wherever possible, justify in the narrative the course of action taken. The                    most economical method should be used that does not compromise or                    sacrifice project quality. The financial expenses associated with performance                    of the project will later become points of negotiation with the Federal                    program staff. If everything is not carefully justified in writing in the proposal,                    after negotiation with the Federal grantor agencies, the approved project                    may resemble less of the original concept. Carefully consider the pressures of                    the proposed implementation, that is, the time and money needed to acquire                    each part of the plan. A Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT)                    chart could be useful and supportive in justifying some proposals.

- Highlight the innovative features of the proposal which could be considered                    distinct from other proposals under consideration.

- Whenever possible, use appendices to provide details, supplementary data,                    references, and information requiring in-depth analysis. These types of data,                    although supportive of the proposal, if included in the body of the design,                    could detract from its readability. Appendices provide the proposal reader                    with immediate access to details if and when clarification of an idea,                    sequence or conclusion is required. Time tables, work plans, schedules,                    activities, methodologies, legal papers, personal vitae, letters of support, and                    endorsements are examples of appendices.

Evaluation: Product and Process Analysis

The evaluation component is two-fold: (1) product evaluation; and (2) process evaluation. Product evaluation addresses results that can be attributed to the project, as well as the extent to which the project has satisfied its desired objectives. Process evaluation addresses how the project was conducted, in terms of consistency with the stated plan of action and the effectiveness of the various activities within the plan.

Most Federal agencies now require some form of program evaluation among grantees. The requirements of the proposed project should be explored carefully. Evaluations may be conducted by an internal staff member, an evaluation firm or both. The applicant should state the amount of time needed to evaluate, how the feedback will be distributed among the proposed staff, and a schedule for review and comment for this type of communication. Evaluation designs may start at the beginning, middle or end of a project, but the applicant should specify a start-up time. It is practical to submit an evaluation design at the start of a project for two reasons:

- Convincing evaluations require the collection of appropriate data before and                    during program operations; and,

- If the evaluation design cannot be prepared at the outset then a critical review                    of the program design may be advisable.

Even if the evaluation design has to be revised as the project progresses, it is much easier and cheaper to modify a good design. If the problem is not well defined and carefully analyzed for cause and effect relationships then a good evaluation design may be difficult to achieve. Sometimes a pilot study is needed to begin the identification of facts and relationships. Often a thorough literature search may be sufficient.

Evaluation requires both coordination and agreement among program decision makers (if known). Above all, the Federal grantor agency's requirements should be highlighted in the evaluation design. Also, Federal grantor agencies may require specific evaluation techniques such as designated data formats (an existing information collection system) or they may offer financial inducements for voluntary participation in a national evaluation study. The applicant should ask specifically about these points. Also, consult the Criteria For Selecting Proposals section of the Catalog program description to determine the exact evaluation methods to be required for the program if funded.

Future Funding: Long-Term Project Planning

Describe a plan for continuation beyond the grant period, and/or the availability of other resources necessary to implement the grant. Discuss maintenance and future program funding if program is for construction activity. Account for other needed expenditures if program includes purchase of equipment.

The Proposal Budget: Planning the Budget

Funding levels in Federal assistance programs change yearly. It is useful to review the appropriations over the past several years to try to project future funding levels (see Financial Information section of the Catalog program description).

However, it is safer to never anticipate that the income from the grant will be the sole support for the project. This consideration should be given to the overall budget requirements, and in particular, to budget line items most subject to inflationary pressures. Restraint is important in determining inflationary cost projections (avoid padding budget line items), but attempt to anticipate possible future increases.

Some vulnerable budget areas are: utilities, rental of buildings and equipment, salary increases, food, telephones, insurance, and transportation. Budget adjustments are sometimes made after the grant award, but this can be a lengthy process. Be certain that implementation, continuation and phase-down costs can be met. Consider costs associated with leases, evaluation systems, hard/soft match requirements, audits, development, implementation and maintenance of information and accounting systems, and other long-term financial commitments.

A well-prepared budget justifies all expenses and is consistent with the proposal narrative. Some areas in need of an evaluation for consistency are: (1) the salaries in the proposal in relation to those of the applicant organization should be similar; (2) if new staff persons are being hired, additional space and equipment should be considered, as necessary; (3) if the budget calls for an equipment purchase, it should be the type allowed by the grantor agency; (4) if additional space is rented, the increase in insurance should be supported; (5) if an indirect cost rate applies to the proposal, the division between direct and indirect costs should not be in conflict, and the aggregate budget totals should refer directly to the approved formula; and (6) if matching costs are required, the contributions to the matching fund should be taken out of the budget unless otherwise specified in the application instructions.

It is very important to become familiar with Government-wide circular requirements. The Catalog identifies in the program description section (as information is provided from the agencies) the particular circulars applicable to a Federal program, and summarizes coordination of Executive Order 12372, "Intergovernmental Review of Programs" requirements in Appendix I. The applicant should thoroughly review the appropriate circulars since they are essential in determining items such as cost principles and conforming with Government guidelines for Federal domestic assistance.


United States Government Manual Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, DC 20402

OMB Circular Nos. A-87, A-102, A-110, and A-133, and Executive Order 12372: Publications Office Office of Administration Room 2200, 725 Seventeenth Street, NW. Washington, DC 20503

Government Printing Office (GPO) Resources

The government documents identified above as available from the GPO can be requested (supply the necessary identifying information) by writing to:

Superintendent of Documents Government Printing Office Washington, DC 20402

Regional and Federal Depository Libraries

Regional libraries can arrange for copies of Government documents through an interlibrary loan. All Federal Depository Libraries will receive copies of the Catalog directly. A list of depository and regional libraries is available by writing: Chief, Library Division, Superintendent of Documents, Stop SLL, Washington, DC 20402.


November, 2000

Last Updated: 11/00

About    News     Grant Management Software     Federal Grant Programs    Audits    Studies    Expenditures     Links

Last Updated, November, 2000             Comments or Questions?           ©Grant 2000, All Rights Reserved