To whom have they awarded recent grants? Do you know, have you contacted any of those people? Have you determined any anticipated new directions? Do you know how the review process is undertaken? (Specialists, Generalists etc..) Have you studied annual reports and guidelines carefully? Do you know if staff are receptive to personal visits or phone contacts?

Have you made use of every possible resource on your campus to develop a competitive proposal?

Have you asked a colleague (preferably some one who had success with proposals) to read a draft? Have you discussed the process with the college grants officer? Do you have the necessary institutional commitment for time, space, computer, additional personal?

Have you 'sold' yourself, established your credibility, as a person competent for the task? Do you have a sense of the proper parameters for the project - or are you about to save the world? Can you tell this is a proposal written by a person - to a person?

Does the budget present a clear picture of the resources needed? Have you asked for too much or too little?

Is it appropriate for this point in your academic career? Is it a logical 'next step' for you, building on previous research, classroom responsibilities, professional goals? Why now?

Will a specific course, or the departmental curriculum, new changed/strengthened? Will you be able to present your results to your peers, in a scholarly journal/book or at a professional meeting?

Is it clear from the beginning of the project how you intend to evaluate- during the grant period, at the end? Is there an implicit long-range plan for your growth as teacher/scholar, for strengthening your institution, for advancing your scholarly field? What do you intend to do next?

Have you followed the guidelines precisely? Does it make inviting reading - good margins, sections (outlines) clearly marked? Is it a good reproduction? Are the appendices appropriate, clearly labeled and referenced? Are there no misspellings, rhetorical ramblings, vague assumptions?

Is it well-written, is there a logic in the flow of the argument? Is there a thesis coherently stated and cogently argued? Does the introduction give an implicit for what follows and the summary remind the reader of each pertinent point? Is it jargon-free, in the active voice, as succinct as possible? Does it follow basic rules of good writing?

Many of these questions are similar to those by proposal reviewers, who, whether they are intelligent lay persons or disciplinary experts, must be able to recognize several key points without difficulty:

1) that the request is an appropriate one for the funding source they represent;

2) that the proposed project has significance beyond the individual circumstance/situation;

3) that the principal investigator demonstrates clear understanding of the issue and of reasonable and creative (and replicable) approaches to addressing the issue.

Hopefully by now you are convinced that proposal writing takes work, creativity, work, imagination, work, persistence, and more work. That is all true. But the very process can be integral to the on-going process of development as a teacher and a scholar. The process of developing a proposal requires you to do some intentional institutional planning, to put your dreams on paper, and to claim that your ideas merit support. This is a risk. But it is a risk worth taking. I wish you all success.