Module 3 - Writing a Compelling Project Description

Overview | Technical | Merit & Impacts | Writing | References | Proposal Steps | Resources

Writing

In order to make a persuasive case for your project, your project goals/objectives/research questions should 

• Flow from your Rationale as the best, logical next steps in moving the field forward
• Provide the reader with an understanding of how these project parts are connected and lead to intended outcomes
• Clearly state how your project is designed to address the ITEST Pillars (See Program Description section in the ITEST Solicitation).
• State the goals/objectives and research questions clearly (See Module 1: Introduction [Plan tab])
• Align to and include your logic model. There should be a clear connection between the project description text and the logic model (i.e., a connection between your theory of change, which provides hypotheses, and your logic model, which provides concrete steps to reach outcomes).

Note: Other sections of the Project Description, including High-Quality Plans and Dissemination, are covered in later modules.

Project Activities

You will describe the project activities in sufficient detail so that the reader knows that you know precisely what you intend to do, with whom, how, and by when. Specifically, it will: 

• Provide further detail on the activities, outputs, and outcomes described in your logic model;
• Include a timeline of major project activities and what partner has primary responsibility for the success of each;
• Describe participants—who, how they will be recruited, criteria for selection and, if compensated, at what rates;
• Provide a high-level overview of agendas and intended outcomes of key events;
• Directly connect activities to your theory of change;
• (If providing professional development or training) describe who will provide training, when, how often, intended outcomes (what knowledge will be gained by participants/what skills developed), how feedback will be obtained and used to improve service. Identify specific pedagogical approaches selected for professional development and why they were chosen.

ITEST Pillars

Expertise and Management Plan

Your Expertise and Management Plan will do the following:

• Describe the management structure that will be used to administer the project (role of lead organization, team meetings, expectations for reporting progress, etc.) and to communicate with partners (frequency and method of communication)
• Describe partners/institutions and the roles they will play in the proposed project
• Describe the expertise of key personnel (PI, Co-PIs, PD, Evaluator), who they are, and their primary project responsibilities
• Describe the Advisory Committee members, their affiliations, why they were selected, and their role/responsibilities for guiding project activities; as well as the process for gathering input (in-person, virtual meetings, how often, how input will be used by project leadership)

Results of Prior Support

For proposed PIs and Co-PIs who have received NSF support within the past 5 years, NSF requires a statement of the results of that support. This is a technical writing task. Specific instructions can be found in the PAPPG section d.iii Project Description,Results of Prior Support (see excerpt below). Note that although NSF wants specific information about the funded grant(s), their purpose is to learn what has resulted from the investment in projects the PI and Co-PIs of this proposal have led. See examples below.

Results from Prior NSF Support

Excerpts from this section are found below,;please refer to PAPPG II.D.2.d.iii (pp.12–13) for the full description.

The purpose of this section is to assist reviewers in assessing the quality of prior work conducted with prior or current NSF funding. If any PI or co-PI identified on the proposal has received prior NSF support including:

• an award with an end date in the past five years; or
• any current funding, including any no cost extensions,

information on the award is required for each PI and co-PI, regardless of whether the support was directly related to the proposal or not. In cases where the PI or any co-PI has received more than one award … they need only report on the one award that is most closely related to the proposal.

Support means salary support, as well as any other funding awarded by NSF, including research, Graduate Research Fellowship, Major Research Instrumentation, conference, equipment, travel, and center awards, etc.

The following information must be provided:

(a) the NSF award number, amount and period of support;

(b) the title of the project;

(c) a summary of the results of the completed work, including accomplishments, supported by the award. The results must be separately described under two distinct headings: Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts;

(d) a listing of the publications resulting from the NSF award (a complete bibliographic citation for each publication must be provided either in this section or in the References Cited section of the proposal); if none, state “No publications were produced under this award.”

(e) evidence of research products and their availability, including, but not limited to: data, publications, samples, physical collections, software, and models, as described in any Data Management Plan; and

(f) if the proposal is for renewed support, a description of the relation of the completed work to the proposed work.

If the project was recently awarded and therefore no new results exist, describe the major goals and broader impacts of the project. Note that the proposal may contain up to five pages to describe the results. Results may be summarized in fewer than five pages, which would give the balance of the 15 pages for the Project Description.

Write

NOTE: Other sections of the Project Description, including Dissemination, Research, and Evaluation, will be covered in later modules.