window.page12_callback(["
\n
\n \n
\n How to Develop and Write a Grant Proposal Congressional Research Service 9
\n
\n2. 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”). 3. Explain what will be achieved through 1 and 2 above (“outputs”), that is, 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 grantor agency or foundation, and/or grant reviews which may involve peer review committees. 4. It may be useful to devise a diagram of the program design. Such a procedure will help to conceptualize both the scope and detail of the project.
\n
\nExample:
\n
\nDraw 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.
\n
\n5. Carefully consider the pressures of the proposed implementation, that is, the time and money needed to undertake each part of the plan. 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 government or foundation program staff. If everything is not carefully justified in writing in the proposal, after negotiation with the grantor agencies or foundations, the approved project may resemble less of the original concept.
\n
\nA Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) chart could be useful and supportive in justifying some proposals. Larger projects can easily be laid out using commercial off-the-shelf project or grants management software. The software allows the project manager to construct a PERT chart that provides a graphical representation of all tasks in the project and the way tasks are related to each other. Such project manager software provides a variety of report formats that can be used to track project progress. The PERT chart and other related reports can be maintained on a network of computers so that all project participants can access the latest project information.
\n
\n6. Highlight the innovative features of the proposal which could be considered distinct from other  proposals under consideration. 7. Whenever possible, use appendixes 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 proposal, could detract from its readability. Appendixes 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 appendixes.
\n
\nEvaluation: Product and Process Analysis
\n
\nAn evaluation plan should be a consideration at every stage of the proposal’s development. Data collected for the problem statement form a comparative basis for determining whether measurable
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n\n"]);