format of a research plan

Instant insights, infinite possibilities

How to write a research plan: Step-by-step guide

Last updated

30 January 2024

Reviewed by

Short on time? Get an AI generated summary of this article instead

Today’s businesses and institutions rely on data and analytics to inform their product and service decisions. These metrics influence how organizations stay competitive and inspire innovation. However, gathering data and insights requires carefully constructed research, and every research project needs a roadmap. This is where a research plan comes into play.

Read this step-by-step guide for writing a detailed research plan that can apply to any project, whether it’s scientific, educational, or business-related.

• What is a research plan?

A research plan is a documented overview of a project in its entirety, from end to end. It details the research efforts, participants, and methods needed, along with any anticipated results. It also outlines the project’s goals and mission, creating layers of steps to achieve those goals within a specified timeline.

Without a research plan, you and your team are flying blind, potentially wasting time and resources to pursue research without structured guidance.

The principal investigator, or PI, is responsible for facilitating the research oversight. They will create the research plan and inform team members and stakeholders of every detail relating to the project. The PI will also use the research plan to inform decision-making throughout the project.

• Why do you need a research plan?

Create a research plan before starting any official research to maximize every effort in pursuing and collecting the research data. Crucially, the plan will model the activities needed at each phase of the research project .

Like any roadmap, a research plan serves as a valuable tool providing direction for those involved in the project—both internally and externally. It will keep you and your immediate team organized and task-focused while also providing necessary definitions and timelines so you can execute your project initiatives with full understanding and transparency.

External stakeholders appreciate a working research plan because it’s a great communication tool, documenting progress and changing dynamics as they arise. Any participants of your planned research sessions will be informed about the purpose of your study, while the exercises will be based on the key messaging outlined in the official plan.

Here are some of the benefits of creating a research plan document for every project:

Project organization and structure

Well-informed participants

All stakeholders and teams align in support of the project

Clearly defined project definitions and purposes

Distractions are eliminated, prioritizing task focus

Timely management of individual task schedules and roles

Costly reworks are avoided

• What should a research plan include?

The different aspects of your research plan will depend on the nature of the project. However, most official research plan documents will include the core elements below. Each aims to define the problem statement , devising an official plan for seeking a solution.

Specific project goals and individual objectives

Ideal strategies or methods for reaching those goals

Required resources

Descriptions of the target audience, sample sizes , demographics, and scopes

Key performance indicators (KPIs)

Project background

Research and testing support

Preliminary studies and progress reporting mechanisms

Cost estimates and change order processes

Depending on the research project’s size and scope, your research plan could be brief—perhaps only a few pages of documented plans. Alternatively, it could be a fully comprehensive report. Either way, it’s an essential first step in dictating your project’s facilitation in the most efficient and effective way.

• How to write a research plan for your project

When you start writing your research plan, aim to be detailed about each step, requirement, and idea. The more time you spend curating your research plan, the more precise your research execution efforts will be.

Account for every potential scenario, and be sure to address each and every aspect of the research.

Consider following this flow to develop a great research plan for your project:

Define your project’s purpose

Start by defining your project’s purpose. Identify what your project aims to accomplish and what you are researching. Remember to use clear language.

Thinking about the project’s purpose will help you set realistic goals and inform how you divide tasks and assign responsibilities. These individual tasks will be your stepping stones to reach your overarching goal.

Additionally, you’ll want to identify the specific problem, the usability metrics needed, and the intended solutions.

Know the following three things about your project’s purpose before you outline anything else:

What you’re doing

Why you’re doing it

What you expect from it

Identify individual objectives

With your overarching project objectives in place, you can identify any individual goals or steps needed to reach those objectives. Break them down into phases or steps. You can work backward from the project goal and identify every process required to facilitate it.

Be mindful to identify each unique task so that you can assign responsibilities to various team members. At this point in your research plan development, you’ll also want to assign priority to those smaller, more manageable steps and phases that require more immediate or dedicated attention.

Select research methods

Once you have outlined your goals, objectives, steps, and tasks, it’s time to drill down on selecting research methods . You’ll want to leverage specific research strategies and processes. When you know what methods will help you reach your goals, you and your teams will have direction to perform and execute your assigned tasks.

Research methods might include any of the following:

User interviews : this is a qualitative research method where researchers engage with participants in one-on-one or group conversations. The aim is to gather insights into their experiences, preferences, and opinions to uncover patterns, trends, and data.

Field studies : this approach allows for a contextual understanding of behaviors, interactions, and processes in real-world settings. It involves the researcher immersing themselves in the field, conducting observations, interviews, or experiments to gather in-depth insights.

Card sorting : participants categorize information by sorting content cards into groups based on their perceived similarities. You might use this process to gain insights into participants’ mental models and preferences when navigating or organizing information on websites, apps, or other systems.

Focus groups : use organized discussions among select groups of participants to provide relevant views and experiences about a particular topic.

Diary studies : ask participants to record their experiences, thoughts, and activities in a diary over a specified period. This method provides a deeper understanding of user experiences, uncovers patterns, and identifies areas for improvement.

Five-second testing: participants are shown a design, such as a web page or interface, for just five seconds. They then answer questions about their initial impressions and recall, allowing you to evaluate the design’s effectiveness.

Surveys : get feedback from participant groups with structured surveys. You can use online forms, telephone interviews, or paper questionnaires to reveal trends, patterns, and correlations.

Tree testing : tree testing involves researching web assets through the lens of findability and navigability. Participants are given a textual representation of the site’s hierarchy (the “tree”) and asked to locate specific information or complete tasks by selecting paths.

Usability testing : ask participants to interact with a product, website, or application to evaluate its ease of use. This method enables you to uncover areas for improvement in digital key feature functionality by observing participants using the product.

Live website testing: research and collect analytics that outlines the design, usability, and performance efficiencies of a website in real time.

There are no limits to the number of research methods you could use within your project. Just make sure your research methods help you determine the following:

What do you plan to do with the research findings?

What decisions will this research inform? How can your stakeholders leverage the research data and results?

Recruit participants and allocate tasks

Next, identify the participants needed to complete the research and the resources required to complete the tasks. Different people will be proficient at different tasks, and having a task allocation plan will allow everything to run smoothly.

Prepare a thorough project summary

Every well-designed research plan will feature a project summary. This official summary will guide your research alongside its communications or messaging. You’ll use the summary while recruiting participants and during stakeholder meetings. It can also be useful when conducting field studies.

Ensure this summary includes all the elements of your research project . Separate the steps into an easily explainable piece of text that includes the following:

An introduction: the message you’ll deliver to participants about the interview, pre-planned questioning, and testing tasks.

Interview questions: prepare questions you intend to ask participants as part of your research study, guiding the sessions from start to finish.

An exit message: draft messaging your teams will use to conclude testing or survey sessions. These should include the next steps and express gratitude for the participant’s time.

Create a realistic timeline

While your project might already have a deadline or a results timeline in place, you’ll need to consider the time needed to execute it effectively.

Realistically outline the time needed to properly execute each supporting phase of research and implementation. And, as you evaluate the necessary schedules, be sure to include additional time for achieving each milestone in case any changes or unexpected delays arise.

For this part of your research plan, you might find it helpful to create visuals to ensure your research team and stakeholders fully understand the information.

Determine how to present your results

A research plan must also describe how you intend to present your results. Depending on the nature of your project and its goals, you might dedicate one team member (the PI) or assume responsibility for communicating the findings yourself.

In this part of the research plan, you’ll articulate how you’ll share the results. Detail any materials you’ll use, such as:

Presentations and slides

A project report booklet

A project findings pamphlet

Documents with key takeaways and statistics

Graphic visuals to support your findings

• Format your research plan

As you create your research plan, you can enjoy a little creative freedom. A plan can assume many forms, so format it how you see fit. Determine the best layout based on your specific project, intended communications, and the preferences of your teams and stakeholders.

Find format inspiration among the following layouts:

Written outlines

Narrative storytelling

Visual mapping

Graphic timelines

Remember, the research plan format you choose will be subject to change and adaptation as your research and findings unfold. However, your final format should ideally outline questions, problems, opportunities, and expectations.

• Research plan example

Imagine you’ve been tasked with finding out how to get more customers to order takeout from an online food delivery platform. The goal is to improve satisfaction and retain existing customers. You set out to discover why more people aren’t ordering and what it is they do want to order or experience. 

You identify the need for a research project that helps you understand what drives customer loyalty . But before you jump in and start calling past customers, you need to develop a research plan—the roadmap that provides focus, clarity, and realistic details to the project.

Here’s an example outline of a research plan you might put together:

Project title

Project members involved in the research plan

Purpose of the project (provide a summary of the research plan’s intent)

Objective 1 (provide a short description for each objective)

Objective 2

Objective 3

Proposed timeline

Audience (detail the group you want to research, such as customers or non-customers)

Budget (how much you think it might cost to do the research)

Risk factors/contingencies (any potential risk factors that may impact the project’s success)

Remember, your research plan doesn’t have to reinvent the wheel—it just needs to fit your project’s unique needs and aims.

Customizing a research plan template

Some companies offer research plan templates to help get you started. However, it may make more sense to develop your own customized plan template. Be sure to include the core elements of a great research plan with your template layout, including the following:

Introductions to participants and stakeholders

Background problems and needs statement

Significance, ethics, and purpose

Research methods, questions, and designs

Preliminary beliefs and expectations

Implications and intended outcomes

Realistic timelines for each phase

Conclusion and presentations

How many pages should a research plan be?

Generally, a research plan can vary in length between 500 to 1,500 words. This is roughly three pages of content. More substantial projects will be 2,000 to 3,500 words, taking up four to seven pages of planning documents.

What is the difference between a research plan and a research proposal?

A research plan is a roadmap to success for research teams. A research proposal, on the other hand, is a dissertation aimed at convincing or earning the support of others. Both are relevant in creating a guide to follow to complete a project goal.

What are the seven steps to developing a research plan?

While each research project is different, it’s best to follow these seven general steps to create your research plan:

Defining the problem

Identifying goals

Choosing research methods

Recruiting participants

Preparing the brief or summary

Establishing task timelines

Defining how you will present the findings

Should you be using a customer insights hub?

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 18 April 2023

Last updated: 27 February 2023

Last updated: 22 August 2024

Last updated: 5 February 2023

Last updated: 16 August 2024

Last updated: 9 March 2023

Last updated: 30 April 2024

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 4 July 2024

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next, log in or sign up.

Get started for free

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

• A Research Guide
• Research Paper Guide

How to Write a Research Plan

• Research plan definition
• Purpose of a research plan
• Research plan structure
• Step-by-step writing guide

Tips for creating a research plan

• Research plan examples

Research plan: definition and significance

What is the purpose of a research plan.

• Bridging gaps in the existing knowledge related to their subject.
• Reinforcing established research about their subject.
• Introducing insights that contribute to subject understanding.

Research plan structure & template

Introduction.

• What is the existing knowledge about the subject?
• What gaps remain unanswered?
• How will your research enrich understanding, practice, and policy?

Literature review

Expected results.

• Express how your research can challenge established theories in your field.
• Highlight how your work lays the groundwork for future research endeavors.
• Emphasize how your work can potentially address real-world problems.

5 Steps to crafting an effective research plan

Step 1: define the project purpose, step 2: select the research method, step 3: manage the task and timeline, step 4: write a summary, step 5: plan the result presentation.

• Brainstorm Collaboratively: Initiate a collective brainstorming session with peers or experts. Outline the essential questions that warrant exploration and answers within your research.
• Prioritize and Feasibility: Evaluate the list of questions and prioritize those that are achievable and important. Focus on questions that can realistically be addressed.
• Define Key Terminology: Define technical terms pertinent to your research, fostering a shared understanding. Ensure that terms like “church” or “unreached people group” are well-defined to prevent ambiguity.
• Organize your approach: Once well-acquainted with your institution’s regulations, organize each aspect of your research by these guidelines. Allocate appropriate word counts for different sections and components of your research paper.

Research plan example

• Writing a Research Paper
• Research Paper Title
• Research Paper Sources
• Research Paper Problem Statement
• Research Paper Thesis Statement
• Hypothesis for a Research Paper
• Research Question
• Research Paper Outline
• Research Paper Summary
• Research Paper Prospectus
• Research Paper Proposal
• Research Paper Format
• Research Paper Styles
• AMA Style Research Paper
• MLA Style Research Paper
• Chicago Style Research Paper
• APA Style Research Paper
• Research Paper Structure
• Research Paper Cover Page
• Research Paper Abstract
• Research Paper Introduction
• Research Paper Body Paragraph
• Research Paper Literature Review
• Research Paper Background
• Research Paper Methods Section
• Research Paper Results Section
• Research Paper Discussion Section
• Research Paper Conclusion
• Research Paper Appendix
• Research Paper Bibliography
• APA Reference Page
• Annotated Bibliography
• Bibliography vs Works Cited vs References Page
• Research Paper Types
• What is Qualitative Research

Receive paper in 3 Hours!

• Choose the number of pages.
• Select your deadline.
• Complete your order.

Number of Pages

550 words (double spaced)

Deadline: 10 days left

By clicking "Log In", you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We'll occasionally send you account related and promo emails.

Sign Up for your FREE account

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

Published on October 12, 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George. Revised on September 5, 2024.

A research proposal describes what you will investigate, why it’s important, and how you will conduct your research.

The format of a research proposal varies between fields, but most proposals will contain at least these elements:

Introduction

Literature review.

• Research design

Reference list

While the sections may vary, the overall objective is always the same. A research proposal serves as a blueprint and guide for your research plan, helping you get organized and feel confident in the path forward you choose to take.

Table of contents

Research proposal purpose, research proposal examples, research design and methods, contribution to knowledge, research schedule, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research proposals.

Academics often have to write research proposals to get funding for their projects. As a student, you might have to write a research proposal as part of a grad school application , or prior to starting your thesis or dissertation .

In addition to helping you figure out what your research can look like, a proposal can also serve to demonstrate why your project is worth pursuing to a funder, educational institution, or supervisor.

Research proposal length

The length of a research proposal can vary quite a bit. A bachelor’s or master’s thesis proposal can be just a few pages, while proposals for PhD dissertations or research funding are usually much longer and more detailed. Your supervisor can help you determine the best length for your work.

One trick to get started is to think of your proposal’s structure as a shorter version of your thesis or dissertation , only without the results , conclusion and discussion sections.

Download our research proposal template

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below.

• Example research proposal #1: “A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management”
• Example research proposal #2: “Medical Students as Mediators of Change in Tobacco Use”

Like your dissertation or thesis, the proposal will usually have a title page that includes:

• The proposed title of your project
• Your supervisor’s name
• Your institution and department

The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project. Make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why.

Your introduction should:

• Introduce your topic
• Give necessary background and context
• Outline your  problem statement  and research questions

To guide your introduction , include information about:

• Who could have an interest in the topic (e.g., scientists, policymakers)
• How much is already known about the topic
• What is missing from this current knowledge
• What new insights your research will contribute
• Why you believe this research is worth doing

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

As you get started, it’s important to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review  shows your reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said, but rather using existing research as a jumping-off point for your own.

In this section, share exactly how your project will contribute to ongoing conversations in the field by:

• Comparing and contrasting the main theories, methods, and debates
• Examining the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches
• Explaining how will you build on, challenge, or synthesize prior scholarship

Following the literature review, restate your main  objectives . This brings the focus back to your own project. Next, your research design or methodology section will describe your overall approach, and the practical steps you will take to answer your research questions.

To finish your proposal on a strong note, explore the potential implications of your research for your field. Emphasize again what you aim to contribute and why it matters.

For example, your results might have implications for:

• Improving best practices
• Informing policymaking decisions
• Strengthening a theory or model
• Challenging popular or scientific beliefs
• Creating a basis for future research

Last but not least, your research proposal must include correct citations for every source you have used, compiled in a reference list . To create citations quickly and easily, you can use our free APA citation generator .

Some institutions or funders require a detailed timeline of the project, asking you to forecast what you will do at each stage and how long it may take. While not always required, be sure to check the requirements of your project.

Here’s an example schedule to help you get started. You can also download a template at the button below.

Download our research schedule template

If you are applying for research funding, chances are you will have to include a detailed budget. This shows your estimates of how much each part of your project will cost.

Make sure to check what type of costs the funding body will agree to cover. For each item, include:

• Cost : exactly how much money do you need?
• Justification : why is this cost necessary to complete the research?
• Source : how did you calculate the amount?

To determine your budget, think about:

• Travel costs : do you need to go somewhere to collect your data? How will you get there, and how much time will you need? What will you do there (e.g., interviews, archival research)?
• Materials : do you need access to any tools or technologies?
• Help : do you need to hire any research assistants for the project? What will they do, and how much will you pay them?

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

A PhD, which is short for philosophiae doctor (doctor of philosophy in Latin), is the highest university degree that can be obtained. In a PhD, students spend 3–5 years writing a dissertation , which aims to make a significant, original contribution to current knowledge.

A PhD is intended to prepare students for a career as a researcher, whether that be in academia, the public sector, or the private sector.

A master’s is a 1- or 2-year graduate degree that can prepare you for a variety of careers.

All master’s involve graduate-level coursework. Some are research-intensive and intend to prepare students for further study in a PhD; these usually require their students to write a master’s thesis . Others focus on professional training for a specific career.

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

The best way to remember the difference between a research plan and a research proposal is that they have fundamentally different audiences. A research plan helps you, the researcher, organize your thoughts. On the other hand, a dissertation proposal or research proposal aims to convince others (e.g., a supervisor, a funding body, or a dissertation committee) that your research topic is relevant and worthy of being conducted.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. & George, T. (2024, September 05). How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved September 18, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-proposal/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

FLEET LIBRARY | Research Guides

Rhode island school of design, create a research plan: research plan.

• Research Plan
• Literature Review
• Ulrich's Global Serials Directory
• Related Guides

A research plan is a framework that shows how you intend to approach your topic. The plan can take many forms: a written outline, a narrative, a visual/concept map or timeline. It's a document that will change and develop as you conduct your research. Components of a research plan

1. Research conceptualization - introduces your research question

2. Research methodology - describes your approach to the research question

3. Literature review, critical evaluation and synthesis - systematic approach to locating,

    reviewing and evaluating the work (text, exhibitions, critiques, etc) relating to your topic

4. Communication - geared toward an intended audience, shows evidence of your inquiry

Research conceptualization refers to the ability to identify specific research questions, problems or opportunities that are worthy of inquiry. Research conceptualization also includes the skills and discipline that go beyond the initial moment of conception, and which enable the researcher to formulate and develop an idea into something researchable ( Newbury 373).

Research methodology refers to the knowledge and skills required to select and apply appropriate methods to carry through the research project ( Newbury 374) .

Method describes a single mode of proceeding; methodology describes the overall process.

Method - a way of doing anything especially according to a defined and regular plan; a mode of procedure in any activity

Methodology - the study of the direction and implications of empirical research, or the sustainability of techniques employed in it; a method or body of methods used in a particular field of study or activity *Browse a list of research methodology books  or this guide on Art & Design Research

Literature Review, critical evaluation & synthesis

A literature review is a systematic approach to locating, reviewing, and evaluating the published work and work in progress of scholars, researchers, and practitioners on a given topic.

Critical evaluation and synthesis is the ability to handle (or process) existing sources. It includes knowledge of the sources of literature and contextual research field within which the person is working ( Newbury 373).

Literature reviews are done for many reasons and situations. Here's a short list:

Sources to consult while conducting a literature review:

Online catalogs of local, regional, national, and special libraries

meta-catalogs such as worldcat , Art Discovery Group , europeana , world digital library or RIBA

subject-specific online article databases (such as the Avery Index, JSTOR, Project Muse)

digital institutional repositories such as Digital Commons @RISD ; see Registry of Open Access Repositories

Open Access Resources recommended by RISD Research LIbrarians

works cited in scholarly books and articles

print bibliographies

the internet-locate major nonprofit, research institutes, museum, university, and government websites

search google scholar to locate grey literature & referenced citations

trade and scholarly publishers

fellow scholars and peers

Communication                              

Communication refers to the ability to

• structure a coherent line of inquiry
• communicate your findings to your intended audience
• make skilled use of visual material to express ideas for presentations, writing, and the creation of exhibitions ( Newbury 374)

Research plan framework: Newbury, Darren. "Research Training in the Creative Arts and Design." The Routledge Companion to Research in the Arts . Ed. Michael Biggs and Henrik Karlsson. New York: Routledge, 2010. 368-87. Print.

About the author

Except where otherwise noted, this guide is subject to a Creative Commons Attribution license

source document

  Routledge Companion to Research in the Arts

• Next: Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Sep 7, 2024 3:56 PM
• URL: https://risd.libguides.com/researchplan

How to Write a Research Plan

Your answers to these questions form your research strategy. Most likely, you’ve addressed some of these issues in your proposal. But you are further along now, and you can flesh out your answers. With your instructor’s help, you should make some basic decisions about what information to collect and what methods to use in analyzing it. You will probably develop this research strategy gradually and, if you are like the rest of us, you will make some changes, large and small, along the way. Still, it is useful to devise a general plan early, even though you will modify it as you progress. Develop a tentative research plan early in the project. Write it down and share it with your instructor. The more concrete and detailed the plan, the better the feedback you’ll get.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

This research plan does not need to be elaborate or time-consuming. Like your working bibliography, it is provisional, a work in progress. Still, it is helpful to write it down since it will clarify a number of issues for you and your professor.

Writing a Research Plan

To write out your research plan, begin by restating your main thesis question and any secondary ones. They may have changed a bit since your original proposal. If these questions bear on a particular theory or analytic perspective, state that briefly. In the social sciences, for example, two or three prominent theories might offer different predictions about your subject. If so, then you might want to explore these differences in your thesis and explain why some theories work better (or worse) in this particular case. Likewise, in the humanities, you might consider how different theories offer different insights and contrasting perspectives on the particular novel or film you are studying. If you intend to explore these differences, state your goal clearly in the research plan so you can discuss it later with your professor. Next, turn to the heart of this exercise, your proposed research strategy. Try to explain your basic approach, the materials you will use, and your method of analysis. You may not know all of these elements yet, but do the best you can. Briefly say how and why you think they will help answer your main questions.

Be concrete. What data will you collect? Which poems will you read? Which paintings will you compare? Which historical cases will you examine? If you plan to use case studies, say whether you have already selected them or settled on the criteria for choosing them. Have you decided which documents and secondary sources are most important? Do you have easy access to the data, documents, or other materials you need? Are they reliable sources—the best information you can get on the subject? Give the answers if you have them, or say plainly that you don’t know so your instructor can help. You should also discuss whether your research requires any special skills and, of course, whether you have them. You can—and should—tailor your work to fit your skills.

If you expect to challenge other approaches—an important element of some theses—which ones will you take on, and why? This last point can be put another way: Your project will be informed by some theoretical traditions and research perspectives and not others. Your research will be stronger if you clarify your own perspective and show how it usefully informs your work. Later, you may also enter the jousts and explain why your approach is superior to the alternatives, in this particular study and perhaps more generally. Your research plan should state these issues clearly so you can discuss them candidly and think them through.

If you plan to conduct tests, experiments, or surveys, discuss them, too. They are common research tools in many fields, from psychology and education to public health. Now is the time to spell out the details—the ones you have nailed down tight and the ones that are still rattling around, unresolved. It’s important to bring up the right questions here, even if you don’t have all the answers yet. Raising these questions directly is the best way to get the answers. What kinds of tests or experiments do you plan, and how will you measure the results? How will you recruit your test subjects, and how many will be included in your sample? What test instruments or observational techniques will you use? How reliable and valid are they? Your instructor can be a great source of feedback here.

Your research plan should say:

• What materials you will use
• What methods you will use to investigate them
• Whether your work follow a particular approach or theory

There are also ethical issues to consider. They crop up in any research involving humans or animals. You need to think carefully about them, underscore potential problems, and discuss them with your professor. You also need to clear this research in advance with the appropriate authorities at your school, such as the committee that reviews proposals for research on human subjects.

Not all these issues and questions will bear on your particular project. But some do, and you should wrestle with them as you begin research. Even if your answers are tentative, you will still gain from writing them down and sharing them with your instructor. That’s how you will get the most comprehensive advice, the most pointed recommendations. If some of these issues puzzle you, or if you have already encountered some obstacles, share them, too, so you can either resolve the problems or find ways to work around them.

Remember, your research plan is simply a working product, designed to guide your ongoing inquiry. It’s not a final paper for a grade; it’s a step toward your final paper. Your goal in sketching it out now is to understand these issues better and get feedback from faculty early in the project. It may be a pain to write it out, but it’s a minor sting compared to major surgery later.

Checklist for Conducting Research

• Familiarize yourself with major questions and debates about your topic.
• Is appropriate to your topic;
• Addresses the main questions you propose in your thesis;
• Relies on materials to which you have access;
• Can be accomplished within the time available;
• Uses skills you have or can acquire.
• Divide your topic into smaller projects and do research on each in turn.
• Write informally as you do research; do not postpone this prewriting until all your research is complete.

Back to How To Write A Research Paper .

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research process
• How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

Published on 30 October 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George. Revised on 13 June 2023.

A research proposal describes what you will investigate, why it’s important, and how you will conduct your research.

The format of a research proposal varies between fields, but most proposals will contain at least these elements:

Introduction

Literature review.

• Research design

Reference list

While the sections may vary, the overall objective is always the same. A research proposal serves as a blueprint and guide for your research plan, helping you get organised and feel confident in the path forward you choose to take.

Table of contents

Research proposal purpose, research proposal examples, research design and methods, contribution to knowledge, research schedule, frequently asked questions.

Academics often have to write research proposals to get funding for their projects. As a student, you might have to write a research proposal as part of a grad school application , or prior to starting your thesis or dissertation .

In addition to helping you figure out what your research can look like, a proposal can also serve to demonstrate why your project is worth pursuing to a funder, educational institution, or supervisor.

Research proposal length

The length of a research proposal can vary quite a bit. A bachelor’s or master’s thesis proposal can be just a few pages, while proposals for PhD dissertations or research funding are usually much longer and more detailed. Your supervisor can help you determine the best length for your work.

One trick to get started is to think of your proposal’s structure as a shorter version of your thesis or dissertation , only without the results , conclusion and discussion sections.

Download our research proposal template

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below.

• Example research proposal #1: ‘A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management’
• Example research proposal #2: ‘ Medical Students as Mediators of Change in Tobacco Use’

Like your dissertation or thesis, the proposal will usually have a title page that includes:

• The proposed title of your project
• Your supervisor’s name
• Your institution and department

The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project. Make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why.

Your introduction should:

• Introduce your topic
• Give necessary background and context
• Outline your  problem statement  and research questions

To guide your introduction , include information about:

• Who could have an interest in the topic (e.g., scientists, policymakers)
• How much is already known about the topic
• What is missing from this current knowledge
• What new insights your research will contribute
• Why you believe this research is worth doing

As you get started, it’s important to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review  shows your reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said, but rather using existing research as a jumping-off point for your own.

In this section, share exactly how your project will contribute to ongoing conversations in the field by:

• Comparing and contrasting the main theories, methods, and debates
• Examining the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches
• Explaining how will you build on, challenge, or synthesise prior scholarship

Following the literature review, restate your main  objectives . This brings the focus back to your own project. Next, your research design or methodology section will describe your overall approach, and the practical steps you will take to answer your research questions.

To finish your proposal on a strong note, explore the potential implications of your research for your field. Emphasise again what you aim to contribute and why it matters.

For example, your results might have implications for:

• Improving best practices
• Informing policymaking decisions
• Strengthening a theory or model
• Challenging popular or scientific beliefs
• Creating a basis for future research

Last but not least, your research proposal must include correct citations for every source you have used, compiled in a reference list . To create citations quickly and easily, you can use our free APA citation generator .

Some institutions or funders require a detailed timeline of the project, asking you to forecast what you will do at each stage and how long it may take. While not always required, be sure to check the requirements of your project.

Here’s an example schedule to help you get started. You can also download a template at the button below.

Download our research schedule template

If you are applying for research funding, chances are you will have to include a detailed budget. This shows your estimates of how much each part of your project will cost.

Make sure to check what type of costs the funding body will agree to cover. For each item, include:

• Cost : exactly how much money do you need?
• Justification : why is this cost necessary to complete the research?
• Source : how did you calculate the amount?

To determine your budget, think about:

• Travel costs : do you need to go somewhere to collect your data? How will you get there, and how much time will you need? What will you do there (e.g., interviews, archival research)?
• Materials : do you need access to any tools or technologies?
• Help : do you need to hire any research assistants for the project? What will they do, and how much will you pay them?

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement.

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

A PhD, which is short for philosophiae doctor (doctor of philosophy in Latin), is the highest university degree that can be obtained. In a PhD, students spend 3–5 years writing a dissertation , which aims to make a significant, original contribution to current knowledge.

A PhD is intended to prepare students for a career as a researcher, whether that be in academia, the public sector, or the private sector.

A master’s is a 1- or 2-year graduate degree that can prepare you for a variety of careers.

All master’s involve graduate-level coursework. Some are research-intensive and intend to prepare students for further study in a PhD; these usually require their students to write a master’s thesis . Others focus on professional training for a specific career.

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. & George, T. (2023, June 13). How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved 18 September 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/the-research-process/research-proposal-explained/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, what is a literature review | guide, template, & examples, how to write a results section | tips & examples.

• Privacy Policy

Home » How To Write A Research Proposal – Step-by-Step [Template]

How To Write A Research Proposal – Step-by-Step [Template]

Table of Contents

How To Write a Research Proposal

Writing a Research proposal involves several steps to ensure a well-structured and comprehensive document. Here is an explanation of each step:

1. Title and Abstract

• Choose a concise and descriptive title that reflects the essence of your research.
• Write an abstract summarizing your research question, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes. It should provide a brief overview of your proposal.

2. Introduction:

• Provide an introduction to your research topic, highlighting its significance and relevance.
• Clearly state the research problem or question you aim to address.
• Discuss the background and context of the study, including previous research in the field.

3. Research Objectives

• Outline the specific objectives or aims of your research. These objectives should be clear, achievable, and aligned with the research problem.

4. Literature Review:

• Conduct a comprehensive review of relevant literature and studies related to your research topic.
• Summarize key findings, identify gaps, and highlight how your research will contribute to the existing knowledge.

5. Methodology:

• Describe the research design and methodology you plan to employ to address your research objectives.
• Explain the data collection methods, instruments, and analysis techniques you will use.
• Justify why the chosen methods are appropriate and suitable for your research.

6. Timeline:

• Create a timeline or schedule that outlines the major milestones and activities of your research project.
• Break down the research process into smaller tasks and estimate the time required for each task.

7. Resources:

• Identify the resources needed for your research, such as access to specific databases, equipment, or funding.
• Explain how you will acquire or utilize these resources to carry out your research effectively.

8. Ethical Considerations:

• Discuss any ethical issues that may arise during your research and explain how you plan to address them.
• If your research involves human subjects, explain how you will ensure their informed consent and privacy.

9. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

• Clearly state the expected outcomes or results of your research.
• Highlight the potential impact and significance of your research in advancing knowledge or addressing practical issues.

10. References:

• Provide a list of all the references cited in your proposal, following a consistent citation style (e.g., APA, MLA).

11. Appendices:

• Include any additional supporting materials, such as survey questionnaires, interview guides, or data analysis plans.

Research Proposal Format

The format of a research proposal may vary depending on the specific requirements of the institution or funding agency. However, the following is a commonly used format for a research proposal:

1. Title Page:

• Include the title of your research proposal, your name, your affiliation or institution, and the date.

2. Abstract:

• Provide a brief summary of your research proposal, highlighting the research problem, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes.

3. Introduction:

• Introduce the research topic and provide background information.
• State the research problem or question you aim to address.
• Explain the significance and relevance of the research.
• Review relevant literature and studies related to your research topic.
• Summarize key findings and identify gaps in the existing knowledge.
• Explain how your research will contribute to filling those gaps.

5. Research Objectives:

• Clearly state the specific objectives or aims of your research.
• Ensure that the objectives are clear, focused, and aligned with the research problem.

6. Methodology:

• Describe the research design and methodology you plan to use.
• Explain the data collection methods, instruments, and analysis techniques.
• Justify why the chosen methods are appropriate for your research.

7. Timeline:

8. Resources:

• Explain how you will acquire or utilize these resources effectively.

9. Ethical Considerations:

• If applicable, explain how you will ensure informed consent and protect the privacy of research participants.

10. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

11. References:

12. Appendices:

Research Proposal Template

Here’s a template for a research proposal:

1. Introduction:

2. Literature Review:

3. Research Objectives:

4. Methodology:

5. Timeline:

6. Resources:

7. Ethical Considerations:

8. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

9. References:

10. Appendices:

Research Proposal Sample

Title: The Impact of Online Education on Student Learning Outcomes: A Comparative Study

1. Introduction

Online education has gained significant prominence in recent years, especially due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This research proposal aims to investigate the impact of online education on student learning outcomes by comparing them with traditional face-to-face instruction. The study will explore various aspects of online education, such as instructional methods, student engagement, and academic performance, to provide insights into the effectiveness of online learning.

2. Objectives

The main objectives of this research are as follows:

• To compare student learning outcomes between online and traditional face-to-face education.
• To examine the factors influencing student engagement in online learning environments.
• To assess the effectiveness of different instructional methods employed in online education.
• To identify challenges and opportunities associated with online education and suggest recommendations for improvement.

3. Methodology

3.1 Study Design

This research will utilize a mixed-methods approach to gather both quantitative and qualitative data. The study will include the following components:

3.2 Participants

The research will involve undergraduate students from two universities, one offering online education and the other providing face-to-face instruction. A total of 500 students (250 from each university) will be selected randomly to participate in the study.

3.3 Data Collection

The research will employ the following data collection methods:

• Quantitative: Pre- and post-assessments will be conducted to measure students’ learning outcomes. Data on student demographics and academic performance will also be collected from university records.
• Qualitative: Focus group discussions and individual interviews will be conducted with students to gather their perceptions and experiences regarding online education.

3.4 Data Analysis

Quantitative data will be analyzed using statistical software, employing descriptive statistics, t-tests, and regression analysis. Qualitative data will be transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically to identify recurring patterns and themes.

4. Ethical Considerations

The study will adhere to ethical guidelines, ensuring the privacy and confidentiality of participants. Informed consent will be obtained, and participants will have the right to withdraw from the study at any time.

5. Significance and Expected Outcomes

This research will contribute to the existing literature by providing empirical evidence on the impact of online education on student learning outcomes. The findings will help educational institutions and policymakers make informed decisions about incorporating online learning methods and improving the quality of online education. Moreover, the study will identify potential challenges and opportunities related to online education and offer recommendations for enhancing student engagement and overall learning outcomes.

6. Timeline

The proposed research will be conducted over a period of 12 months, including data collection, analysis, and report writing.

The estimated budget for this research includes expenses related to data collection, software licenses, participant compensation, and research assistance. A detailed budget breakdown will be provided in the final research plan.

8. Conclusion

This research proposal aims to investigate the impact of online education on student learning outcomes through a comparative study with traditional face-to-face instruction. By exploring various dimensions of online education, this research will provide valuable insights into the effectiveness and challenges associated with online learning. The findings will contribute to the ongoing discourse on educational practices and help shape future strategies for maximizing student learning outcomes in online education settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Business Proposal – Templates, Examples and Guide

Proposal – Types, Examples, and Writing Guide

Grant Proposal – Example, Template and Guide

How To Write A Business Proposal – Step-by-Step...

Research Proposal – Types, Template and Example

How To Write A Grant Proposal – Step-by-Step...

What (Exactly) Is A Research Proposal?

A simple explainer with examples + free template.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2020 (Updated April 2023)

Whether you’re nearing the end of your degree and your dissertation is on the horizon, or you’re planning to apply for a PhD program, chances are you’ll need to craft a convincing research proposal . If you’re on this page, you’re probably unsure exactly what the research proposal is all about. Well, you’ve come to the right place.

Overview: Research Proposal Basics

• What a research proposal is
• What a research proposal needs to cover
• How to structure your research proposal
• Example /sample proposals
• Proposal writing FAQs
• Key takeaways & additional resources

What is a research proposal?

Simply put, a research proposal is a structured, formal document that explains what you plan to research (your research topic), why it’s worth researching (your justification), and how  you plan to investigate it (your methodology). 

The purpose of the research proposal (its job, so to speak) is to convince  your research supervisor, committee or university that your research is  suitable  (for the requirements of the degree program) and  manageable  (given the time and resource constraints you will face). 

The most important word here is “ convince ” – in other words, your research proposal needs to  sell  your research idea (to whoever is going to approve it). If it doesn’t convince them (of its suitability and manageability), you’ll need to revise and resubmit . This will cost you valuable time, which will either delay the start of your research or eat into its time allowance (which is bad news). 

What goes into a research proposal?

A good dissertation or thesis proposal needs to cover the “ what “, “ why ” and” how ” of the proposed study. Let’s look at each of these attributes in a little more detail:

Your proposal needs to clearly articulate your research topic . This needs to be specific and unambiguous . Your research topic should make it clear exactly what you plan to research and in what context. Here’s an example of a well-articulated research topic:

An investigation into the factors which impact female Generation Y consumer’s likelihood to promote a specific makeup brand to their peers: a British context

As you can see, this topic is extremely clear. From this one line we can see exactly:

• What’s being investigated – factors that make people promote or advocate for a brand of a specific makeup brand
• Who it involves – female Gen-Y consumers
• In what context – the United Kingdom

So, make sure that your research proposal provides a detailed explanation of your research topic . If possible, also briefly outline your research aims and objectives , and perhaps even your research questions (although in some cases you’ll only develop these at a later stage). Needless to say, don’t start writing your proposal until you have a clear topic in mind , or you’ll end up waffling and your research proposal will suffer as a result of this.

Need a helping hand?

As we touched on earlier, it’s not good enough to simply propose a research topic – you need to justify why your topic is original . In other words, what makes it  unique ? What gap in the current literature does it fill? If it’s simply a rehash of the existing research, it’s probably not going to get approval – it needs to be fresh.

But,  originality  alone is not enough. Once you’ve ticked that box, you also need to justify why your proposed topic is  important . In other words, what value will it add to the world if you achieve your research aims?

As an example, let’s look at the sample research topic we mentioned earlier (factors impacting brand advocacy). In this case, if the research could uncover relevant factors, these findings would be very useful to marketers in the cosmetics industry, and would, therefore, have commercial value . That is a clear justification for the research.

So, when you’re crafting your research proposal, remember that it’s not enough for a topic to simply be unique. It needs to be useful and value-creating – and you need to convey that value in your proposal. If you’re struggling to find a research topic that makes the cut, watch  our video covering how to find a research topic .

It’s all good and well to have a great topic that’s original and valuable, but you’re not going to convince anyone to approve it without discussing the practicalities – in other words:

• How will you actually undertake your research (i.e., your methodology)?
• Is your research methodology appropriate given your research aims?
• Is your approach manageable given your constraints (time, money, etc.)?

While it’s generally not expected that you’ll have a fully fleshed-out methodology at the proposal stage, you’ll likely still need to provide a high-level overview of your research methodology . Here are some important questions you’ll need to address in your research proposal:

• Will you take a qualitative , quantitative or mixed -method approach?
• What sampling strategy will you adopt?
• How will you collect your data (e.g., interviews , surveys, etc)?
• How will you analyse your data (e.g., descriptive and inferential statistics , content analysis, discourse analysis, etc, .)?
• What potential limitations will your methodology carry?

So, be sure to give some thought to the practicalities of your research and have at least a basic methodological plan before you start writing up your proposal. If this all sounds rather intimidating, the video below provides a good introduction to research methodology and the key choices you’ll need to make.

How To Structure A Research Proposal

Now that we’ve covered the key points that need to be addressed in a proposal, you may be wondering, “ But how is a research proposal structured? “.

While the exact structure and format required for a research proposal differs from university to university, there are four “essential ingredients” that commonly make up the structure of a research proposal:

• A rich introduction and background to the proposed research
• An initial literature review covering the existing research
• An overview of the proposed research methodology
• A discussion regarding the practicalities (project plans, timelines, etc.)

In the video below, we unpack each of these four sections, step by step.

Research Proposal Examples/Samples

In the video below, we provide a detailed walkthrough of two successful research proposals (Master’s and PhD-level), as well as our popular free proposal template.

Proposal Writing FAQs

How long should a research proposal be.

This varies tremendously, depending on the university, the field of study (e.g., social sciences vs natural sciences), and the level of the degree (e.g. undergraduate, Masters or PhD) – so it’s always best to check with your university what their specific requirements are before you start planning your proposal.

As a rough guide, a formal research proposal at Masters-level often ranges between 2000-3000 words, while a PhD-level proposal can be far more detailed, ranging from 5000-8000 words. In some cases, a rough outline of the topic is all that’s needed, while in other cases, universities expect a very detailed proposal that essentially forms the first three chapters of the dissertation or thesis.

The takeaway – be sure to check with your institution before you start writing.

How do I choose a topic for my research proposal?

Finding a good research topic is a process that involves multiple steps. We cover the topic ideation process in this video post.

How do I write a literature review for my proposal?

While you typically won’t need a comprehensive literature review at the proposal stage, you still need to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the key literature and are able to synthesise it. We explain the literature review process here.

How do I create a timeline and budget for my proposal?

We explain how to craft a project plan/timeline and budget in Research Proposal Bootcamp .

Which referencing format should I use in my research proposal?

The expectations and requirements regarding formatting and referencing vary from institution to institution. Therefore, you’ll need to check this information with your university.

What common proposal writing mistakes do I need to look out for?

We’ve create a video post about some of the most common mistakes students make when writing a proposal – you can access that here . If you’re short on time, here’s a quick summary:

• The research topic is too broad (or just poorly articulated).
• The research aims, objectives and questions don’t align.
• The research topic is not well justified.
• The study has a weak theoretical foundation.
• The research design is not well articulated well enough.
• Poor writing and sloppy presentation.
• Poor project planning and risk management.
• Not following the university’s specific criteria.

Key Takeaways & Additional Resources

As you write up your research proposal, remember the all-important core purpose:  to convince . Your research proposal needs to sell your study in terms of suitability and viability. So, focus on crafting a convincing narrative to ensure a strong proposal.

At the same time, pay close attention to your university’s requirements. While we’ve covered the essentials here, every institution has its own set of expectations and it’s essential that you follow these to maximise your chances of approval.

By the way, we’ve got plenty more resources to help you fast-track your research proposal. Here are some of our most popular resources to get you started:

• Proposal Writing 101 : A Introductory Webinar
• Research Proposal Bootcamp : The Ultimate Online Course
• Template : A basic template to help you craft your proposal

If you’re looking for 1-on-1 support with your research proposal, be sure to check out our private coaching service , where we hold your hand through the proposal development process (and the entire research journey), step by step.

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Research Proposal Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

52 Comments

I truly enjoyed this video, as it was eye-opening to what I have to do in the preparation of preparing a Research proposal.

I would be interested in getting some coaching.

I real appreciate on your elaboration on how to develop research proposal,the video explains each steps clearly.

Thank you for the video. It really assisted me and my niece. I am a PhD candidate and she is an undergraduate student. It is at times, very difficult to guide a family member but with this video, my job is done.

In view of the above, I welcome more coaching.

Wonderful guidelines, thanks

This is very helpful. Would love to continue even as I prepare for starting my masters next year.

Thanks for the work done, the text was helpful to me

Bundle of thanks to you for the research proposal guide it was really good and useful if it is possible please send me the sample of research proposal

You’re most welcome. We don’t have any research proposals that we can share (the students own the intellectual property), but you might find our research proposal template useful: https://gradcoach.com/research-proposal-template/

Cheruiyot Moses Kipyegon

Thanks alot. It was an eye opener that came timely enough before my imminent proposal defense. Thanks, again

thank you very much your lesson is very interested may God be with you

I am an undergraduate student (First Degree) preparing to write my project,this video and explanation had shed more light to me thanks for your efforts keep it up.

Very useful. I am grateful.

this is a very a good guidance on research proposal, for sure i have learnt something

Wonderful guidelines for writing a research proposal, I am a student of m.phil( education), this guideline is suitable for me. Thanks

You’re welcome 🙂

Thank you, this was so helpful.

A really great and insightful video. It opened my eyes as to how to write a research paper. I would like to receive more guidance for writing my research paper from your esteemed faculty.

Thank you, great insights

Thank you, great insights, thank you so much, feeling edified

Wow thank you, great insights, thanks a lot

Thank you. This is a great insight. I am a student preparing for a PhD program. I am requested to write my Research Proposal as part of what I am required to submit before my unconditional admission. I am grateful having listened to this video which will go a long way in helping me to actually choose a topic of interest and not just any topic as well as to narrow down the topic and be specific about it. I indeed need more of this especially as am trying to choose a topic suitable for a DBA am about embarking on. Thank you once more. The video is indeed helpful.

Have learnt a lot just at the right time. Thank you so much.

thank you very much ,because have learn a lot things concerning research proposal and be blessed u for your time that you providing to help us

Hi. For my MSc medical education research, please evaluate this topic for me: Training Needs Assessment of Faculty in Medical Training Institutions in Kericho and Bomet Counties

I have really learnt a lot based on research proposal and it’s formulation

Thank you. I learn much from the proposal since it is applied

Your effort is much appreciated – you have good articulation.

You have good articulation.

I do applaud your simplified method of explaining the subject matter, which indeed has broaden my understanding of the subject matter. Definitely this would enable me writing a sellable research proposal.

This really helping

Great! I liked your tutoring on how to find a research topic and how to write a research proposal. Precise and concise. Thank you very much. Will certainly share this with my students. Research made simple indeed.

Thank you very much. I an now assist my students effectively.

Thank you very much. I can now assist my students effectively.

I need any research proposal

Thank you for these videos. I will need chapter by chapter assistance in writing my MSc dissertation

Very helpfull

the videos are very good and straight forward

thanks so much for this wonderful presentations, i really enjoyed it to the fullest wish to learn more from you

Thank you very much. I learned a lot from your lecture.

I really enjoy the in-depth knowledge on research proposal you have given. me. You have indeed broaden my understanding and skills. Thank you

interesting session this has equipped me with knowledge as i head for exams in an hour’s time, am sure i get A++

This article was most informative and easy to understand. I now have a good idea of how to write my research proposal.

Thank you very much.

Wow, this literature is very resourceful and interesting to read. I enjoyed it and I intend reading it every now then.

Thank you for the clarity

Thank you. Very helpful.

Thank you very much for this essential piece. I need 1o1 coaching, unfortunately, your service is not available in my country. Anyways, a very important eye-opener. I really enjoyed it. A thumb up to Gradcoach

What is JAM? Please explain.

Thank you so much for these videos. They are extremely helpful! God bless!

very very wonderful…

thank you for the video but i need a written example

So far , So good!

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Write Your Research Plan

In this part, we give you detailed information about writing an effective Research Plan. We start with the importance and parameters of significance and innovation.

We then discuss how to focus the Research Plan, relying on the iterative process described in the Iterative Approach to Application Planning Checklist shown at Draft Specific Aims  and give you advice for filling out the forms.

You'll also learn the importance of having a well-organized, visually appealing application that avoids common missteps and the importance of preparing your just-in-time information early.

While this document is geared toward the basic research project grant, the R01, much of it is useful for other grant types.

Table of Contents

Research plan overview and your approach, craft a title, explain your aims, research strategy instructions, advice for a successful research strategy, graphics and video, significance, innovation, and approach, tracking for your budget, preliminary studies or progress report, referencing publications, review and finalize your research plan, abstract and narrative.

Your application's Research Plan has two sections:

• Specific Aims —a one-page statement of your objectives for the project.
• Research Strategy —a description of the rationale for your research and your experiments in 12 pages for an R01.

In your Specific Aims, you note the significance and innovation of your research; then list your two to three concrete objectives, your aims.

Your Research Strategy is the nuts and bolts of your application, where you describe your research rationale and the experiments you will conduct to accomplish each aim. Though how you organize it is largely up to you, NIH expects you to follow these guidelines.

• Organize using bold headers or an outline or numbering system—or both—that you use consistently throughout.
• Start each section with the appropriate header: Significance, Innovation, or Approach.
• Organize the Approach section around your Specific Aims.

Format of Your Research Plan

To write the Research Plan, you don't need the application forms. Write the text in your word processor, turn it into a PDF file, and upload it into the application form when it's final.

Because NIH may return your application if it doesn't meet all requirements, be sure to follow the rules for font, page limits, and more. Read the instructions at NIH’s Format Attachments .

For an R01, the Research Strategy can be up to 12 pages, plus one page for Specific Aims. Don't pad other sections with information that belongs in the Research Plan. NIH is on the lookout and may return your application to you if you try to evade page limits.

Follow Examples

As you read this page, look at our Sample Applications and More  to see some of the different strategies successful PIs use to create an outstanding Research Plan.

Keeping It All In Sync

Writing in a logical sequence will save you time.

Information you put in the Research Plan affects just about every other application part. You'll need to keep everything in sync as your plans evolve during the writing phase.

It's best to consider your writing as an iterative process. As you develop and finalize your experiments, you will go back and check other parts of the application to make sure everything is in sync: the "who, what, when, where, and how (much money)" as well as look again at the scope of your plans.

In that vein, writing in a logical sequence is a good approach that will save you time. We suggest proceeding in the following order:

• Create a provisional title.
• Write a draft of your Specific Aims.
• Start with your Significance and Innovation sections.
• Then draft the Approach section considering the personnel and skills you'll need for each step.
• Evaluate your Specific Aims and methods in light of your expected budget (for a new PI, it should be modest, probably under the $250,000 for NIH's modular budget).
• As you design experiments, reevaluate your hypothesis, aims, and title to make sure they still reflect your plans.
• Prepare your Abstract (a summary of your Specific Aims).
• Complete the other forms.

Even the smaller sections of your application need to be well-organized and readable so reviewers can readily grasp the information. If writing is not your forte, get help.

To view writing strategies for successful applications, see our Sample Applications and More . There are many ways to create a great application, so explore your options.

Within the character limit, include the important information to distinguish your project within the research area, your project's goals, and the research problem.

Giving your project a title at the outset can help you stay focused and avoid a meandering Research Plan. So you may want to launch your writing by creating a well-defined title.

NIH gives you a 200 character limit, but don’t feel obliged to use all of that allotment. Instead, we advise you to keep the title as succinct as possible while including the important information to distinguish your project within the research area. Make your title reflect your project's goals, the problem your project addresses, and possibly your approach to studying it. Make your title specific: saying you are studying lymphocyte trafficking is not informative enough.

For examples of strong titles, see our Sample Applications and More .

After you write a preliminary title, check that

• My title is specific, indicating at least the research area and the goals of my project.
• It is 200 characters or less.
• I use as simple language as possible.
• I state the research problem and, possibly, my approach to studying it.
• I use a different title for each of my applications. (Note: there are exceptions, for example, for a renewal—see Apply for Renewal  for details.)
• My title has appropriate keywords.

Later you may want to change your initial title. That's fine—at this point, it's just an aid to keep your plans focused.

Since all your reviewers read your Specific Aims, you want to excite them about your project.

If testing your hypothesis is the destination for your research, your Research Plan is the map that takes you there.

You'll start by writing the smaller part, the Specific Aims. Think of the one-page Specific Aims as a capsule of your Research Plan. Since all your reviewers read your Specific Aims, you want to excite them about your project.

For more on crafting your Specific Aims, see Draft Specific Aims .

Write a Narrative

Use at least half the page to provide the rationale and significance of your planned research. A good way to start is with a sentence that states your project's goals.

For the rest of the narrative, you will describe the significance of your research, and give your rationale for choosing the project. In some cases, you may want to explain why you did not take an alternative route.

Then, briefly describe your aims, and show how they build on your preliminary studies and your previous research. State your hypothesis.

If it is likely your application will be reviewed by a study section with broad expertise, summarize the status of research in your field and explain how your project fits in.

In the narrative part of the Specific Aims of many outstanding applications, people also used their aims to

• State the technologies they plan to use.
• Note their expertise to do a specific task or that of collaborators.
• Describe past accomplishments related to the project.
• Describe preliminary studies and new and highly relevant findings in the field.
• Explain their area's biology.
• Show how the aims relate to one another.
• Describe expected outcomes for each aim.
• Explain how they plan to interpret data from the aim’s efforts.
• Describe how to address potential pitfalls with contingency plans.

Depending on your situation, decide which items are important for you. For example, a new investigator would likely want to highlight preliminary data and qualifications to do the work.

Many people use bold or italics to emphasize items they want to bring to the reviewers' attention, such as the hypothesis or rationale.

Detail Your Aims

After the narrative, enter your aims as bold bullets, or stand-alone or run-on headers.

• State your plans using strong verbs like identify, define, quantify, establish, determine.
• Describe each aim in one to three sentences.
• Consider adding bullets under each aim to refine your objectives.

How focused should your aims be? Look at the example below.

Spot the Sample

Read the Specific Aims of the Application from Drs. Li and Samulski , "Enhance AAV Liver Transduction with Capsid Immune Evasion."

• Aim 1. Study the effect of adeno-associated virus (AAV) empty particles on AAV capsid antigen cross-presentation in vivo .
• Aim 2. Investigate AAV capsid antigen presentation following administration of AAV mutants and/or proteasome inhibitors for enhanced liver transduction in vivo .
• Aim 3. Isolate AAV chimeric capsids with human hepatocyte tropism and the capacity for cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL) evasion.

After finishing the draft Specific Aims, check that

• I keep to the one-page limit.
• Each of my two or three aims is a narrowly focused, concrete objective I can achieve during the grant.
• They give a clear picture of how my project can generate knowledge that may improve human health.
• They show my project's importance to science, how it addresses a critical research opportunity that can move my field forward.
• My text states how my work is innovative.
• I describe the biology to the extent needed for my reviewers.
• I give a rationale for choosing the topic and approach.
• I tie the project to my preliminary data and other new findings in the field.
• I explicitly state my hypothesis and why testing it is important.
• My aims can test my hypothesis and are logical.
• I can design and lead the execution of two or three sets of experiments that will strive to accomplish each aim.
• As much as possible, I use language that an educated person without expertise can understand.
• My text has bullets, bolding, or headers so reviewers can easily spot my aims (and other key items).

For each element listed above, analyze your text and revise it until your Specific Aims hit all the key points you'd like to make.

After the list of aims, some people add a closing paragraph, emphasizing the significance of the work, their collaborators, or whatever else they want to focus reviewers' attention on.

Your Research Strategy is the bigger part of your application's Research Plan (the other part is the Specific Aims—discussed above.)

The Research Strategy is the nuts and bolts of your application, describing the rationale for your research and the experiments you will do to accomplish each aim. It is structured as follows:

• Significance
• You can either include this information as a subsection of Approach or integrate it into any or all of the three main sections.
• If you do the latter, be sure to mark the information clearly, for example, with a bold subhead.
• Possible other sections, for example, human subjects, vertebrate animals, select agents, and others (these do not count toward the page limit).

Though how you organize your application is largely up to you, NIH does want you to follow these guidelines:

• Add bold headers or an outlining or numbering system—or both—that you use consistently throughout.
• Start each of the Research Strategy's sections with a header: Significance, Innovation, and Approach.

For an R01, the Research Strategy is limited to 12 pages for the three main sections and the preliminary studies only. Other items are not included in the page limit.

Find instructions for R01s in the SF 424 Application Guide—go to NIH's SF 424 (R&R) Application and Electronic Submission Information for the generic SF 424 Application Guide or find it in your notice of funding opportunity (NOFO).

For most applications, you need to address Rigor and Reproducibility by describing the experimental design and methods you propose and how they will achieve robust and unbiased results. The requirement applies to research grant, career development, fellowship, and training applications.

If you're responding to an institute-specific program announcement (PA) (not a parent program announcement) or a request for applications (RFA), check the NIH Guide notice, which has additional information you need. Should it differ from the NOFO, go with the NIH Guide .

Also note that your application must meet the initiative's objectives and special requirements. NIAID program staff will check your application, and if it is not responsive to the announcement, your application will be returned to you without a review.

When writing your Research Strategy, your goal is to present a well-organized, visually appealing, and readable description of your proposed project. That means your writing should be streamlined and organized so your reviewers can readily grasp the information. If writing is not your forte, get help.

There are many ways to create an outstanding Research Plan, so explore your options.

What Success Looks Like

Your application's Research Plan is the map that shows your reviewers how you plan to test your hypothesis.

It not only lays out your experiments and expected outcomes, but must also convince your reviewers of your likely success by allaying any doubts that may cross their minds that you will be able to conduct the research.

Notice in the sample applications how the writing keeps reviewers' eyes on the ball by bringing them back to the main points the PIs want to make. Write yourself an insurance policy against human fallibility: if it's a key point, repeat it, then repeat it again.

The Big Three

So as you write, put the big picture squarely in your sights. When reviewers read your application, they'll look for the answers to three basic questions:

• Can your research move your field forward?
• Is the field important—will progress make a difference to human health?
• Can you and your team carry out the work?

Add Emphasis

Savvy PIs create opportunities to drive their main points home. They don't stop at the Significance section to emphasize their project's importance, and they look beyond their biosketches to highlight their team's expertise.

Don't take a chance your reviewer will gloss over that one critical sentence buried somewhere in your Research Strategy or elsewhere. Write yourself an insurance policy against human fallibility: if it's a key point, repeat it, then repeat it again.

Add more emphasis by putting the text in bold, or bold italics (in the modern age, we skip underlining—it's for typewriters).

Here are more strategies from our successful PIs:

• While describing a method in the Approach section, they state their or collaborators' experience with it.
• They point out that they have access to a necessary piece of equipment.
• When explaining their field and the status of current research, they weave in their own work and their preliminary data.
• They delve into the biology of the area to make sure reviewers will grasp the importance of their research and understand their field and how their work fits into it.

You can see many of these principles at work in the Approach section of the Application from Dr. William Faubion , "Inflammatory cascades disrupt Treg function through epigenetic mechanisms."

• Reviewers felt that the experiments described for Aim 1 will yield clear results.
• The plans to translate those findings to gene targets of relevance are well outlined and focused.
• He ties his proposed experiments to the larger picture, including past research and strong preliminary data for the current application. 

Anticipate Reviewer Questions

Our applicants not only wrote with their reviewers in mind they seemed to anticipate their questions. You may think: how can I anticipate all the questions people may have? Of course you can't, but there are some basic items (in addition to the "big three" listed above) that will surely be on your reviewers' minds:

• Will the investigators be able to get the work done within the project period, or is the proposed work over ambitious?
• Did the PI describe potential pitfalls and possible alternatives?
• Will the experiments generate meaningful data?
• Could the resulting data prove the hypothesis?
• Are others already doing the work, or has it been already completed?

Address these questions; then spend time thinking about more potential issues specific to you and your research—and address those too.

For applications, a picture can truly be worth a thousand words. Graphics can illustrate complex information in a small space and add visual interest to your application.

Look at our sample applications to see how the investigators included schematics, tables, illustrations, graphs, and other types of graphics to enhance their applications.

Consider adding a timetable or flowchart to illustrate your experimental plan, including decision trees with alternative experimental pathways to help your reviewers understand your plans.

Plan Ahead for Video

If you plan to send one or more videos, you'll need to meet certain standards and include key information in your Research Strategy now.

To present some concepts or demonstrations, video may enhance your application beyond what graphics alone can achieve. However, you can't count on all reviewers being able to see or hear video, so you'll want to be strategic in how you incorporate it into your application.

Be reviewer-friendly. Help your cause by taking the following steps:

• Caption any narration in the video.
• Choose evocative still images from your video to accompany your summary.
• Write your summary of the video carefully so the text would make sense even without the video.

In addition to those considerations, create your videos to fit NIH’s technical requirements. Learn more in the SF 424 Form Instructions .

Next, as you write your Research Strategy, include key images from the video and a brief description.

Then, state in your cover letter that you plan to send video later. (Don't attach your files to the application.)

After you apply and get assignment information from the Commons, ask your assigned scientific review officer (SRO) how your business official should send the files. Your video files are due at least one month before the peer review meeting.

Know Your Audience's Perspective

The primary audience for your application is your peer review group. Learn how to write for the reviewers who are experts in your field and those who are experts in other fields by reading Know Your Audience .

Be Organized: A B C or 1 2 3?

In the top-notch applications we reviewed, organization ruled but followed few rules. While you want to be organized, how you go about it is up to you.

Nevertheless, here are some principles to follow:

• Start each of the Research Strategy's sections with a header: Significance, Innovation, and Approach—this you must do.

The Research Strategy's page limit—12 for R01s—is for the three main parts: Significance, Innovation, and Approach and your preliminary studies (or a progress report if you're renewing your grant). Other sections, for example, research animals or select agents, do not have a page limit.

Although you will emphasize your project's significance throughout the application, the Significance section should give the most details. Don't skimp—the farther removed your reviewers are from your field, the more information you'll need to provide on basic biology, importance of the area, research opportunities, and new findings.

When you describe your project's significance, put it in the context of 1) the state of your field, 2) your long-term research plans, and 3) your preliminary data.

In our Sample Applications , you can see that both investigators and reviewers made a case for the importance of the research to improving human health as well as to the scientific field.

Look at the Significance section of the Application from Dr. Mengxi Jiang , "Intersection of polyomavirus infection and host cellular responses," to see how these elements combine to make a strong case for significance.

• Dr. Jiang starts with a summary of the field of polyomavirus research, identifying critical knowledge gaps in the field.
• The application ties the lab's previous discoveries and new research plans to filling those gaps, establishing the significance with context.
• Note the use of formatting, whitespace, and sectioning to highlight key points and make it easier for reviewers to read the text.

After conveying the significance of the research in several parts of the application, check that

• In the Significance section, I describe the importance of my hypothesis to the field (especially if my reviewers are not in it) and human disease.
• I also point out the project's significance throughout the application.
• The application shows that I am aware of opportunities, gaps, roadblocks, and research underway in my field.
• I state how my research will advance my field, highlighting knowledge gaps and showing how my project fills one or more of them.
• Based on my scan of the review committee roster, I determine whether I cannot assume my reviewers will know my field and provide some information on basic biology, the importance of the area, knowledge gaps, and new findings.

If you are either a new PI or entering a new area: be cautious about seeming too innovative. Not only is innovation just one of five review criteria, but there might be a paradigm shift in your area of science. A reviewer may take a challenge to the status quo as a challenge to his or her world view.

When you look at our sample applications, you see that both the new and experienced investigators are not generally shifting paradigms. They are using new approaches or models, working in new areas, or testing innovative ideas.

After finishing the draft innovation section, check that

• I show how my proposed research is new and unique, e.g., explores new scientific avenues, has a novel hypothesis, will create new knowledge.
• Most likely, I explain how my project's research can refine, improve, or propose a new application of an existing concept or method.
• Make a very strong case for challenging the existing paradigm.
• Have data to support the innovative approach.
• Have strong evidence that I can do the work.

In your Approach, you spell out a few sets of experiments to address each aim. As we noted above, it's a good idea to restate the key points you've made about your project's significance, its place in your field, and your long-term goals.

You're probably wondering how much detail to include.

If you look at our sample applications as a guide, you can see very different approaches. Though people generally used less detail than you'd see in a scientific paper, they do include some experimental detail.

Expect your assigned reviewers to scrutinize your approach: they will want to know what you plan to do and how you plan to do it.

NIH data show that of the peer review criteria, approach has the highest correlation with the overall impact score.

Look at the Application from Dr. Mengxi Jiang , "Intersection of polyomavirus infection and host cellular responses," to see how a new investigator handled the Approach section.

For an example of an experienced investigator's well-received Approach section, see the Application from Dr. William Faubion , "Inflammatory cascades disrupt Treg function through epigenetic mechanisms."

Especially if you are a new investigator, you need enough detail to convince reviewers that you understand what you are undertaking and can handle the method.

• Cite a publication that shows you can handle the method where you can, but give more details if you and your team don't have a proven record using the method—and state explicitly why you think you will succeed.
• If space is short, you could also focus on experiments that highlight your expertise or are especially interesting. For experiments that are pedestrian or contracted out, just list the method.

Be sure to lay out a plan for alternative experiments and approaches in case you get negative or surprising results. Show reviewers you have a plan for spending the four or five years you will be funded no matter where the experiments lead.

See the Application from Drs. Li and Samulski , "Enhance AAV Liver Transduction with Capsid Immune Evasion," for a strong Approach section covering potential. As an example, see section C.1.3.'s alternative approaches.

Here are some pointers for organizing your Approach:

• Enter a bold header for each Specific Aim.
• Under each aim, describe the first set of experiments.
• If you get result X, you will follow pathway X; if you get result Y, you will follow pathway Y.
• Consider illustrating this with a flowchart.

Trim the fat—omit all information not needed to make your case. If you try to wow reviewers with your knowledge, they'll find flaws and penalize you heavily. Don't give them ammunition by including anything you don't need.

As you design your experiments, keep a running tab of the following essential data on a separate piece of paper:

• Who. A list of people who will help you for your Key Personnel section later.
• What. A list of equipment and supplies for the experiments you plan.
• Time. Notes on how long each step takes. Timing directly affects your budget as well as how many Specific Aims you can realistically achieve.

Jotting this information down will help you Create a Budget and complete other sections later.

After finishing a draft Approach section, check that

• I include enough background and preliminary data to give reviewers the context and significance of my plans.
• They can test the hypothesis (or hypotheses).
• I show alternative experiments and approaches in case I get negative or surprising results.
• My experiments can yield meaningful data to test my hypothesis (or hypotheses).
• As a new investigator, I include enough detail to convince reviewers I understand and can handle a method. I reviewed the sample applications to see how much detail to use.
• If I or my team has experience with a method, I cite it; otherwise I include enough details to convince reviewers we can handle it.
• I describe the results I anticipate and their implications.
• I omit all information not needed to state my case.
• I keep track of and explain who will do what, what they will do, when and where they will do it, how long it will take, and how much money it will cost.
• My timeline shows when I expect to complete my aims.

If you are applying for a new application, include preliminary studies; for a renewal or a revision (a competing supplement to an existing grant), prepare a progress report instead.

Describing Preliminary Studies

Your preliminary studies show that you can handle the methods and interpret results. Here's where you build reviewer confidence that you are headed in the right direction by pursuing research that builds on your accomplishments.

Reviewers use your preliminary studies together with the biosketches to assess the investigator review criterion, which reflects the competence of the research team.

Give alternative interpretations to your data to show reviewers you've thought through problems in-depth and are prepared to meet future challenges. If you don't do this, the reviewers will!

Though you may include other people's publications, focus on your preliminary data or unpublished data from your lab and the labs of your team members as much as you can.

As we noted above, you can put your preliminary data anywhere in the Research Strategy that you feel is appropriate, but just make sure your reviewers will be able to distinguish it. Alternatively, you can create a separate section with its own header.

Including a Progress Report

If you are applying for a renewal or a revision (a competing supplement to an existing grant), prepare a progress report instead of preliminary studies.

Create a header so your program officer can easily find it and include the following information:

• Project period beginning and end dates.
• Summary of the importance of your findings in relation to your Specific Aims.
• Account of published and unpublished results, highlighting your progress toward achieving your Specific Aims.

Note: if you submit a renewal application before the due date of your progress report, you do not need to submit a separate progress report for your grant. However, you will need to submit it, if your renewal is not funded.

After finishing the draft, check that

• I interpret my preliminary results critically.
• There is enough information to show I know what I'm talking about.
• If my project is complex, I give more preliminary studies.
• I show how my previous experience prepared me for the new project.
• It's clear which data are mine and which are not.

References show your breadth of knowledge of the field. If you leave out an important work, reviewers may assume you're not aware of it.

Throughout your application, you will reference all relevant publications for the concepts underlying your research and your methods.

Read more about your Bibliography and References Cited at Add a Bibliography and Appendix .

• Throughout my application I cite the literature thoroughly but not excessively, adding citations for all references important to my work.
• I cite all papers important to my field, including those from potential reviewers.
• I include fewer than 100 citations (if possible).
• My Bibliography and References Cited form lists all my references.
• I refer to unpublished work, including information I learned through personal contacts.
• If I do not describe a method, I add a reference to the literature.

Look over what you've written with a critical eye of a reviewer to identify potential questions or weak spots.

Enlist others to do that too—they can look at your application with a fresh eye. Include people who aren't familiar with your research to make sure you can get your point across to someone outside your field.

As you finalize the details of your Research Strategy, you will also need to return to your Specific Aims to see if you must revise. See Draft Specific Aims .

After you finish your Research Plan, you are ready to write your Abstract (called Project Summary/Abstract) and Project Narrative, which are attachments to the Other Project Information form.

These sections may be small, but they're important.

• All your peer reviewers read your Abstract and narrative.
• Staff and automated systems in NIH's Center for Scientific Review use them to decide where to assign your application, even if you requested an institute and study section.
• They show the importance and health relevance of your research to members of the public and Congress who are interested in what NIH is funding with taxpayer dollars.

Be sure to omit confidential or proprietary information in these sections! When your application is funded, NIH enters your title and Abstract in the public RePORTER database.

Think brief and simple: to the extent that you can, write these sections in lay language, and include appropriate keywords, e.g., immunotherapy, genetic risk factors.

As NIH referral officers use these parts to direct your application to an institute for possible funding, your description can influence the choice they make.

Write a succinct summary of your project that both a scientist and a lay person can understand (to the extent that you can).

• Use your Specific Aims as a template—shorten it and simplify the language.
• In the first sentence, state the significance of your research to your field and relevance to NIAID's mission: to better understand, treat, and prevent infectious, immunologic, and allergic diseases.
• Next state your hypothesis and the innovative potential of your research.
• Then list and briefly describe your Specific Aims and long-term objectives.

In your Project Narrative, you have only a few sentences to drive home your project's potential to improve public health.

Check out these effective Abstracts and Narratives from our R01  Sample Applications :

• Application from Dr. Mengxi Jiang , "Intersection of polyomavirus infection and host cellular responses"
• Application from Dr. William Faubion , "Inflammatory cascades disrupt Treg function through epigenetic mechanisms"
• My Project Summary/Abstract and Project Narrative (and title) are accessible to a broad audience.
• They describe the significance of my research to my field and state my hypothesis, my aims, and the innovative potential of my research.
• My narrative describes my project's potential to improve public health.
• I do not include any confidential or proprietary information.
• I do not use graphs or images.
• My Abstract has keywords that are appropriate and distinct enough to avoid confusion with other terms.
• My title is specific and informative.

Previous Step

Have questions.

A program officer in your area of science can give you application advice, NIAID's perspective on your research, and confirmation that your proposed research fits within NIAID’s mission.

Find contacts and instructions at When to Contact an NIAID Program Officer .

How to Write a Research Proposal: (with Examples & Templates)

Table of Contents

Before conducting a study, a research proposal should be created that outlines researchers’ plans and methodology and is submitted to the concerned evaluating organization or person. Creating a research proposal is an important step to ensure that researchers are on track and are moving forward as intended. A research proposal can be defined as a detailed plan or blueprint for the proposed research that you intend to undertake. It provides readers with a snapshot of your project by describing what you will investigate, why it is needed, and how you will conduct the research.  

Your research proposal should aim to explain to the readers why your research is relevant and original, that you understand the context and current scenario in the field, have the appropriate resources to conduct the research, and that the research is feasible given the usual constraints.  

This article will describe in detail the purpose and typical structure of a research proposal , along with examples and templates to help you ace this step in your research journey.  

What is a Research Proposal ?  

A research proposal¹ ,²  can be defined as a formal report that describes your proposed research, its objectives, methodology, implications, and other important details. Research proposals are the framework of your research and are used to obtain approvals or grants to conduct the study from various committees or organizations. Consequently, research proposals should convince readers of your study’s credibility, accuracy, achievability, practicality, and reproducibility.   

With research proposals , researchers usually aim to persuade the readers, funding agencies, educational institutions, and supervisors to approve the proposal. To achieve this, the report should be well structured with the objectives written in clear, understandable language devoid of jargon. A well-organized research proposal conveys to the readers or evaluators that the writer has thought out the research plan meticulously and has the resources to ensure timely completion.  

Purpose of Research Proposals  

A research proposal is a sales pitch and therefore should be detailed enough to convince your readers, who could be supervisors, ethics committees, universities, etc., that what you’re proposing has merit and is feasible . Research proposals can help students discuss their dissertation with their faculty or fulfill course requirements and also help researchers obtain funding. A well-structured proposal instills confidence among readers about your ability to conduct and complete the study as proposed.  

Research proposals can be written for several reasons:³  

• To describe the importance of research in the specific topic  
• Address any potential challenges you may encounter  
• Showcase knowledge in the field and your ability to conduct a study  
• Apply for a role at a research institute  
• Convince a research supervisor or university that your research can satisfy the requirements of a degree program  
• Highlight the importance of your research to organizations that may sponsor your project  
• Identify implications of your project and how it can benefit the audience  

What Goes in a Research Proposal?    

Research proposals should aim to answer the three basic questions—what, why, and how.  

The What question should be answered by describing the specific subject being researched. It should typically include the objectives, the cohort details, and the location or setting.  

The Why question should be answered by describing the existing scenario of the subject, listing unanswered questions, identifying gaps in the existing research, and describing how your study can address these gaps, along with the implications and significance.  

The How question should be answered by describing the proposed research methodology, data analysis tools expected to be used, and other details to describe your proposed methodology.   

Research Proposal Example  

Here is a research proposal sample template (with examples) from the University of Rochester Medical Center. 4 The sections in all research proposals are essentially the same although different terminology and other specific sections may be used depending on the subject.  

Structure of a Research Proposal  

If you want to know how to make a research proposal impactful, include the following components:¹  

1. Introduction  

This section provides a background of the study, including the research topic, what is already known about it and the gaps, and the significance of the proposed research.  

2. Literature review  

This section contains descriptions of all the previous relevant studies pertaining to the research topic. Every study cited should be described in a few sentences, starting with the general studies to the more specific ones. This section builds on the understanding gained by readers in the Introduction section and supports it by citing relevant prior literature, indicating to readers that you have thoroughly researched your subject.  

3. Objectives  

Once the background and gaps in the research topic have been established, authors must now state the aims of the research clearly. Hypotheses should be mentioned here. This section further helps readers understand what your study’s specific goals are.  

4. Research design and methodology  

Here, authors should clearly describe the methods they intend to use to achieve their proposed objectives. Important components of this section include the population and sample size, data collection and analysis methods and duration, statistical analysis software, measures to avoid bias (randomization, blinding), etc.  

5. Ethical considerations  

This refers to the protection of participants’ rights, such as the right to privacy, right to confidentiality, etc. Researchers need to obtain informed consent and institutional review approval by the required authorities and mention this clearly for transparency.  

6. Budget/funding  

Researchers should prepare their budget and include all expected expenditures. An additional allowance for contingencies such as delays should also be factored in.  

7. Appendices  

This section typically includes information that supports the research proposal and may include informed consent forms, questionnaires, participant information, measurement tools, etc.  

8. Citations  

Important Tips for Writing a Research Proposal  

Writing a research proposal begins much before the actual task of writing. Planning the research proposal structure and content is an important stage, which if done efficiently, can help you seamlessly transition into the writing stage. 3,5  

The Planning Stage  

• Manage your time efficiently. Plan to have the draft version ready at least two weeks before your deadline and the final version at least two to three days before the deadline.
• What is the primary objective of your research?  
• Will your research address any existing gap?  
• What is the impact of your proposed research?  
• Do people outside your field find your research applicable in other areas?  
• If your research is unsuccessful, would there still be other useful research outcomes?  

  The Writing Stage  

• Create an outline with main section headings that are typically used.  
• Focus only on writing and getting your points across without worrying about the format of the research proposal , grammar, punctuation, etc. These can be fixed during the subsequent passes. Add details to each section heading you created in the beginning.   
• Ensure your sentences are concise and use plain language. A research proposal usually contains about 2,000 to 4,000 words or four to seven pages.  
• Don’t use too many technical terms and abbreviations assuming that the readers would know them. Define the abbreviations and technical terms.  
• Ensure that the entire content is readable. Avoid using long paragraphs because they affect the continuity in reading. Break them into shorter paragraphs and introduce some white space for readability.  
• Focus on only the major research issues and cite sources accordingly. Don’t include generic information or their sources in the literature review.  
• Proofread your final document to ensure there are no grammatical errors so readers can enjoy a seamless, uninterrupted read.  
• Use academic, scholarly language because it brings formality into a document.  
• Ensure that your title is created using the keywords in the document and is neither too long and specific nor too short and general.  
• Cite all sources appropriately to avoid plagiarism.  
• Make sure that you follow guidelines, if provided. This includes rules as simple as using a specific font or a hyphen or en dash between numerical ranges.  
• Ensure that you’ve answered all questions requested by the evaluating authority.  

Key Takeaways   

Here’s a summary of the main points about research proposals discussed in the previous sections:  

• A research proposal is a document that outlines the details of a proposed study and is created by researchers to submit to evaluators who could be research institutions, universities, faculty, etc.  
• Research proposals are usually about 2,000-4,000 words long, but this depends on the evaluating authority’s guidelines.  
• A good research proposal ensures that you’ve done your background research and assessed the feasibility of the research.  
• Research proposals have the following main sections—introduction, literature review, objectives, methodology, ethical considerations, and budget.  

Frequently Asked Questions  

Q1. How is a research proposal evaluated?  

A1. In general, most evaluators, including universities, broadly use the following criteria to evaluate research proposals . 6  

• Significance —Does the research address any important subject or issue, which may or may not be specific to the evaluator or university?  
• Content and design —Is the proposed methodology appropriate to answer the research question? Are the objectives clear and well aligned with the proposed methodology?  
• Sample size and selection —Is the target population or cohort size clearly mentioned? Is the sampling process used to select participants randomized, appropriate, and free of bias?  
• Timing —Are the proposed data collection dates mentioned clearly? Is the project feasible given the specified resources and timeline?  
• Data management and dissemination —Who will have access to the data? What is the plan for data analysis?  

Q2. What is the difference between the Introduction and Literature Review sections in a research proposal ?  

A2. The Introduction or Background section in a research proposal sets the context of the study by describing the current scenario of the subject and identifying the gaps and need for the research. A Literature Review, on the other hand, provides references to all prior relevant literature to help corroborate the gaps identified and the research need.  

Q3. How long should a research proposal be?  

A3. Research proposal lengths vary with the evaluating authority like universities or committees and also the subject. Here’s a table that lists the typical research proposal lengths for a few universities.  

Q4. What are the common mistakes to avoid in a research proposal ?  

A4. Here are a few common mistakes that you must avoid while writing a research proposal . 7  

• No clear objectives: Objectives should be clear, specific, and measurable for the easy understanding among readers.  
• Incomplete or unconvincing background research: Background research usually includes a review of the current scenario of the particular industry and also a review of the previous literature on the subject. This helps readers understand your reasons for undertaking this research because you identified gaps in the existing research.  
• Overlooking project feasibility: The project scope and estimates should be realistic considering the resources and time available.   
• Neglecting the impact and significance of the study: In a research proposal , readers and evaluators look for the implications or significance of your research and how it contributes to the existing research. This information should always be included.  
• Unstructured format of a research proposal : A well-structured document gives confidence to evaluators that you have read the guidelines carefully and are well organized in your approach, consequently affirming that you will be able to undertake the research as mentioned in your proposal.  
• Ineffective writing style: The language used should be formal and grammatically correct. If required, editors could be consulted, including AI-based tools such as Paperpal , to refine the research proposal structure and language.  

Thus, a research proposal is an essential document that can help you promote your research and secure funds and grants for conducting your research. Consequently, it should be well written in clear language and include all essential details to convince the evaluators of your ability to conduct the research as proposed.  

This article has described all the important components of a research proposal and has also provided tips to improve your writing style. We hope all these tips will help you write a well-structured research proposal to ensure receipt of grants or any other purpose.  

References  

• Sudheesh K, Duggappa DR, Nethra SS. How to write a research proposal? Indian J Anaesth. 2016;60(9):631-634. Accessed July 15, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5037942/  
• Writing research proposals. Harvard College Office of Undergraduate Research and Fellowships. Harvard University. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://uraf.harvard.edu/apply-opportunities/app-components/essays/research-proposals  
• What is a research proposal? Plus how to write one. Indeed website. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/research-proposal  
• Research proposal template. University of Rochester Medical Center. Accessed July 16, 2024. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/MediaLibraries/URMCMedia/pediatrics/research/documents/Research-proposal-Template.pdf  
• Tips for successful proposal writing. Johns Hopkins University. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://research.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Tips-for-Successful-Proposal-Writing.pdf  
• Formal review of research proposals. Cornell University. Accessed July 18, 2024. https://irp.dpb.cornell.edu/surveys/survey-assessment-review-group/research-proposals  
• 7 Mistakes you must avoid in your research proposal. Aveksana (via LinkedIn). Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/7-mistakes-you-must-avoid-your-research-proposal-aveksana-cmtwf/  

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

How to write a phd research proposal.

• What are the Benefits of Generative AI for Academic Writing?
• How to Avoid Plagiarism When Using Generative AI Tools
• What is Hedging in Academic Writing?  

How to Write Your Research Paper in APA Format

The future of academia: how ai tools are changing the way we do research, you may also like, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., research funding basics: what should a grant proposal..., how to write an abstract in research papers..., how to write dissertation acknowledgements.

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

The goal of a research proposal is twofold: to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. The design elements and procedures for conducting research are governed by standards of the predominant discipline in which the problem resides, therefore, the guidelines for research proposals are more exacting and less formal than a general project proposal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews. They must provide persuasive evidence that a need exists for the proposed study. In addition to providing a rationale, a proposal describes detailed methodology for conducting the research consistent with requirements of the professional or academic field and a statement on anticipated outcomes and benefits derived from the study's completion.

Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005.

How to Approach Writing a Research Proposal

Your professor may assign the task of writing a research proposal for the following reasons:

• Develop your skills in thinking about and designing a comprehensive research study;
• Learn how to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature to determine that the research problem has not been adequately addressed or has been answered ineffectively and, in so doing, become better at locating pertinent scholarship related to your topic;
• Improve your general research and writing skills;
• Practice identifying the logical steps that must be taken to accomplish one's research goals;
• Critically review, examine, and consider the use of different methods for gathering and analyzing data related to the research problem; and,
• Nurture a sense of inquisitiveness within yourself and to help see yourself as an active participant in the process of conducting scholarly research.

A proposal should contain all the key elements involved in designing a completed research study, with sufficient information that allows readers to assess the validity and usefulness of your proposed study. The only elements missing from a research proposal are the findings of the study and your analysis of those findings. Finally, an effective proposal is judged on the quality of your writing and, therefore, it is important that your proposal is coherent, clear, and compelling.

Regardless of the research problem you are investigating and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the following questions:

• What do you plan to accomplish? Be clear and succinct in defining the research problem and what it is you are proposing to investigate.
• Why do you want to do the research? In addition to detailing your research design, you also must conduct a thorough review of the literature and provide convincing evidence that it is a topic worthy of in-depth study. A successful research proposal must answer the "So What?" question.
• How are you going to conduct the research? Be sure that what you propose is doable. If you're having difficulty formulating a research problem to propose investigating, go here for strategies in developing a problem to study.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Failure to be concise . A research proposal must be focused and not be "all over the map" or diverge into unrelated tangents without a clear sense of purpose.
• Failure to cite landmark works in your literature review . Proposals should be grounded in foundational research that lays a foundation for understanding the development and scope of the the topic and its relevance.
• Failure to delimit the contextual scope of your research [e.g., time, place, people, etc.]. As with any research paper, your proposed study must inform the reader how and in what ways the study will frame the problem.
• Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research . This is critical. In many workplace settings, the research proposal is a formal document intended to argue for why a study should be funded.
• Sloppy or imprecise writing, or poor grammar . Although a research proposal does not represent a completed research study, there is still an expectation that it is well-written and follows the style and rules of good academic writing.
• Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues . Your proposal should focus on only a few key research questions in order to support the argument that the research needs to be conducted. Minor issues, even if valid, can be mentioned but they should not dominate the overall narrative.

Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal.  The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Sanford, Keith. Information for Students: Writing a Research Proposal. Baylor University; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences, Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Structure and Writing Style

Beginning the Proposal Process

As with writing most college-level academic papers, research proposals are generally organized the same way throughout most social science disciplines. The text of proposals generally vary in length between ten and thirty-five pages, followed by the list of references. However, before you begin, read the assignment carefully and, if anything seems unclear, ask your professor whether there are any specific requirements for organizing and writing the proposal.

A good place to begin is to ask yourself a series of questions:

• What do I want to study?
• Why is the topic important?
• How is it significant within the subject areas covered in my class?
• What problems will it help solve?
• How does it build upon [and hopefully go beyond] research already conducted on the topic?
• What exactly should I plan to do, and can I get it done in the time available?

In general, a compelling research proposal should document your knowledge of the topic and demonstrate your enthusiasm for conducting the study. Approach it with the intention of leaving your readers feeling like, "Wow, that's an exciting idea and I can’t wait to see how it turns out!"

Most proposals should include the following sections:

I.  Introduction

In the real world of higher education, a research proposal is most often written by scholars seeking grant funding for a research project or it's the first step in getting approval to write a doctoral dissertation. Even if this is just a course assignment, treat your introduction as the initial pitch of an idea based on a thorough examination of the significance of a research problem. After reading the introduction, your readers should not only have an understanding of what you want to do, but they should also be able to gain a sense of your passion for the topic and to be excited about the study's possible outcomes. Note that most proposals do not include an abstract [summary] before the introduction.

Think about your introduction as a narrative written in two to four paragraphs that succinctly answers the following four questions :

• What is the central research problem?
• What is the topic of study related to that research problem?
• What methods should be used to analyze the research problem?
• Answer the "So What?" question by explaining why this is important research, what is its significance, and why should someone reading the proposal care about the outcomes of the proposed study?

II.  Background and Significance

This is where you explain the scope and context of your proposal and describe in detail why it's important. It can be melded into your introduction or you can create a separate section to help with the organization and narrative flow of your proposal. Approach writing this section with the thought that you can’t assume your readers will know as much about the research problem as you do. Note that this section is not an essay going over everything you have learned about the topic; instead, you must choose what is most relevant in explaining the aims of your research.

To that end, while there are no prescribed rules for establishing the significance of your proposed study, you should attempt to address some or all of the following:

• State the research problem and give a more detailed explanation about the purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction. This is particularly important if the problem is complex or multifaceted .
• Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing; be sure to answer the "So What? question [i.e., why should anyone care?].
• Describe the major issues or problems examined by your research. This can be in the form of questions to be addressed. Be sure to note how your proposed study builds on previous assumptions about the research problem.
• Explain the methods you plan to use for conducting your research. Clearly identify the key sources you intend to use and explain how they will contribute to your analysis of the topic.
• Describe the boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a clear focus. Where appropriate, state not only what you plan to study, but what aspects of the research problem will be excluded from the study.
• If necessary, provide definitions of key concepts, theories, or terms.

III.  Literature Review

Connected to the background and significance of your study is a section of your proposal devoted to a more deliberate review and synthesis of prior studies related to the research problem under investigation . The purpose here is to place your project within the larger whole of what is currently being explored, while at the same time, demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. Think about what questions other researchers have asked, what methodological approaches they have used, and what is your understanding of their findings and, when stated, their recommendations. Also pay attention to any suggestions for further research.

Since a literature review is information dense, it is crucial that this section is intelligently structured to enable a reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your proposed study in relation to the arguments put forth by other researchers. A good strategy is to break the literature into "conceptual categories" [themes] rather than systematically or chronologically describing groups of materials one at a time. Note that conceptual categories generally reveal themselves after you have read most of the pertinent literature on your topic so adding new categories is an on-going process of discovery as you review more studies. How do you know you've covered the key conceptual categories underlying the research literature? Generally, you can have confidence that all of the significant conceptual categories have been identified if you start to see repetition in the conclusions or recommendations that are being made.

NOTE: Do not shy away from challenging the conclusions made in prior research as a basis for supporting the need for your proposal. Assess what you believe is missing and state how previous research has failed to adequately examine the issue that your study addresses. Highlighting the problematic conclusions strengthens your proposal. For more information on writing literature reviews, GO HERE .

To help frame your proposal's review of prior research, consider the "five C’s" of writing a literature review:

• Cite , so as to keep the primary focus on the literature pertinent to your research problem.
• Compare the various arguments, theories, methodologies, and findings expressed in the literature: what do the authors agree on? Who applies similar approaches to analyzing the research problem?
• Contrast the various arguments, themes, methodologies, approaches, and controversies expressed in the literature: describe what are the major areas of disagreement, controversy, or debate among scholars?
• Critique the literature: Which arguments are more persuasive, and why? Which approaches, findings, and methodologies seem most reliable, valid, or appropriate, and why? Pay attention to the verbs you use to describe what an author says/does [e.g., asserts, demonstrates, argues, etc.].
• Connect the literature to your own area of research and investigation: how does your own work draw upon, depart from, synthesize, or add a new perspective to what has been said in the literature?

IV.  Research Design and Methods

This section must be well-written and logically organized because you are not actually doing the research, yet, your reader must have confidence that you have a plan worth pursuing . The reader will never have a study outcome from which to evaluate whether your methodological choices were the correct ones. Thus, the objective here is to convince the reader that your overall research design and proposed methods of analysis will correctly address the problem and that the methods will provide the means to effectively interpret the potential results. Your design and methods should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

Describe the overall research design by building upon and drawing examples from your review of the literature. Consider not only methods that other researchers have used, but methods of data gathering that have not been used but perhaps could be. Be specific about the methodological approaches you plan to undertake to obtain information, the techniques you would use to analyze the data, and the tests of external validity to which you commit yourself [i.e., the trustworthiness by which you can generalize from your study to other people, places, events, and/or periods of time].

When describing the methods you will use, be sure to cover the following:

• Specify the research process you will undertake and the way you will interpret the results obtained in relation to the research problem. Don't just describe what you intend to achieve from applying the methods you choose, but state how you will spend your time while applying these methods [e.g., coding text from interviews to find statements about the need to change school curriculum; running a regression to determine if there is a relationship between campaign advertising on social media sites and election outcomes in Europe ].
• Keep in mind that the methodology is not just a list of tasks; it is a deliberate argument as to why techniques for gathering information add up to the best way to investigate the research problem. This is an important point because the mere listing of tasks to be performed does not demonstrate that, collectively, they effectively address the research problem. Be sure you clearly explain this.
• Anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers and pitfalls in carrying out your research design and explain how you plan to address them. No method applied to research in the social and behavioral sciences is perfect, so you need to describe where you believe challenges may exist in obtaining data or accessing information. It's always better to acknowledge this than to have it brought up by your professor!

V.  Preliminary Suppositions and Implications

Just because you don't have to actually conduct the study and analyze the results, doesn't mean you can skip talking about the analytical process and potential implications . The purpose of this section is to argue how and in what ways you believe your research will refine, revise, or extend existing knowledge in the subject area under investigation. Depending on the aims and objectives of your study, describe how the anticipated results will impact future scholarly research, theory, practice, forms of interventions, or policy making. Note that such discussions may have either substantive [a potential new policy], theoretical [a potential new understanding], or methodological [a potential new way of analyzing] significance.   When thinking about the potential implications of your study, ask the following questions:

• What might the results mean in regards to challenging the theoretical framework and underlying assumptions that support the study?
• What suggestions for subsequent research could arise from the potential outcomes of the study?
• What will the results mean to practitioners in the natural settings of their workplace, organization, or community?
• Will the results influence programs, methods, and/or forms of intervention?
• How might the results contribute to the solution of social, economic, or other types of problems?
• Will the results influence policy decisions?
• In what way do individuals or groups benefit should your study be pursued?
• What will be improved or changed as a result of the proposed research?
• How will the results of the study be implemented and what innovations or transformative insights could emerge from the process of implementation?

NOTE:   This section should not delve into idle speculation, opinion, or be formulated on the basis of unclear evidence . The purpose is to reflect upon gaps or understudied areas of the current literature and describe how your proposed research contributes to a new understanding of the research problem should the study be implemented as designed.

ANOTHER NOTE : This section is also where you describe any potential limitations to your proposed study. While it is impossible to highlight all potential limitations because the study has yet to be conducted, you still must tell the reader where and in what form impediments may arise and how you plan to address them.

VI.  Conclusion

The conclusion reiterates the importance or significance of your proposal and provides a brief summary of the entire study . This section should be only one or two paragraphs long, emphasizing why the research problem is worth investigating, why your research study is unique, and how it should advance existing knowledge.

Someone reading this section should come away with an understanding of:

• Why the study should be done;
• The specific purpose of the study and the research questions it attempts to answer;
• The decision for why the research design and methods used where chosen over other options;
• The potential implications emerging from your proposed study of the research problem; and
• A sense of how your study fits within the broader scholarship about the research problem.

VII.  Citations

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used . In a standard research proposal, this section can take two forms, so consult with your professor about which one is preferred.

• References -- a list of only the sources you actually used in creating your proposal.
• Bibliography -- a list of everything you used in creating your proposal, along with additional citations to any key sources relevant to understanding the research problem.

In either case, this section should testify to the fact that you did enough preparatory work to ensure the project will complement and not just duplicate the efforts of other researchers. It demonstrates to the reader that you have a thorough understanding of prior research on the topic.

Most proposal formats have you start a new page and use the heading "References" or "Bibliography" centered at the top of the page. Cited works should always use a standard format that follows the writing style advised by the discipline of your course [e.g., education=APA; history=Chicago] or that is preferred by your professor. This section normally does not count towards the total page length of your research proposal.

Develop a Research Proposal: Writing the Proposal. Office of Library Information Services. Baltimore County Public Schools; Heath, M. Teresa Pereira and Caroline Tynan. “Crafting a Research Proposal.” The Marketing Review 10 (Summer 2010): 147-168; Jones, Mark. “Writing a Research Proposal.” In MasterClass in Geography Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning . Graham Butt, editor. (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015), pp. 113-127; Juni, Muhamad Hanafiah. “Writing a Research Proposal.” International Journal of Public Health and Clinical Sciences 1 (September/October 2014): 229-240; Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005; Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Punch, Keith and Wayne McGowan. "Developing and Writing a Research Proposal." In From Postgraduate to Social Scientist: A Guide to Key Skills . Nigel Gilbert, ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006), 59-81; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences , Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

• << Previous: Writing a Reflective Paper
• Next: Generative AI and Writing >>
• Last Updated: Jun 3, 2024 9:44 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

• Locations and Hours
• UCLA Library
• Research Guides
• Research Tips and Tools

Advanced Research Methods

• Writing a Research Proposal
• What Is Research?
• Library Research

What Is a Research Proposal?

Reference books.

• Writing the Research Paper
• Presenting the Research Paper

When applying for a research grant or scholarship, or, just before you start a major research project, you may be asked to write a preliminary document that includes basic information about your future research. This is the information that is usually needed in your proposal:

• The topic and goal of the research project.
• The kind of result expected from the research.
• The theory or framework in which the research will be done and presented.
• What kind of methods will be used (statistical, empirical, etc.).
• Short reference on the preliminary scholarship and why your research project is needed; how will it continue/justify/disprove the previous scholarship.
• How much will the research project cost; how will it be budgeted (what for the money will be spent).
• Why is it you who can do this research and not somebody else.

Most agencies that offer scholarships or grants provide information about the required format of the proposal. It may include filling out templates, types of information they need, suggested/maximum length of the proposal, etc.

Research proposal formats vary depending on the size of the planned research, the number of participants, the discipline, the characteristics of the research, etc. The following outline assumes an individual researcher. This is just a SAMPLE; several other ways are equally good and can be successful. If possible, discuss your research proposal with an expert in writing, a professor, your colleague, another student who already wrote successful proposals, etc.

• Author, author's affiliation
• Explain the topic and why you chose it. If possible explain your goal/outcome of the research . How much time you need to complete the research?
• Give a brief summary of previous scholarship and explain why your topic and goals are important.
• Relate your planned research to previous scholarship. What will your research add to our knowledge of the topic.
• Break down the main topic into smaller research questions. List them one by one and explain why these questions need to be investigated. Relate them to previous scholarship.
• Include your hypothesis into the descriptions of the detailed research issues if you have one. Explain why it is important to justify your hypothesis.
• This part depends of the methods conducted in the research process. List the methods; explain how the results will be presented; how they will be assessed.
• Explain what kind of results will justify or  disprove your hypothesis. 
• Explain how much money you need.
• Explain the details of the budget (how much you want to spend for what).
• Describe why your research is important.
• List the sources you have used for writing the research proposal, including a few main citations of the preliminary scholarship.

• << Previous: Library Research
• Next: Writing the Research Paper >>
• Last Updated: Aug 22, 2024 3:43 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.ucla.edu/research-methods

Research Proposal Template

Used 7,990 times

4.1 Rating ( 29 reviews)

Reviewed by Olga Asheychik

e-Sign with PandaDoc

Prepared by: ​ [Researcher.FirstName] [Researcher.LastName] ​

Prepared for: ​ [Supervisor.FirstName]

​ [Supervisor.LastName]

This should be clear and concise, leaving the reader with no doubt regarding your field of study. A good title structure can often be “Short Title: Longer Explanation of Your Field.” Your academic institution may have a preferred format for the title, or even a title page. Find out before you submit your proposal. If there is no preferred format, keep it simple and clear, and use a “serif” font that is easily legible.

(Main title: What I am trying to find out by taking on this project)

(Academic Institution)

(Subject Area)

​ [Supervisor.FirstName]

​ [Supervisor.LastName] (if you already have one)

​ [Researcher.FirstName]

​ [Researcher.LastName]

(Student ID/Number)

2. Abstract

100-200 words. This summarizes the central theme of your research. Use concise, clipped language that is academic without being over-wordy and verbose. The abstract needs to be entirely your own words, as every abstract should be completely different, unique in its approach to your topic. Like the rest of the document, apart from block quotations, it should be double-spaced and laid out clearly.

3. Contents

Depending on the length of your research proposal, you may wish to include a contents page for the proposal itself (not for your main research project: suggested contents for this are included in your Proposed Chapter Outline, section 9) , as follows (add page numbers/subsections when you know them, depending on your research) . As you introduce sub-sections into your different sections, number them accordingly e.g. subsections of the literature review could be numbered 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, etc.

Abstract………………………………………pn

Contents……………………………………..pn

Introduction………………………………..pn

Problem Statement……………………pn

Objectives…………………………………..pn

Literature Review……………………….pn

Notion of Original Research……..pn

Key Assertions / Objectives……..pn

Research Methods…………………….pn

Sample Audience……………………….pn

Research Questions…………………..pn

Research Design………………………..pn

Analysis………………………………………pn

Proposed Chapter Outline…………pn

Research Limitations…………………pn

Proposed Timescale………………….pn

Funding (Optional)……………………..pn

References/ Bibliography………….pn

4. Introduction

200-400 words. Unlike the abstract, this is not a summary of everything you are about to say — you can afford to grab your readers’ attention right out of the gate. Deliver a surprise beginning, perhaps a quote from someone who inspires you on this topic, and show your knowledge of the research area (include, if you like, your previous research experience in this field; in fact, it may serve you well to be personal in this section) and why it is relevant to today’s world.

Try to provide facts and references here in order to give relevance to your study and why it is being conducted. This will help to explain the motivation behind your research and how important it is for academia, the industry or public sector it is being conducted in.

5. Problem Statement

Keep this short and informative. This section is meant to provide the reader with a summarized description of the problems you seek to address through your research proposal. Showcase the questions you seek to answer through your research and how it will help benefit those who read it. A problem statement should include the context of the problem, a particular audience you are targeting, and a timeline for the study. This will ensure that your research is well-focused and relevant to the current time and people.

The application of (topic, aka the main title of the subject you are researching) for (a particular group of people) in (timeline, this should either be current year or upcoming years but research can be done on past years as well) .

6. Objectives

This follows up on the problem statement section. It elaborates further on the problem statement by dividing it into a set of 3 to 5 descriptive assertions or intentions that relate to the problem. Objectives establish the scope and depth of your project and also help set up the idea for the research design (as seen later in the research proposal template) . The objectives can also indicate a section that shows how your research will contribute to already existing research and knowledge.

To study the applications of blockchain in the gaming industry and how it can help be a new source of revenue.

To study how blockchain gaming can influence people who don’t gamble to actively invest time in gaming.

To determine whether blockchain gaming can be a viable job opportunity in the future.

7. Literature review

Length can vary immensely, but probably 300-1500 words or more, depending on the nature of your research. This is one of the most important sections of your research proposal. It demonstrates that you know your field, who the key research players are in it, what has been said in the past and what is being said at the moment. You will want to mention — and where appropriate, quote from — key works in your area.

This is the section that requires the most preliminary research, so be sure you spend ample time in an academic library and use search engines for relevant academic papers before presenting. You do not need to discuss every work in your area, but you need to present a competent outline, and (especially if this is a proposal for doctoral research) you need to be sure that no one else has already done the same project. A good way of presenting a literature review coherently is in the form of a narrative, which can either be chronological or thematic.

There has been a (small/considerable/state value here) amount of previous academic research in this field.

(For a chronological narrative) I will outline how the understanding of (subject) has developed over (the last number of) years.

(Insert chronological narrative, remembering to introduce key players, dates, and academic works, and end with the state of the field as it is today.)

(For a thematic narrative) I will outline the major themes that are of relevance in this field, and go through them each in turn:

• (use a bulleted list to outline what themes/topics you are planning on covering)

After your bulleted list, you can use the themes from your list as subtitles to split up your literature review. Put them in bold. You could also add them as subsections in your contents page.

Under each subtitle, describe the state of the field of research in this area, including the most important researchers and works in this area.

8. Notion of original research

Length varies here as well, but similar in length to the literature review is likely a good place to start. This is where you sell your research proposal to the reader. You need to explain, clearly and simply, how your research will complement the field you have just described in your literature review — what you will add, how it fills an existing gap, why the academic world would benefit from your research, etc.

9. Key Assertions/Objectives

One sentence for each question/assertion. This is really part of the “notion of original research” section. A good way of making your research aim clear is to state a clear research question, and back it up with 2-4 specific assertions or objectives.

My central research question is as follows:

(insert research question here, in bold)

In the light of this, I will make the following observations/assertions: (insert observations/assertions here, in bulleted list.)

10. Research methods

Approx. 50-1000 words, depending on the nature of your research. This is where you explain how and where you plan to carry out your research. This will vary hugely depending on your subject. Will you be researching in libraries and archives? Which ones hold the books and documents you will need? Will you need to travel? If so, where? Will your research involve extensive field work? How and where? State whether you will plan to use different methods of data collection, and if so what they will be.

Do you need to be in a laboratory? Will you be emphasizing qualitative or quantitative collection of data, or both equally? Do you have the necessary skills and qualifications to undertake your research (for instance, foreign languages, statistical analysis, laboratory training, etc) ? If not, what are your plans to acquire these skills? (Note: many postgraduate institutions offer considerable support in the acquisition of new skills necessary to perform research, but this will require discussion at the proposal stage.)

11. Sample Audience

This section aims to provide the reader of the proposal with a description of who the sample audience is. You can add a brief description of your ideal sample audience and why such a person is relevant or necessary to the research. You can also mention what measures can be taken to gain their consent for the research in order to get a more enthusiastic and unbiased response. Lastly, you should mention where you propose to find this sample audience and any barriers that may occur in finding or engaging them.

12. Research Questions

13. research design.

This section will give the reader a description of what the research stimuli will look like. It gives a background of the different variations you may employ to better help test your hypothesis. It should also showcase the different factors that may vary a person's response to the research problem while you are researching the topic. This is important in a research proposal, because as with method, different factors help show what could affect you by confirming or denying your hypothesis. Keep your design descriptive and show how you will rule out or control factors that may come up.

14. Analysis

Approx. 50-300 words. Once you have collected your data, include details about what you plan to do with it. Again, depending on the nature of your research, this section could be anywhere from one or two sentences to several paragraphs.

If your research is in a survey format, then include the questions to the survey along with the method of collecting the survey. You can also include a few examples of how you plan to present the data, such as in a pie chart format or as a bar graph.

15. Proposed chapter outline

Probably less than 200 words, unless you have a very detailed plan already in mind. Note: this is like the preliminary contents page, but it does not need to be very specific, and can suggest sections rather than chapters at this stage. The academics reading your proposal will be impressed to know that you have some idea how you may wish to present your work, and that you have some way in mind of translating your research to paper.

(title of your first chapter) (explanation of your first chapter contents: one sentence)

(first subsection of your first chapter)

(second subsection of your first chapter)

(title of your second chapter) (explanation of your second chapter contents: one sentence)

(first subsection of your second chapter)

(second subsection of your second chapter)

(smaller section)

(another small section)

(title of your third chapter) (explanation of your third chapter contents: one sentence)

16. Research limitations

Approx 50-300 words. This section states everything you won’t be able to do in your research. It is surprisingly important, as it shows that you can recognise the limited scale of your work. Every project needs distinct limiting factors and clear boundaries in order to be manageable.

Naturally, the scope of this project is limited. This section describes specific limitations. (add limitations here) .

17. Proposed Timetable

Approx 50-300 words. This section is optional, but may be helpful to show your potential supervisors that you are being realistic and recognize that your project has set parameters within which to conduct the study. It also will help you to know the scale of your work in the preliminary stages of planning, and help you to maintain realistic expectations of yourself.

I predict that this research project will take (number) months/years. I propose a rough timeline, as follows:

(Here, include a list of tasks that will need completing as part of your research project, and how long you predict each will take in terms of weeks or months. End with a final count of months. If you have a predicted start date, you can begin with this and work towards a proposed end date.)

You can also use a project schedule table in order to plan out the project for yourself as well as give a better understanding as to the breakup of the project timeline. An example of this is:

18. Funding

For example, your money allocation table can look like this:

19. References/Bibliography

The reference list should always begin on a new page. Depending on your subject, there will probably be a specific format and referencing pattern for written work (Chicago, Harvard, MLA, Social Sciences) . Before you start writing, make sure you know what the convention for your subject area is, learn it and stick to it. There are a wide variety of different referencing conventions so it is important to make sure you find the correct one and stay consistent.

This will make doing your research proposal (and future research) a lot easier. Depending on your subject, your referencing may involve in-text citations or footnotes. Either way, your proposal will need a full reference list or bibliography at the end, including all of the secondary works you have mentioned in your literature review and primary sources (if applicable) .

You do not, however, need to include work that you have read in preparation but not used or mentioned in your work. Make sure this is correctly formatted — plenty of style guides for each referencing style are available online. Also, remember to lay out your reference list in alphabetical order by the authors’ surnames.

​ [Researcher.FirstName] [Researcher.LastName] ​

Care to rate this template?

Your rating will help others.

Thanks for your rate!

Useful resources

• Featured Templates
• Sales Proposals
• NDA Agreements
• Operating Agreements
• Service Agreements
• Sales Documents
• Marketing Proposals
• Rental and Lease Agreements
• Quote Templates
• Business Proposals
• Agreement Templates
• Purchase Agreements
• Contract Templates

How to write a research proposal?

To make a comprehensive research proposal, make sure you answer all the questions your review committee might have, such as who is your sample audience, what kind of questions you plan to ask them, why you are conducting this research, what you think will come out of it, etc. Leave no room for assumptions. Alternatively, you can also use this template to best understand which nitty-gritty details to cover.

Filter by Keywords

10 Free Research Plan Templates for Teams and Professionals

February 13, 2024

Start using ClickUp today

• Manage all your work in one place
• Collaborate with your team
• Use ClickUp for FREE—forever

Starting a new research project from scratch can feel overwhelming. Without the right tools and templates, you’re left with a blank page and no direction. With them, starting a new project or organizing an existing one feels like a breeze.

That’s why you need to build a library of the best research plan templates. And we’re here to help you do it.

Stick with us as we run through the benefits of using a research plan template and share some of our favorites—all designed to help make your research projects run like magic.

What is a Research Plan Template?

What makes a good research plan template, 1. clickup user research plan template, 2. clickup market research template, 3. clickup research whiteboard template, 4. clickup equity research report template, 5. clickup seo research & management template, 6. clickup research report template, 7. clickup data analysis findings template, 8. clickup personal swot analysis template, 9. clickup case study template, 10. clickup investigation report template, how to write a research plan.

A research plan template is a document that’s designed to help you build the best research management plan possible. Instead of starting from scratch with a blank screen, a research plan document gives you the building blocks to fill in—so you won’t miss anything important.

There are a lot of solid research plan documents out there—covering everything from UX research (user experience) to case study templates . These templates can be helpful for any team, whether you’re working on product development prototypes or research objectives for a marketing project. They’re especially helpful for product design , UX research, and project management teams.

Some of the most popular research plan templates include:

• UX research plan templates
• Usability testing research templates
• Data analysis findings templates
• Project proposal templates
• Case study templates
• Research process templates
• Market research templates
• Competitive analysis templates
• Request for proposal templates

Each is there to guide you towards collecting, reviewing, and reporting on your research in a more strategic and organized way. Think of the research plan as your helpful research buddy—there to make things easier, provide guidance, and help you ace your project execution .

We’re all looking for something different when it comes to project templates. You might favor simplicity and order, while another team might prefer a more creative approach with lots of color and prompts.

Even though your needs are unique, there are some elements that almost always make a research plan template stand out above all the rest.

The best research plan templates:

• Keep you and your product team organized
• Help you standardize the research process and research method you use 
• Keep you focused on the key project goals and deliverables
• Give you suggestions for metrics to record and analyze
• Help you keep your research questions in one place
• Help you stay on target with your project timeline
• Give you a defined place to store your thoughts and research findings

There’s no one perfect template for any individual or team. Consider what your purpose or goal is, what your project management workstreams look like, and which areas you need the most support or guidance in. This will help you choose which templates to feature and how you can use wiki software to build a collection of your go-to templates.

10 Research Plan Templates to Use in 2024

There are hundreds of research plan templates out there, but they’re not all alike. Some of them bring out the best of your project management skills , while others hinder them.

We’ve brought together the best of the best, to share with you the ultimate list of research plan templates to add to your workflow this year. Want to know what’s even better? You don’t need to get buy-in for an expensive pricing plan—these templates are all free!

One of the first things that comes to mind when you say “research plan template” is user research. For development and project teams, this is one step of the process where strategy and staying organized is essential.

The User Research Plan Template by ClickUp makes it easy for you to achieve that and more. There’s space to share your project overview and research goals, research objectives, hypotheses, and more—plus a bonus Interview Research Debrief doc.

This template acts as a central resource for all the stakeholders. Use it to bring your team together, reaffirm your goals and objectives, and stay on track as you execute your qualitative research project.

Bonus: UX design tools !

Planning your market research is a must-have if you want to get the best possible data. Give your team everything they need in one place and it helps your process run smoothly.

To help keep your team informed and ready to go, we developed the Market Research Template by ClickUp . It’s a Task template that brings you key information, all in one place.

Our Market Research Template features five custom fields—a research presentation link, market research type, report document link, data collection technique, and research stage. Add your clickable links, and use the dropdowns to assign the correct stage or type as you progress.

You can collect user research in so many ways. Questionnaires, user interviews, focus groups, user research sessions, or social media. Another super engaging way to do this is with a whiteboard.

Collaboration and user research feels interactive and fun with the Research Whiteboard Template by ClickUp . Encourage your team to share the insights they’ve collected in this highly visual template, with digital sticky notes instead of empty white boxes.

Use this ClickUp whiteboard template as a more engaging way to view your user research. You can also use this as a tool for internal research projects—invite your stakeholders by link and ask them to comment directly.

If you’re in the business of advising investors on what to do with their money, an equity report is a must-have. Instead of manually writing a new report every time, a research plan template can help you shortcut the process and get straight to the details.

Enter the Equity Research Report Template by ClickUp . It’s designed to help you share what you know in a more strategic way. Share an insight into the company overview, management team, performance, market valuation, and recommendations.

This research plan template has everything you need to present your findings to investors in an organized and effective way. Look like a pro to your investor clients and partners, and store all your data in a meaningful way to reflect on later.

Staying on top of your company’s SEO performance is no easy task. There are so many moving parts, tools, projects, goals, and team members that you need a way to stay organized and productive.

Luckily for you, the SEO Research & Management Template by ClickUp is here to help simplify the process—and make you look good to your boss. This Folder template gives you a dedicated place to work on your SEO goals, with SEO-related custom fields and plenty of custom task types to help your team communicate progress and see roadblocks in your research plan.

Use this template to see at a glance where your SEO projects are, so you can be more proactive about how your team is working. You can also dive in to details and understand time estimates, publish dates, and where your rankings are at.

Check out these AI SEO Tools !

There’s no need to start from scratch every time you’re asked to put a research report together—instead use a template to make all your research questions and study reports as impressive as the last one.

Shortcut your way to success with the Research Report Template by ClickUp . There are sections for your executive summary, introduction, research method and techniques, results & discussion, references, and appendices. Add a report author and contributors, so you can recognize everyone that contributed to the report.

Share your research methods, approach, and findings with stakeholders and clients with this impressive template. It’s a useful foundation to help your team get organized and find a better way to update stakeholders on progress.

The Data Analysis Findings Template by ClickUp helps you present your data to everyone in a more meaningful way. Instead of presenting numbers and graphs, this template can help you go deeper into the problem statement, scope, analysis and research method, findings, and conclusion.

Use this template to help you organize your thoughts and communicate the results of your study in a transparent and easy-to-read way. Explain the context and background information alongside your approach, so your stakeholders can fully understand what the data shows.

A personal SWOT analysis can help you understand your (or your team’s) strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. This information can not only help you work better, but it means you can be more intentional about your impact on the wider company.

The Personal SWOT Analysis Template by ClickUp can help you remember to work on your SWOT analysis. Find your strengths, weaknesses or pain points, opportunities, and threats. This Task template features several custom fields designed to help you monitor your progress—including your objective, timeline, and completion rate.

This template can be a helpful reminder to focus on your personal SWOT analysis, so you can be more intentional and aware of how you contribute to your team and company’s goals and objectives. Use your personal SWOT to help you set professional goals for work and make a bigger impact.

Case studies give you a powerful insight into what your brands, clients, or competitors are doing. They’re an in-depth look into a specific area of the business, based on your personal research and findings.

Simplify the process of building your case studies with the Case Study Template by ClickUp . This template gives you a strong foundation for presenting clear, insightful case studies with your team, stakeholders, or clients. Introduce the company, your case study objective, solutions and statistics, and your insights.

Use this template to help you create case studies at scale. Present your data in a clear and concise way, with all the context your team or stakeholders need to extract the most value from the case study as possible.

Often our research helps us understand the market, our competitors, or what our own company is doing. Sometimes, it’s to help us understand incidents and challenges instead.

That’s where the Investigation Report Template by ClickUp comes in. This template is designed to help you report on accidents, complaints, incidents, and violations. Explain the case details including a summary and evidence, then move into cross-examination with space for interview questions and answers, and your conclusion.

This template is a must-have for teams and companies that want to demonstrate how they overcome challenges or handle incidents. It’s great for transparency and trust-building, and serves as a useful way to document a trail of evidence for when you need it.

Now that you have a template for your research plan, let’s dive into the details of how to write one. Follow these steps to create an effective research plan that will guide your research and help you achieve your goals.

Step 1: Identify Your Research Question

The first step in writing a research plan is to clearly define your research question or topic. This will serve as the foundation for all of your research and help guide your methods and analysis. Make sure your question is specific, relevant, and achievable within the scope of your project.

Step 2: Outline Your Objectives

Next, you should outline the specific objectives or goals of your research. These objectives should be aligned with your research question and provide a clear roadmap for your project. Be sure to make them measurable and achievable.

Step 3: Choose Your Research Methods

Based on your research question and objectives, you can now determine the appropriate methods for gathering data and conducting analysis. This may include surveys, experiments, interviews, or literature reviews. It’s important to choose methods that are suitable for your research topic and will provide reliable and accurate results.

Step 4: Create a Timeline

A research plan should include a detailed timeline for each stage of the project. This will help you stay on track and ensure that you have enough time to complete each task. Be realistic with your timeline and build in some buffer time for unexpected delays or challenges.

Step 5: Consider Ethical Implications

When conducting research, it’s important to consider any potential ethical implications. This may include obtaining consent from participants, ensuring privacy and confidentiality, or following ethical guidelines set by your institution or governing body.

Step 6: Anticipate Potential Outcomes

As with any research project, there are always potential outcomes that can arise. These could be both positive and negative, and it’s important to anticipate and plan for them. This will help you be prepared for any potential challenges or changes that may occur during your research.

Step 7: Revise and Refine Your Plan

Once you have completed the previous steps, it’s essential to review and revise your research plan as needed. It’s common for plans to change as the project progresses, so be open to making adjustments and tweaking your methods or timeline as needed.

Stay Organized with the Best Research Plan Templates

Nobody likes a disorganized project—especially a research project. Let your team breathe a sigh of relief and make your stakeholders smile when they realize you’ve got it all under control.

Use these free research plan templates to help you get organized, streamline your workflows, and keep everyone informed. Build a collection of templates that work for your projects, and make them a central part of the way you work as a team. Standardize, simplify, and get productive.

All of these research plan templates are available right now, for free, inside our template library . Get access to these user-friendly templates, 100MB of storage, 1,000+ integrations, and more with ClickUp—free now, and forever!

Questions? Comments? Visit our Help Center for support.

Receive the latest WriteClick Newsletter updates.

Thanks for subscribing to our blog!

Please enter a valid email

• Free training & 24-hour support
• Serious about security & privacy
• 99.99% uptime the last 12 months

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Indian J Anaesth
• v.60(9); 2016 Sep

How to write a research proposal?

Department of Anaesthesiology, Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Devika Rani Duggappa

Writing the proposal of a research work in the present era is a challenging task due to the constantly evolving trends in the qualitative research design and the need to incorporate medical advances into the methodology. The proposal is a detailed plan or ‘blueprint’ for the intended study, and once it is completed, the research project should flow smoothly. Even today, many of the proposals at post-graduate evaluation committees and application proposals for funding are substandard. A search was conducted with keywords such as research proposal, writing proposal and qualitative using search engines, namely, PubMed and Google Scholar, and an attempt has been made to provide broad guidelines for writing a scientifically appropriate research proposal.

INTRODUCTION

A clean, well-thought-out proposal forms the backbone for the research itself and hence becomes the most important step in the process of conduct of research.[ 1 ] The objective of preparing a research proposal would be to obtain approvals from various committees including ethics committee [details under ‘Research methodology II’ section [ Table 1 ] in this issue of IJA) and to request for grants. However, there are very few universally accepted guidelines for preparation of a good quality research proposal. A search was performed with keywords such as research proposal, funding, qualitative and writing proposals using search engines, namely, PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus.

Five ‘C’s while writing a literature review

BASIC REQUIREMENTS OF A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

A proposal needs to show how your work fits into what is already known about the topic and what new paradigm will it add to the literature, while specifying the question that the research will answer, establishing its significance, and the implications of the answer.[ 2 ] The proposal must be capable of convincing the evaluation committee about the credibility, achievability, practicality and reproducibility (repeatability) of the research design.[ 3 ] Four categories of audience with different expectations may be present in the evaluation committees, namely academic colleagues, policy-makers, practitioners and lay audiences who evaluate the research proposal. Tips for preparation of a good research proposal include; ‘be practical, be persuasive, make broader links, aim for crystal clarity and plan before you write’. A researcher must be balanced, with a realistic understanding of what can be achieved. Being persuasive implies that researcher must be able to convince other researchers, research funding agencies, educational institutions and supervisors that the research is worth getting approval. The aim of the researcher should be clearly stated in simple language that describes the research in a way that non-specialists can comprehend, without use of jargons. The proposal must not only demonstrate that it is based on an intelligent understanding of the existing literature but also show that the writer has thought about the time needed to conduct each stage of the research.[ 4 , 5 ]

CONTENTS OF A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

The contents or formats of a research proposal vary depending on the requirements of evaluation committee and are generally provided by the evaluation committee or the institution.

In general, a cover page should contain the (i) title of the proposal, (ii) name and affiliation of the researcher (principal investigator) and co-investigators, (iii) institutional affiliation (degree of the investigator and the name of institution where the study will be performed), details of contact such as phone numbers, E-mail id's and lines for signatures of investigators.

The main contents of the proposal may be presented under the following headings: (i) introduction, (ii) review of literature, (iii) aims and objectives, (iv) research design and methods, (v) ethical considerations, (vi) budget, (vii) appendices and (viii) citations.[ 4 ]

Introduction

It is also sometimes termed as ‘need for study’ or ‘abstract’. Introduction is an initial pitch of an idea; it sets the scene and puts the research in context.[ 6 ] The introduction should be designed to create interest in the reader about the topic and proposal. It should convey to the reader, what you want to do, what necessitates the study and your passion for the topic.[ 7 ] Some questions that can be used to assess the significance of the study are: (i) Who has an interest in the domain of inquiry? (ii) What do we already know about the topic? (iii) What has not been answered adequately in previous research and practice? (iv) How will this research add to knowledge, practice and policy in this area? Some of the evaluation committees, expect the last two questions, elaborated under a separate heading of ‘background and significance’.[ 8 ] Introduction should also contain the hypothesis behind the research design. If hypothesis cannot be constructed, the line of inquiry to be used in the research must be indicated.

Review of literature

It refers to all sources of scientific evidence pertaining to the topic in interest. In the present era of digitalisation and easy accessibility, there is an enormous amount of relevant data available, making it a challenge for the researcher to include all of it in his/her review.[ 9 ] It is crucial to structure this section intelligently so that the reader can grasp the argument related to your study in relation to that of other researchers, while still demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. It is preferable to summarise each article in a paragraph, highlighting the details pertinent to the topic of interest. The progression of review can move from the more general to the more focused studies, or a historical progression can be used to develop the story, without making it exhaustive.[ 1 ] Literature should include supporting data, disagreements and controversies. Five ‘C's may be kept in mind while writing a literature review[ 10 ] [ Table 1 ].

Aims and objectives

The research purpose (or goal or aim) gives a broad indication of what the researcher wishes to achieve in the research. The hypothesis to be tested can be the aim of the study. The objectives related to parameters or tools used to achieve the aim are generally categorised as primary and secondary objectives.

Research design and method

The objective here is to convince the reader that the overall research design and methods of analysis will correctly address the research problem and to impress upon the reader that the methodology/sources chosen are appropriate for the specific topic. It should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

In this section, the methods and sources used to conduct the research must be discussed, including specific references to sites, databases, key texts or authors that will be indispensable to the project. There should be specific mention about the methodological approaches to be undertaken to gather information, about the techniques to be used to analyse it and about the tests of external validity to which researcher is committed.[ 10 , 11 ]

The components of this section include the following:[ 4 ]

Population and sample

Population refers to all the elements (individuals, objects or substances) that meet certain criteria for inclusion in a given universe,[ 12 ] and sample refers to subset of population which meets the inclusion criteria for enrolment into the study. The inclusion and exclusion criteria should be clearly defined. The details pertaining to sample size are discussed in the article “Sample size calculation: Basic priniciples” published in this issue of IJA.

Data collection

The researcher is expected to give a detailed account of the methodology adopted for collection of data, which include the time frame required for the research. The methodology should be tested for its validity and ensure that, in pursuit of achieving the results, the participant's life is not jeopardised. The author should anticipate and acknowledge any potential barrier and pitfall in carrying out the research design and explain plans to address them, thereby avoiding lacunae due to incomplete data collection. If the researcher is planning to acquire data through interviews or questionnaires, copy of the questions used for the same should be attached as an annexure with the proposal.

Rigor (soundness of the research)

This addresses the strength of the research with respect to its neutrality, consistency and applicability. Rigor must be reflected throughout the proposal.

It refers to the robustness of a research method against bias. The author should convey the measures taken to avoid bias, viz. blinding and randomisation, in an elaborate way, thus ensuring that the result obtained from the adopted method is purely as chance and not influenced by other confounding variables.

Consistency

Consistency considers whether the findings will be consistent if the inquiry was replicated with the same participants and in a similar context. This can be achieved by adopting standard and universally accepted methods and scales.

Applicability

Applicability refers to the degree to which the findings can be applied to different contexts and groups.[ 13 ]

Data analysis

This section deals with the reduction and reconstruction of data and its analysis including sample size calculation. The researcher is expected to explain the steps adopted for coding and sorting the data obtained. Various tests to be used to analyse the data for its robustness, significance should be clearly stated. Author should also mention the names of statistician and suitable software which will be used in due course of data analysis and their contribution to data analysis and sample calculation.[ 9 ]

Ethical considerations

Medical research introduces special moral and ethical problems that are not usually encountered by other researchers during data collection, and hence, the researcher should take special care in ensuring that ethical standards are met. Ethical considerations refer to the protection of the participants' rights (right to self-determination, right to privacy, right to autonomy and confidentiality, right to fair treatment and right to protection from discomfort and harm), obtaining informed consent and the institutional review process (ethical approval). The researcher needs to provide adequate information on each of these aspects.

Informed consent needs to be obtained from the participants (details discussed in further chapters), as well as the research site and the relevant authorities.

When the researcher prepares a research budget, he/she should predict and cost all aspects of the research and then add an additional allowance for unpredictable disasters, delays and rising costs. All items in the budget should be justified.

Appendices are documents that support the proposal and application. The appendices will be specific for each proposal but documents that are usually required include informed consent form, supporting documents, questionnaires, measurement tools and patient information of the study in layman's language.

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used in composing your proposal. Although the words ‘references and bibliography’ are different, they are used interchangeably. It refers to all references cited in the research proposal.

Successful, qualitative research proposals should communicate the researcher's knowledge of the field and method and convey the emergent nature of the qualitative design. The proposal should follow a discernible logic from the introduction to presentation of the appendices.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

• TemplateLab
• Research Poposal Templates

40 Best Research Proposal Templates & Format Examples

If you are doing academic research or any research for the company you work for, you will need to present the material in a professional fashion. A research proposal will help explain the intention behind the research you plan to conduct. It will also highlight the research techniques you plan to use. Making clear your intentions and methods is imperative if you want your proposal to impress those who must approve the project. This is where a research proposal template serves as a valuable and helpful resource.

Table of Contents

• 1 Research Proposal Templates
• 2 Who should use a research proposal?
• 3 What are the research proposal template requirements?
• 4 Research Proposal Examples
• 5.1 Research Paper Title
• 5.2 Table of Contents
• 5.3 Abstract
• 5.4 Background and Rationale
• 5.5 Research Questions or Introduction
• 5.6 Literary Review
• 6 Research Proposal Samples
• 7 Final Thoughts
• 8 Research Proposal Format

A research paper proposal template breaks down all the necessary sections of the proposal into segments. You can use a research proposal example to help in designing your own template. But, you also have the choice of using a ready-made research paper outline template to make things easier for you.

When filling out the research proposal template you will still need to take considerable care in developing the proposal’s presentation. The proposal needs to be exact, easy to understand, and concise. Academic or business-oriented writing and language are essential. You will need to fill the template in such a way that your ideas still be in linear order. The most basic of formats must be the final shape of the presentation. In other words, your writing is fluid and move from the introduction to the body of the proposal. It must then continue with a fluid presentation into the conclusion of the document.

Research Proposal Templates

Who should use a research proposal?

If you are writing a paper for an independent study or you are writing a dissertation in college, you will need to write a research proposal. The document must express the subject of your research. It must also include how you plan to go forth with the research. This document is of tremendous importance since it is the precursor to a larger body of work. The research paper proposal template is ideal for the following people:

• Students conducting independent studies.
• Students preparing for a dissertation.
• Students practice writing for future research papers.
• Employees looking to write a research paper for their employer.
• Faculty members at universities looking to write research papers.
• People writing a proposal to get a grant for research.

What are the research proposal template requirements?

Every research paper differs and is dependent upon the subject matter. You should talk with the supervisor of your project to find out about project expectations and deadlines. You can verify proposal deadlines and if the research you are interested in pursuing is acceptable.

The academic level and the purpose of the paper, whether a dissertation or some other type of assignment, plays a role in what goes into the initial proposal. However, there are some general elements one can expect to find in a proposal.

A quality research proposal example will reveal a document offering a clear, well-written outline describing your project’s undertaking. The plans you have for completing the research is something to include in the proposal. The goal of the proposal is so you can sway project funders to provide you with the monies needed to complete the necessary research. Or, it might be that your goal is to impress your professor by proving the knowledge you’ve accumulated will contribute to a successful research project.

No matter what you decide to research, the proposal will have some basic requirements to meet. The proposal must include the following:

• Your name and course name (if applicable).
• Your student identification number (if applicable).
• The Governing Education Department and the Supervisor/Professor.
• The Course Code (if applicable).
• The date of the paper’s submission.
• Paper Title.
• An introduction to the longer body of work. This introduction needs to present your argument and what you are setting out to prove with your research.
• An explanation of your planned research methods.
• A timetable revealing the length of time for the completion of research (if applicable).
• A mention of any ethical considerations.
• A paragraph or more describing anything that might limit the scope of the research you plan to conduct.
• A bibliography and citations with the correct citation format (Of works you plan to work with; the list is something you can expand upon and edit as you conduct your research).

Research Proposal Examples

What is the proper length for a research proposal?

It’s imperative that the abstract stays brief. The expectation is about 250 to 300 words in length. That’s about 10 percent of the total length of the research proposal. Longer than that, and it might deter the reader’s interest. It will also give you less room to discuss the goals and aims of the research project.

The length of the research proposal template is not long. You’ll find most writing requirements demand a word count of 2500 to 3000 words. Depending on spacing requirements, this might be three to five pages of information. This ensures concise writing. Of course, the study supervisor makes the final call on proposal length and necessary inclusions.

Research Paper Title

The research proposal template will have an area where you can put the title of the document. This title needs to be short, concise, and to the point. It should not take up more space than necessary. You’ll need to have a title that is absent of acronyms or abbreviations. The title needs to have a hook or stimulating words that will stir up the reader’s interest in what the research paper is about; you can use a research proposal example to get an idea about excellent title writing.

Within the title, if it is possible for you to do so, you need to give reference to the independent and dependent variables. If it is possible, the title needs to still be under 15 words. It should not be shorter than five words. There will be room for the catchy title on a research paper proposal template; it is here you will win the attentions of that all-important reader.

The title should be on a separate page and set apart from the rest of the template. Here, the author’s name, the class or course name, and the date of the work is necessary. The page numbers begin on the next page, but do not appear on the first page of the template.

Part of presenting a well-documented and researched paper is to make it available with ease of access. The table of contents follows the title page. The main chapters or sections of the paper must appear neat and orderly. Sub-headings are something you can add to make it easy to find the detailed portions of each section or chapter as well. If you can create a mock table of contents, it can serve as an outline for the paper’s structure. You can always edit the table later as you develop your research and expand on the subject matter.

The abstract is the next section you will see on a well-constructed research proposal template. This area has information about what the paper holds. The abstract is a summary so the reader gets an immediate understanding about the arguments or discoveries in the paper.  The abstract should be in active voice if it is possible to do so.

The proper use of grammar and sentence style is also necessary when you are writing the abstract. You might benefit from writing the abstract portion of the paper last. This gives you an opportunity to work your way through the rest of the research paper outline template.  It allows for the opportunity to develop a clear description of all the essential information the paper holds.

The abstract of the research proposal template needs to be short. You do not mention your references or research material at this point. All sentences should be complete and you should not use ellipses. Terms, jargon, and related abbreviations should appear the body of the paper. Do not reference your images at this point either. It is a clear and unambiguous explanation of the paper’s purpose only.

Background and Rationale

Depending on the research proposal template and assignment specifications, you might see a section where you must present some background information and the rationale for the paper. This is a section allowing you to describe how you decided to examine the subject of the paper.

You can help draw the interest of the reader if you explain how you became interested in what the paper explores. The answer needs to be brief, but by explaining the development of your interests, it will help the reader understand the point of you view you take when examining your subject matter. Here, a bit of your background and experience can also prove both beneficial and revealing.

In this section, you can touch on some of the supporting literature you will use to back your arguments. Your familiarity with the subject matter will become clear as you make mention of the types of work you’ve explored during the process of your planned research. The information of most value, however, will be the reason the project is a worthwhile expedition or endeavor; it’s your job to tell the reader the knowledge you expect to gain through the study.

Research Questions or Introduction

As you examine one research proposal example after another, you will see the style of the paper differs on the type of coursework relating to the paper in question. You’ll also see differences in a research proposal template design when you are proposing diverse types of research. Some papers need an area where explore one or more research questions. Others might want a cut and dry introduction revealing the questions you plan to explore. The subject of your investigation and the questions you plan to answer need to have a clear definition. You need to know in advance what you plan to focus on with the work you are developing. Here you need to convince the reader you have a solid understanding of the subject and how you will approach it.

Literary Review

Some research paper proposal template selections will include an area where you can include a literary review. This section allows you to make a list of the literature you have explored to support your research. It can also list the literature you plan to examine to find evidence supporting your theories or position. The literature review is a place to give the reader with a summary of existing literature, and your interpretation of that literature. Emphasis is on your interpretation here; you don’t want to regurgitate someone else’s work. You want to interpret what you’ve found and enhance it by adding your own opinion to it. In this section, you’ll also need to find any gaps that might be in existing research. If your theory or presentation plans to address this gap in knowledge, you can identify that fact in this section by explaining how it will supply the missing knowledge.

The Framework or Methodology of the Proposal

This is the part of the research proposal template that needs information in relation to the methods you plan to use to research and support your argument. Are there special methods or procedures you must use? Here, you’ll have to source your information and data. The reader can internalize the information and consider whether it is valid or not. Your means of analysis will also undergo the reader’s scrutiny. The inclusion of the method section of is imperative. No matter what subject you are covering, if the information you are using is outdated, outmoded, spurious, or if your focus is too rigid, you can end up with a research project featuring weak or refutable arguments.

Since there are many methods for conducting research, you’ll need to clarify your research techniques. This section of the research template proposal gives you the chance to reveal the reasons why you choose one method of research over others. For example, did you use an observational method when you conducted your research ? Did you interact with any subjects in the study? If so, how did you interact? Did you offer a questionnaire for students to answer? What size was the representative sample for the questionnaire? Clarifying your method will allow the reader to understand how you approached the research.

Research Proposal Samples

Final Thoughts

A research proposal template can help simplify the task of proposing research for a dissertation, job, or research grant approval. While the template helps in designing a proposal that helps a supervisor or governing body understand your theories and methods, it is also a paper that helps you in developing an understanding of how to continue with writing the longer dissertation. It will serve as a documented outline of the literary pieces you’ll need to review for project completion. The proposal also defines your theory in concrete terms, so you can compare your findings with the initial assertions you set forth in the proposal. You may find your argument and findings evolve during the course of the research.

Research Proposal Format

More Templates

Collaboration Agreements

Industry Analysis Examples

Literature Review Templates

IDH 1041: Honors Core - Social Sciences (Marten)

• Introduction
• Scholarly Articles
• Data & Statistics
• Research Proposal
• Annotated Bibliography
• Literature Review

Assignment Guidelines

The paper proposal describes and outlines a topic you expect to explore for your semester project. It is intended to be preliminary - this begins a conversation about your project with me and you can change your mind! Please also feel free to come chat with us to brainstorm some ideas if you’d like, we’re happy to help.

In this proposal you will:

• state your research question(s) (analytical, open ended RQ, rather than a descriptive, close ended one)
• introduce your topic and briefly describe it (including, perhaps, why your topic is an important one to address)
• identify and describe some potential challenges and/or questions you may have about your research project: Are you having a hard time finding scholarly sources? Do you think your topic might be too broad/narrow? Is some of the information/data confusing? Would you like your topic to go in a direction that better aligns with your interests, major, skill set, etc.?
• include the scholarly citations of at least two journal articles you plan to include in your project

The proposal should be between 400 and 600 words, double spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman, 1” margins. I love subheads [e.g. Research Question(s), Topic Description, Questions and Concerns, References], but you are welcome to use the system of organization that works best for you, just make sure to include all components in a clear and organized way.

Choosing a Topic

• Opposing Viewpoints In Context (Gale) This link opens in a new window Opposing Viewpoints in Context is the premier online resource covering today’s hottest social issues, from Offshore Drilling to Climate Change, Health Care to Immigration. Opposing Viewpoints in Context helps students research, analyze and organize a broad variety of data for conducting research, completing writing assignments, preparing for debates, creating presentations and more.
• CQ Researcher This link opens in a new window CQ Researcher is often the first source that librarians recommend when researchers are seeking original, comprehensive reporting and analysis on issues in the news. CQ Researcher is noted for its in-depth, unbiased coverage of health, social trends, criminal justice, international affairs, education, the environment, technology, and the economy. Reports are published weekly in print and online 44 times a year by CQ Press, an imprint of SAGE Publications.
• << Previous: Data & Statistics
• Next: Annotated Bibliography >>
• Last Updated: Sep 18, 2024 9:32 AM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/idh1041

Pardon Our Interruption

As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:

• You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
• You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
• You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
• A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .

To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.

Search form

Research Proposal and Thesis Format

This is a written presentation of an intended research specifying the problem, the purpose, scope/objectives, methodology, references and the financial plan/budget. A synopsis is an outline of the research proposal of 3-5 pages length (including references) which is currently required for provisional admission to Ph.D and other doctoral degree studies at Makerere University.

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Active funding opportunity

Nsf 24-576: gen-4 engineering research centers, program solicitation, document information, document history.

• Posted: May 20, 2024
• Replaces: NSF 22-580

Program Solicitation NSF 24-576

Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization’s local time):

     September 03, 2024

Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization’s local time):

     September 30, 2024

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization’s local time):

By Invitation Only

Important Information And Revision Notes

This solicitation encourages proposals addressing a broad spectrum of engineering topics, including but not limited to advanced manufacturing, advanced wireless, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, microelectronics and semiconductors, net-zero technologies, quantum engineering, and systems engineering for healthcare.

This solicitation is updated to clarify the definition of underrepresented students in STEM and to welcome proposal submissions that broaden geographic and demographic participation. More details are provided in Section IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION .

Cost Sharing: Cost sharing is required. The formula for required cost sharing is described in the full text of this solicitation.

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is regularly revised and it is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements specified in this solicitation and the applicable version of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General information.

Program Title:

Gen-4 Engineering Research Centers (ERC) Convergent Research and Innovation through Inclusive Partnerships and Workforce Development

Founded in 1984, the Engineering Research Centers (ERC) program brings technology-based industry and universities together in an effort to strengthen the competitive position of American industry in the global marketplace. These partnerships are expected to establish cross-disciplinary centers focused on advancing fundamental engineering knowledge and engineered systems technology while exposing students to the integrative aspects of engineered systems and industrial practice. The goal of the ERC program has traditionally been to integrate engineering research and education with technological innovation to transform and improve national prosperity, health, and security. Building upon this tradition, NSF is interested in supporting ERCs to develop and advance engineered systems, which if successful, will have a high Societal Impact. The ERC program supports convergent research (CR) that will lead to strong societal impact. Each ERC has interacting foundational components that go beyond the research project, including engineering workforce development (EWD) at all participant stages, where all participants gain mutual benefit, and value creation within an innovation ecosystem (IE) that will outlast the lifetime of the ERC. These foundational elements are integrated throughout ERC activities and in alignment with the Center's vision and targeted societal impact. The overall impact of the ERC program is expected within the Engineering Community, the Scientific Enterprise, and Society.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

Sandra Cruz-Pol, telephone: (703) 292-2928, email: [email protected]

Dana L. Denick, telephone: (703) 292-8866, email: [email protected]

Randy Duran, telephone: (703) 292-5326, email: [email protected]

Nadia A. El-Masry, telephone: (703) 292-4975, email: [email protected]

Paul Torrens, telephone: (703) 292-2473, email: [email protected]

Lan Wang, telephone: (703) 292-5098, email: [email protected]

• 47.041 --- Engineering

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement

Up to 4 depending on the quality of the proposals and the availability of funds. ERCs are generally funded for ten years, with an initial award for the first five years and second award based on performance and review of a renewal proposal. This solicitation seeks to make awards for the first five years for new ERCs.

See Section III of this solicitation for additional information about the allowable maximum annual budget for years one through five.

NSF expects to make the ERC awards in the summer of 2026. The budget distribution among the lead and core partners should be appropriate for the scope of work and activities planned for each foundational component.

Note that ERCs will not be granted no-cost extensions (NCE).

Co-funding:

NSF is currently in negotiations with other government agencies to form partnerships in support of ERC awards. These partnerships have the potential to expand the total number of awards. This is contingent upon realization of these partnerships, and budgets provided to these organizations by Congress for FY 2026 and 2027.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

Only U.S. Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs), also referred to in this solicitation as universities and academic institutions, accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, that grant engineering degrees at the undergraduate, masters, and doctoral engineering level may submit proposals as the lead university. The Lead university submits the proposal, and the award is made to the lead university. Support is provided to core partner universities and any affiliated faculty from other partner institutions through subawards. NSF welcomes proposal submissions that broaden geographic and demographic participation. Proposals from STEM-minority-serving institutions (STEM-MSI*), non-R1 schools, emerging research institutions, and IHEs in EPSCoR-eligible jurisdictions, as lead or core partners, as well as IHEs that primarily serve populations of students with disabilities or women in engineering interested in STEM, are encouraged.

Invited full proposals must meet all the following organizational requirements or they will be returned without review:

• The Lead must be an Institution of Higher Education per the Carnegie Foundational Attribute: https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/
• A proposed ERC must be multi-institutional, with a lead university and additional domestic university core partners. There is no maximum number of partner institutions.
• To qualify as a core partner institution, there must be financial support for a minimum of three faculty participating in the ERC along with financial support for a minimum of three students (Postdoctoral scholars may not be included as students).
• The lead or at least one of the core partner universities must be a STEM-MSI* university.
• Commitments from lead and core partner universities for cost sharing must be in place.

*For this solicitation STEM-MSI is defined by the Department of Education as institutions of higher education enrolling populations with significant percentages of undergraduate minority students, or that serve certain populations of minority students under various programs created by Congress.

Eligibility may be determined by reference to the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) of the US Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics ( https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/ ).

Who May Serve as PI:

The Lead PI must be a faculty member at the Lead university. Non-Lead PIs are the co-PIs listed on the Cover Sheet after the Lead PI and may be from institutions other than the lead university. In order to provide more flexibility for the Center's management, the Lead PI and the ERC Director are not required to be the same person, however, both must be affiliated with the lead institution.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

If an institution has two active ERC awards, it does not qualify to submit an ERC preliminary proposal as a lead institution. There are no other restrictions or limits on the number of preliminary proposals submitted by a Lead institution. Full Proposals may be submitted only by invitation and only by the lead institution designated in the preliminary proposal.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. proposal preparation instructions.

Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is required. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Preliminary Proposals: Submission of Preliminary Proposals is required. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Full Proposals:

• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply. The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .
• Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ).

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing Requirements:

Cost Sharing is required. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

Not Applicable

Other Budgetary Limitations:

Other budgetary limitations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

C. Due Dates

Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization's local time):

Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization's local time):

Proposal Review Information Criteria

Merit Review Criteria:

National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review criteria apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Reporting Requirements:

Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

I. Introduction

The National Science Foundation (NSF) created the Engineering Research Centers (ERC) program in 1984 to bring technology-based industry and universities together in an effort to strengthen the competitive position of American industry in the global marketplace. These partnerships established cross-disciplinary centers focused on advancing fundamental engineering knowledge and engineered systems technology while exposing students to the integrative aspects of engineered systems and industrial practice. As a result, ERCs have produced a wide range of new fundamental knowledge, engineered systems and other technologies aimed at spawning whole new fields or industries or radically transforming the product lines, processes, and practices of current industries. At the same time, they have produced a new generation of engineering graduates who are highly innovative, diverse, globally engaged, and effective as technology leaders in academia and industry.

NSF has continually refined the goals and purposes of the ERC program to meet shifting needs. The NSF-requested 2017 study from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) "A New Vision for Center-Based Engineering Research" ( https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24767/a-new-vision-for-center-based-engineering-research ) recommends that NSF places a greater emphasis on forming research centers focused on convergent research and education approaches that address challenges with significant societal impact. Complex societal problems require a convergent approach for the deep integration of knowledge, tools, and ways of thinking across disciplinary boundaries. A detailed explanation of the convergence concept can be found in a 2014 National Academies report, "Convergence: Facilitating Transdisciplinary Integration of Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Engineering and Beyond" ( https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18722/convergence-facilitating-transdisciplinary-integration-of-life-sciences-physical-sciences-engineering ).

This current iteration of the ERC program reflects the recommendations from the NASEM study as well as other sources. The program continues to focus on advancing an engineered system through inclusive cross-disciplinary and cross-sector partnerships, while placing greater emphasis on research with high- risk/high-payoff ideas that lead to societal impact through convergent approaches, engaging broader stakeholder communities, and using team science concepts for their team formation.

II. Program Description

A. ERC Program Model

The ERC program is grounded by the four foundational components of the ERC: Convergent Research (CR), Engineering Workforce Development (EWD), Diversity and Culture of Inclusion (DCI), and the Innovation Ecosystem (IE) (Figure 1). These foundational components are connected by an integrated, holistic ERC vision and strategic plan. The whole of the ERC has added value and synergies that require a center or institute-like approach as opposed to individual projects.

Convergent Research (CR): High-risk/high-payoff research ideas and discoveries that push the frontiers of engineering knowledge; ERC convergent research is a highly collaborative and interdisciplinary approach that leads to positive impacts on society. Convergence involves the integration of various fields in engineering and science, including all branches of science, in a coordinated and interdependent manner. This approach fosters strong collaborations that are essential for successful inquiry.

Engineering Workforce Development (EWD): In addition to training opportunities for ERC participants, the Center engages in human resource capacity development aligned with the targeted engineered system. ERC EWD strengthens a robust spectrum of engineering education pathways and technical workforce opportunities. EWD occurs at all levels of the Center and provides opportunities for engagement by all ERC members including students, faculty, and external partners as appropriate. The ERC EWD program is driven by the future education, workforce development, and labor market needs relevant to the proposed Center.

Diversity and Culture of Inclusion (DCI): In addition to fomenting a diverse team, the culture of the ERC and teams within the ERC demonstrate an environment of inclusion in which all members feel valued and welcomed, creatively contribute, and gain mutual benefit from participating. Because of the ERC's attention to diversity and culture of inclusion, participation from members of groups traditionally underrepresented in engineering as well as diverse scientific and other perspectives is required. The ERC DCI program ensures diversity at all levels of the Center and employs an intentional and evidence-based approach to developing a culture of inclusion.

Innovation Ecosystem (IE): Trusted partners that work together to create and enhance the capacity for innovation and new ways for delivering value with positive societal impact. ERC innovation ecosystems (IE) include effective translational efforts from ideation to implementation, workforce development that creates the workforce needed for the enterprise, and deliberate efforts to attract funding and resources. ERCs articulate plans for strategic engagement of stakeholder communities while including the legal, ethical, civic, and societal acceptance frameworks needed to protect the participants.

The ERC foundational elements are carried out in concert through ERC activities and in alignment with the Center's vision and targeted societal impact. The overall impact of the ERC program is expected within the Engineering Community , the Scientific Enterprise , and Society , shown in Figure 1 (above). These may be thought of as nested regions of increasing influence, where the largest scale of impact is on society itself. Potential outcomes of ERCs are organized within each of the four ERC foundational components.

Engineering Community: ERCs not only create fundamental knowledge and technology, but also impact the engineering community, preparing students and researchers by highlighting new engineering approaches and best practices for engineering workforce development, diversity and inclusion, and academic-industrial partnerships.

Scientific Enterprise: ERCs should be exemplars of how cohesive, high-performing teams engage in convergent research and innovative approaches to create major impact that informs and inspires the scientific community, engineering and beyond.

Society: ERCs enable society to have a better quality of life, and be more resilient, productive, and safe. Each ERC is expected to have a transformational positive impact on significant societal challenges and opportunities. This is the level where the introduction of value creation and technology innovation requires an understanding of socio-technical interactions and how they might impact society at large. In response, new strategies, concepts, ideas and/or re- organizations may be needed to shore-up, extend, or strengthen society. The desired outcome is the ERC's ability to assist society in its drive to advance the national health, prosperity, welfare, and to secure the national defense.

The goal of the ERC program has traditionally been to integrate engineering research and education with technological innovation to transform and improve national prosperity, health, and security. Building upon this tradition, NSF is interested in supporting ERCs to develop and advance engineered systems, which if successful, will have a high Societal Impact .

ERCs create inclusive cultures not only to integrate scientific discovery with technological innovation through convergent engineered systems research and education, but also to include the participation of the full spectrum of diverse talent in engineering. ERCs build partnerships with industry, practitioners, and other key stakeholders to strengthen the innovative capacity of the United States in a global context. In addition to building capacity for research, innovation, and a diverse workforce, ERCs are expected to produce significant outcomes within the 10-year timeframe of NSF support and beyond.

ERCs should realize a vision of advancing an engineered system driven by clearly articulated societal impact and should have strong synergies or value-added rationale that justifies a center or institute-like approach. As part of creating sustainable positive impacts on society and communities, ERCs should focus on positive outcomes that can be seen within engineering communities and build and empower human resource capacity for their targeted engineering challenges. Beyond this, ERCs should contribute to the scientific enterprise by advancing research, science, engineering fundamentals, and research communities. This should be demonstrated with benchmarks against the state-of-the-art. ERCs should build knowledge, prepare students and researchers that respect and flourish in an environment with diverse perspectives, impact how engineering research is conducted and provide value for society. The ERC program encourages proposals addressing a broad spectrum of engineering topics, including but not limited to advanced manufacturing, advanced wireless, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, microelectronics and semiconductors, net zero technologies, quantum engineering, and systems engineering for healthcare.

C. Key Elements of an ERC

Vision: The ERC vision guides discovery and technology to uniquely transform US prosperity, health, and/or security in 10 years. The vision describes the compelling new idea, explains how it relates to national needs, and makes the connection to engineering.

Strategic Plan: The ERC strategic plan connects and leverages research, engineering workforce development, diversity and culture of inclusion, and innovation ecosystem to address the chosen societal challenge. The overall plan should employ three strategic approaches:

Convergence : "Convergence is an approach to problem solving that cuts across disciplinary boundaries. It integrates knowledge, tools, and ways of thinking across disciplinary boundaries in STEM fields to form a comprehensive synthetic framework for tackling scientific and societal challenges that exist at the interfaces of multiple fields." ( https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18722/convergence-facilitating-transdisciplinary-integration-of-life-sciences-physical-sciences-engineering ). This is also stated in another report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) from the Committee on a Vision for the Future of Center-based Multidisciplinary Engineering Research, which defined convergent engineering as a deeply collaborative, team-based engineering approach for defining and solving important and complex societal problems ( https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24767/a-new-vision-for-center-based-engineering-research ). Hence, convergent research blends scientific disciplines in a coordinated, reciprocal way and fosters the robust collaboration needed for successful inquiry and has the strong potential to lead to transformative solutions and new fields of study. The research thrusts, testbeds, team formation, and other major aspects of the research plan should support a convergent approach.

Stakeholder Engagement : The intentional and early-stage engagement of all parties who may contribute to the ERC or may be impacted by the ERC along its capacity-building and value creation responsibilities. Stakeholders can include, but are not limited to, relevant researchers across partner institutions with complementary research and education expertise; undergraduate and graduate students, postdoctoral researchers; industry leaders who can guide the innovation effort; partners for innovation, education, workforce development, and diversity and culture of inclusion of all participants; and beneficiaries of the ERC outcomes (e.g., community members, users, customers, patients, and watchdog organizations).

Team Formation : The process by which all necessary disciplines, skills, perspectives, and capabilities are brought together. Successful teams are interdependent, multidisciplinary, and diverse and can work and communicate effectively even when geographically dispersed. Team formation includes evidence-based strategies and team science training to overcome barriers to effective, collaborative teaming, including the integration of members with different areas of expertise, different vocabularies and core values and ways of approaching problems, different understanding of the problems to be addressed, different values, and different working styles. This is especially needed during the early stages of the Center.

Organization and Management Structure:

Effective Leadership: ERC leaders have intellectual vision, demonstrable leadership, successful entrepreneurial experience, a track record of delivering results, and the ability to communicate clearly and effectively with diverse audiences such as team members, sponsors, partners, host institutions, stakeholders, press and media, and the public. Below are some example practices desired for effective ERC leadership and management teams:

• Empowers all team members to contribute;
• Builds consensus around goals and problem definition;
• Facilitates communication to ensure a common understanding among all stakeholders; and resolves conflicts and builds trust.

It is rare that a single individual will have all of these attributes; thus, a strong leader will need to assemble an executive team that covers this broad spectrum of skills. The Center Director should understand their strengths and limitations, should be effective in assembling an executive leadership team that fills in the gaps of their limitations, and should be supported by an effective Council of Deans (See Section II.C. for details of the formation of the Council of Deans).The Director does not need to be a faculty member.

Organization and Management: An effective management structure begins with a clear understanding of the goals of the ERC and how the structure (including the ERC four foundational components) will support those goals. The structure should have the flexibility to adapt as the needs of the ERC change, as key people transition into or out of the ERC, or change roles, and to handle other changes as the ERC matures.

It is critical to have one person or team that has clear responsibility for each foundational component of the ERC. However, each ERC participant and each of the core participants should also understand the importance of each foundational component and be engaged in their role in carrying it out. Core partner institutions must meet the eligibility requirements of at least 3 faculty and 3 students participating in the ERC; postdoctoral scholars may not be included as students. Proposing teams will determine the funding source(s) of student support and nature of participation, whether graduate or undergraduate. Typically, ERC’s have many more fully/partly funded graduate and undergraduate students engaged in the ERC, in addition to faculty or postdocs.

ERC program experience has shown that an important role in the ERC structure is that of an administrative director, as described below. This remains a mandatory piece of the management structure.

Administrative Director: An experienced staff member at the lead university who is responsible for operational management, financial management, data collection, publicity, and reporting, etc. for the ERC. Post-award NSF training is available for this position given the ERC reporting complexities.

Lead Institution: The lead institution effectively guides the multiple elements of the ERC. The ERC headquarters are located at the lead institution, and the lead institution is the NSF recipient and is ultimately responsible for the financial and reporting obligations of the ERC award.

Core Partners: To qualify as a core partner university, there must be a minimum of three faculty participating in the ERC along with a minimum of three students; postdoctoral scholars may not be included as students. Core partners are included in the Cost Sharing requirements and in the Council of Deans (See Section II.C. for details of the formation of the Council of Deans.)

Other potential partners may include universities contributing affiliated faculty, federal laboratories, private-sector or non-profit organizations, educational partners, and/or foreign collaborators' universities or institutions. While not considered core partners, the involvement of such partners can be valuable.

Industrial/Practitioner Member: An organization that satisfies all requirements for membership according to the Center's membership agreement which may include financial support (cash or in-kind).

ERCs should engage industrial/practitioner members from sectors such as the Federal Government, State government, local government, quasi-government research, industry, industry association, policy organization, regulatory agency, medical facility, private foundation, nonprofit, venture capitalists, community organizations, professional/trade union, and other stakeholders as appropriate for the center's mission.

Affiliated Faculty Member: The ERC may include affiliated faculty members, which are faculty members who are contributing to the ERC from institutions other than the lead or core partner universities and are included in the budget.

Institutional Commitment: The lead and all core partner institutions must augment support for the ERC through cost-sharing and other allowed means and sustain the ERC once NSF's support ceases. Lead, core, and other partner academic institutions must commit to:

• Joining in partnership to support the ERC's vision, strategic plans, and activities in CR, EWD, DCI, IE and their integration across the institutions.
• Assuring cross-university industrial membership and intellectual property (IP) policies that recognize shared rights for joint work.
• Adopting institutional policies to reward faculty, particularly those in the promotion and tenure process, for participating in convergent research and innovation, technological advance, mentoring, university and pre-college education activity, and delivering on the ERC's plans for workforce development and creating an inclusive and diverse culture. NSF strongly encourages the full spectrum of diverse talent that society has to offer.
• Official recognition for university students engaged in mentoring of other university students and in pre-college outreach. This recognition is crucial to acknowledge their efforts and motivate them to continue their valuable work

Community Feedback: Broad-based stakeholder feedback to the ERCs is one of the important mechanisms used by the ERC to provide continual monitoring of the Center's health.

Advisory Boards: Advisory boards are formed to reinforce and support the proper functioning of the ERC's foundational components which are CR, EWD, DCI, and IE, as described above. Careful consideration must be given to defining each advisory board's functional role and selecting quality board members capable of overseeing that role. An example of a generic ERC feedback loop structure is illustrated in Figure 2. As part of the NSF Management/Oversight, the NSF Program Director and the NSF Site Visit Team (SVT) typically interact with the ERC and give feedback to the ERC once a year at a minimum. The advisory boards provide feedback at least twice a year; usually more often on an as needed basis. It may occasionally be necessary to form additional special committees to support special needs of the Center's vision. The staffing of these committees may be either internal or external. The Council of Deans and Student Leadership Council, as defined below, are mandatory advisory groups; however, the ERC is expected to propose appropriate advisory groups beyond these two.

Student Leadership Council (SLC): Undergraduate and graduate students from all partner universities responsible for coordinating their various activities in support of the ERC. A student president and a student co-president lead the SLC. The SLC will prepare a written Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis and present the SWOT findings during the annual visit of the NSF Site Visit Team (SVT).

Council of Deans: Led by the Dean of Engineering from the Lead university, this Council includes the Deans from the lead and each core partner institution. They meet collectively to provide administrative support of the ERC and to help facilitate multiple ERC elements across the lead and core partner universities. The Dean may not designate an alternate unless a PI, Co-PI, Director, or any senior personnel is also a Dean at the Institution. The two roles cannot be performed by the same person.

III. Award Information

Estimated program budget, number of awards, and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds. The maximum annual budget allowed is shown in the table below.

Year 1 budget will be committed upon award, and subsequent year budgets are subject to satisfactory annual review of accomplishments and availability of funds. After a gradual ramp up, years three through five are projected to level off at $6,000,000 in each of those years. Pending performance and outcome of a renewal review in the fourth year, support for years six to eight will continue at $6,000,000 per year until the eighth year. Support for years nine and ten will be phased down, with $4,000,000 in year 9 and $2,600,000 in year 10. No-cost extensions (NCEs) will not be granted.

IV. Eligibility Information

Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Only U.S. Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs), also referred to in this solicitation as universities and academic institutions, accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, that grant engineering degrees at the undergraduate, masters, and doctoral engineering level may submit proposals as the lead university. The Lead university submits the proposal, and the award is made to the lead university. Support is provided to core partner universities and any affiliated faculty from other partner institutions through subawards. NSF welcomes proposal submissions that broaden geographic and demographic participation. Proposals from STEM-minority-serving institutions (STEM-MSI*), non-R1 schools, emerging research institutions, and IHEs in EPSCoR-eligible jurisdictions, as lead or core partners, as well as IHEs that primarily serve populations of students with disabilities or women in engineering interested in STEM, are encouraged. Invited full proposals must meet all the following organizational requirements or they will be returned without review: The Lead must be an Institution of Higher Education per the Carnegie Foundational Attribute: https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/ A proposed ERC must be multi-institutional, with a lead university and additional domestic university core partners. There is no maximum number of partner institutions. To qualify as a core partner institution, there must be financial support for a minimum of three faculty participating in the ERC along with financial support for a minimum of three students (Postdoctoral scholars may not be included as students). The lead or at least one of the core partner universities must be a STEM-MSI* university. Commitments from lead and core partner universities for cost sharing must be in place. *For this solicitation STEM-MSI is defined by the Department of Education as institutions of higher education enrolling populations with significant percentages of undergraduate minority students, or that serve certain populations of minority students under various programs created by Congress. Eligibility may be determined by reference to the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) of the US Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics (https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/).

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions

Letters of Intent (required) :

1. LETTER OF INTENT

A Letter of Intent (LOI) is required to facilitate the NSF review process. The LOI must be submitted via Research.gov no later than the LOI deadline date. Please note the following conditions:

• LOIs must be submitted through Research.gov (not Grants.gov). A Minimum of one PI and up to four co-PIs are allowed.
• A list of all anticipated Core Partner Universities is required.
• The lead university cannot change after submission of the Letter of Intent.

Title: The title should begin with "NSF Engineering Research Center for ( insert the rest of the title and the Center's acronym )". The title should reflect the engineered system of the proposed ERC.

Lead PI and/or Center Director: The Lead PI's information is automatically included when the LOI is created. If the Lead PI and the Center Director are different individuals, please include the Center Director's name, university, department, phone number, and e-mail address at the beginning of the Synopsis section.

Anticipated ERC Non-Lead PIs (co-PIs): Identify up to four co-PIs. For the LOI, the participating team (Senior/Key Personnel) will be limited to the lead PI and up to four co-PIs who may come from any or all the domestic core partner universities.

Anticipated Core Partner Universities: The Lead university (not PI) is binding throughout the process. Other partners may change. The anticipated core partner universities should be included in the Manage Participating Organizations section of the LOI.

Synopsis (not to exceed one page): Upload brief statements of the vision and goals of the ERC, its potential for societal impact, and an integrated plan for the Center. Include an overview of the research program, such as research thrust titles, goals, and fundamental gaps or barriers in knowledge/technology that it meets. Although the EWD, DCI, and the IE are also critical foundational components of an ERC, they do not need to be described in detail in the LOI.

Other Comments (an additional max 2,500 characters including any blank spaces): Continue Synopsis as needed in this section.

Keywords: In order of decreasing emphasis, list up to ten keywords that represent the scientific interdisciplinary content in the proposal.

Letter of Intent Preparation Instructions :

When submitting a Letter of Intent through Research.gov in response to this Program Solicitation please note the conditions outlined below:

Submission by an Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) is not required when submitting Letters of Intent.

A Minimum of 0 and Maximum of 4 Other Senior Project Personnel are permitted

A Minimum of 0 and Maximum of 6 Other Participating Organizations are permitted

• Keywords is required when submitting Letters of Intent
• Submission of multiple Letters of Intent is permitted

Preliminary Proposals (required) : Preliminary proposals are required and must be submitted via Research.gov, even if full proposals will be submitted via Grants.gov.

2. PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL

Submission of a Preliminary Proposal is required to be eligible for an invitation to submit a Full Proposal.

Preliminary Proposal Preparation Instructions:

Preliminary proposals must explicitly address the following questions in the project description:

• What are the compelling new ideas and what is the potential for high societal impact?
• What is the ERC engineered system? Is it high-risk but high payoff? Is the 3-plane chart well-conceived and justified?
• Why is an ERC necessary to tackle the idea?
• What is the proposed management structure for the ERC? How will the ERC's organization and management structure integrate and implement the four foundational components (CR, EWD, DCI, and IE) and foster the desired team formation?
• What are the proposed strategies for engaging and developing the appropriate stakeholder community?
• Does the proposed ERC create an inclusive environment where all the ERC participants learn to work in a team towards a common goal?

Preliminary Proposal Set-Up: Select "Prepare New Preliminary Proposal" in Research.gov. Search for and select this solicitation title in Step One of the Preliminary Proposal wizard. The information in Step 2 is pre-populated by the system. In Step 3 select "Single proposal (with or without subawards). Separately submitted collaborative preliminary proposals will be returned without review.

Title: The title should begin with "NSF Engineering Research Center for ( insert the rest of the title and the Center's acronym )". The rest of the title and acronym can change from the LOI to the submitted preliminary proposal as long as it is in the same topic area. The title should reflect the system focus of the proposed ERC.

The required components of the preliminary proposal are given below. Page limitations given here will be strictly enforced. Proposers should review the most current PAPPG for specific information and format for the required sections. No other sections are required or may be included in the preliminary proposal.

Cover Sheet: Select the proposed start date and proposed duration.

Project Summary (1 page): The Project Summary must have three separate section headers entitled "Overview", "Intellectual Merit", and "Broader Impacts"; each heading must be on its own line with no other text on that line. Within the Overview section, include a separate sub-section entitled "Proposed Vision". The summary should be informative to those working in the same or related fields and understandable to a scientifically or technically literate reader.

Project Description: Maximum 10 pages, total, containing the following sections, not necessarily in this order. All figures and tables must be included within the 10-page limit.

The proposing team (Participant Table) should be submitted as a supplementary document.

The Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts of the ERC must be addressed and described throughout the narrative as an integral part of the Project Description. Between Sections IV and V, include a separate header for Broader Impacts, as specified below. In addition, Results from Prior Support is not a required section for the preliminary proposal.

Outline for the Preliminary Proposal Project Description (up to 10 pages)

II. Strategic Plan

III. Organization and Management Structure

IV. Convergent Research

BROADER IMPACTS ( Please note: The Project Description must include a separate section header labeled Broader Impacts and the heading must be on its own line with no other text on that line. )

V. Engineering Workforce Development

VI. Diversity and Culture of Inclusion

VII. Innovation Ecosystem

I. Vision: The proposed vision for the ERC must be explained, with a discussion of the convergent engineering research theme and the anticipated societal impact. Explain the proposed transformative engineered system and the potential for impact on society, the engineering community and the greater scientific community.

II. Strategic Plan: The plan must define the engineered system and describe how the features of the ERC will be integrated to achieve the vision, in particular the cohesive plan for involving participants at all levels in the four foundational components:

• Convergent Research (CR)
• Engineering Workforce Development (EWD)
• Diversity and Culture of Inclusion (DCI)
• Innovation Ecosystem (IE)

III. Organization and Management Structure: Describe the proposed management, including the functions of key personnel and the role of any advisory committee (including the required Student Leadership Council and the Council of Deans), executive committee, program committee, or their equivalent. Note that there is no recommendation for how ERCs should be managed. This solicitation provides for flexibility on organization structure and management and is part of the review criteria – as such the proposal should clearly justify the proposed structure.

IV. Convergent Research (CR): The role of convergence and team formation in the proposed research must be described. Research activities must address any gaps and barriers to achieve the proposed vision. Research must advance fundamental knowledge and support the development of technology that is proven through proof-of-concept testbeds as part of a well-defined engineered system. Integration of research activities must be graphically depicted on a clearly legible version of the ERC Program's 3-Plane Strategic Planning Chart ( http://erc-assoc.org/content/three-plane-diagram ) that is tailored to the proposed ERC. The chart should be at least half a page, but a full page is recommended for legibility, as this chart is used at several stages of the NSF review process. This section should clearly state what new knowledge is expected that would advance the state of the art in key research areas.

V. Engineering Workforce Development (EWD): A proposed evidence-based program for human capacity development for the future engineering and technical workforce must be described. The program goals and expected outcomes must be described. Proposed activities should logically lead to targeted outcomes and support diverse pathways and experiences for participants. Existing programs and partnerships may be leveraged to support the ERC EWD program and provide opportunities to engage with potential participants.

VI. Diversity and Culture of Inclusion (DCI): Preliminary ideas to create and nurture a culture of inclusion to foster the engagement of all ERC participants. This section should include evidence-based and intentional programming approach.

VII. Innovation Ecosystem (IE): An innovation ecosystem development effort must be proposed. However, DO NOT list potential or committed industrial or other supporters.

In addition, the preliminary proposal must also include these documents and information.

References Cited (required): See PAPPG for format guidelines.

Senior/Key Personnel Documents: The Lead PI, Center Director (if different from the Lead PI) and up to four co-PIs) must be designated as Senior/Key Personnel and must provide the following documents in accordance with the guidance contained in PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.h.

• Biographical Sketches
• Collaborators & Other Affiliations (COA)Information

Supplementary Documents:

A letter of commitment from the Dean of Engineering of the lead institution must be submitted which describes the support for and commitment to the ERC (including space for the ERC headquarters) should it be funded. While the Lead PI does not need to be from the School of Engineering, this letter must be from the Dean of Engineering to demonstrate the Engineering Dean's support for the proposed impact of the ERC on the engineering community.

The Dean should NOT include any financial commitments. Instead, the Dean should make a statement as to how the proposed ERC will align with the strategic directions of the college or the university. Proposals submitted without a letter of commitment from the Dean of Engineering will be returned without review. No letters of collaboration are allowed.

Participant Table (one page maximum): Provide a participant table that includes all committed ERC personnel: (1) Name of the Lead PI (and ERC Director, if different from the Lead PI) and Non-Lead PIs, (2) Institution(s), (3) Department(s), and (4) Most Relevant Field(s) of Expertise. In addition, please list all committed senior/key personnel. Do not identify members of advisory boards. The team table should include only those personnel who would receive NSF funds. This table is used by NSF in the merit review process to manage reviewer selection.

Single Copy Documents:

Collaborators & Other Affiliations Information: Information regarding collaborators and other affiliations (COA) must be separately provided for all members of the ERC Leadership Team and key faculty who are not designated as Senior/Key Personnel. Proposers must follow the guidance contained in PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.h. and include the COA information in the Additional Single Copy Documents section of the preliminary proposal. The accuracy of this section is very important to the integrity of the ERC review process. Please be accurate, up to date, and complete with the entries, including professional email addresses.

Institutional Affiliations: Beyond the affiliations captured on the COA form for individual ERC participants, the ERC Lead University must report any institutional affiliations arising from partnerships including any government agencies, international partners, industry partners or other non-academic institutional partners. The institutional affiliation information must be entered into the ERC Preliminary Proposal Institutional Conflict template (See bullet #2 on http://erc-assoc.org/content/templates-proposal-preparation-0 ) and uploaded into the Additional Single Copy Documents section.

DO NOT SUBMIT other documents, including letters of commitment or collaboration from the domestic partner universities, prospective industrial members, or other future partners. The only allowed item is the required letter of commitment from the Dean of Engineering at the Lead Institution.

RELIMINARY PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

(Note: This is NOT a total list of the ERC preliminary proposal requirements. Refer to the ERC Solicitation and the PAPPG for complete requirements).

Full Proposal Preparation Instructions : Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Research.gov or Grants.gov.

• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg . Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] . The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.
• Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov . The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: ( https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

3. FULL PROPOSAL

Full Proposal Preparation Instructions :

As a multi-university ERC, the proposal must be submitted as a single integrated proposal by the Lead university, with proposed subawards to the other partner institutions. Separately submitted collaborative proposals from each partner will not be accepted.

Select "Prepare New Full Proposal" in Research.gov. Search for and select this solicitation title in Step One of the Full Proposal wizard. Select "Center" as the proposal type. In the proposal details section, select "Single proposal (with or without subawards)." Separately submitted collaborative proposals will be returned without review.

Title: Research.gov will pre-pend the title with "Center." The remainder of the title should begin with "NSF Engineering Research Center for ( insert the rest of the title and the Center's acronym )". The title should reflect the engineering system of the proposed ERC.

Cover Sheet: For planning purposes, September 1, 2026 should be shown as the requested start date. The award duration should be 60 months.

Project Summary (1 page): The Project Summary must have three separate section headers entitled "Overview", "Intellectual Merit", and "Broader Impacts"; each heading must be on its own line with no other text on that line. Within the Overview section, include a separate sub-section entitled "Proposed Vision".

The summary should be informative to those working in the same or related fields and understandable to a scientifically or technically literate reader. Full proposals that do not contain the Project Summary as described above will be returned without review.

Project Description: Maximum 26 pages, total, containing the following sections, not necessarily in this order. Figures and tables must be included within the 26-page limit.

Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts: The intellectual merit and broader impacts of the ERC must be addressed and described throughout the narrative as an integral part of the Project Description. Between Sections IV and V, include a separate header for Broader Impacts, as specified below.

Outline for the Full Proposal Project Description (up to 26 pages)

BROADER IMPACTS ( Please note: The Project Description must include a separate section header labeled Broader Impacts and the heading must be on its own line with no other text on that line .)

VIII. Evaluation Plan

IX. Financial Support and Functional Allocation of Resources

X. Results from Prior NSF Support

The proposed vision for the ERC must be explained, with a discussion of the convergent engineering research theme and the anticipated societal impact. Explain the proposed transformative engineered system and the potential for impact on society, the engineering community and the greater scientific community.

Rationale: Make the case for why the proposed ERC is appropriate and why a convergent approach is needed for the targeted societal impact. Articulate why this vision cannot be realized with a series of individual investigators awards, the additional value of the proposed ERC compared with the sum of its parts.

The plan must clearly define the engineered system and describe how the features of the ERC will be integrated to achieve the vision, in particular the cohesive plan for involving participants at all levels in the four foundational components:

The Strategic Plan should include the high-level goals within each of these foundational components that will be described in more detail in later sections and the interrelationships among those goals, as well as the strategic role of partner institutions in integrating the foundation components and achieving these goals. The plan should also include the high-level expected progress of the ERC efforts across the 10-years of support in these four fundamental components, including ERC growth. The plan should further include discussions on the overarching convergent approach, the engagement of the stakeholder community, and the plans for convergent team formation. The ERC Strategic Plan should provide a roadmap with major milestones and describe how the ERC will know when it has been successful in meeting its goals. Finally, the ERC Strategic Plan should also articulate the logical reasoning that connects the proposed activities to the identified goals as well as the connections between the goals and the desired impacts expressed in the ERC Vision. The overall strategy must have the flexibility and the agility to evolve over time. An ERC needs to continually refine its vision based on a reliable feedback mechanism to focus on core advances, prune less compelling ERC elements, and refine as necessary the level of detail of its strategic plan over time.

Leadership Team: To properly address the four foundational components of the ERC, among the ERC Leadership Team, there must be identified individuals with: (a) deep expertise in the fundamental science/engineering areas envisioned by the ERC; (b) strategic leadership in innovation including intellectual property; (c) expertise in engineering workforce development and (d) experience in diversity and inclusion. Provide a chart summarizing the composition and expertise of the leadership team. Justify how each of the disciplines in this spectrum is needed for the convergent approach.

Management Plan: Proposals must include a management plan that describes the administration of the Center, including the functions of the leadership team, key personnel, and the role of any advisory committees, including the required Student Leadership Council and the Council of Deans, executive committee(s), and/or program committees or their equivalent. While the details of the structure are left to the proposers, the management structure should be designed to facilitate and integrate the ERC's critical and foundational components (CR, EWD, DCI, and IE). In addition, the proposed management plan should address the roles, authorities, and accountability for the leadership team that will ensure no bottlenecks in decision making.

Specifically, the successful proposal will delineate:

• The overall management and reporting structure of the ERC.
• Which personnel or groups will be responsible for CR, EWD, DCI, and IE. Please explain the relevant experience and expertise of these individuals and how they fit their assigned roles.
• These individuals should be included in the leadership team.
• An organizational chart, including advisory boards and the reporting/feedback loops involved.

The accompanying narrative for the organization chart should define the functional roles and responsibilities of each leadership position, and how these positions support the integrated strategic plan described earlier. It should also define the functional purpose of any additional advisory bodies that are deemed necessary to support the four foundational components, accomplish the proposed ERC vision, and achieve the desired long-term societal impact. Note that the functional roles of the two mandated ERC Advisory Bodies, the Council of Deans and the Student Leadership Council, are defined earlier in the section on Community Feedback. Since the quality of team member interaction is critical to team effectiveness, describe the managerial processes overlaying the organization chart that will be used to integrate the team. Please provide sufficient detail to allow critical evaluation.

Institutional Configuration: Describe the institutional configuration given the proposed vision for the ERC. Discuss the value added by each core partner university in meeting the goals of the four foundational components. Discuss the value added by any partnerships as described in the Key Elements of an ERC – Partners section.

IV. Convergent Research (CR)

ERCs are expected to have center-scale convergent engineering research that will support the ERC's overall potential for societal impact. The research program is the core of the ERC from which all ERC activities evolve.

Research Strategy: Clearly describe the proposed engineered system (a combination of components and elements that work together to perform a useful function) for the ERC. This section must include detailed research strategies, such as the 3-plane diagram (described below), research thrusts, and testbeds. A 10-year roadmap must illustrate the critical path, milestones, contributions from research projects, interdependence of research activities, short- and long-term deliverables, and overarching objectives in knowledge, technology, and proof of principle testbeds included in the ERC's vision. Impacts of the proposed research and technology outcomes on society, stakeholders, and the scientific and engineering communities must be included. Discuss how the research strategy will support the proposed societal impact of the ERC, including any potential negative consequences that would arise from the development of new technologies. Include risk mitigation strategies if appropriate. This section should also include strategies for building and maintaining teams appropriate for the proposed convergent approach and the process for starting, managing, and potentially ending research projects throughout the lifetime of the ERC. This section should clearly state what fundamental knowledge is expected within each thrust to advance the state of the art, including engineering as a whole discipline.

ERC 3-Plane Strategic Planning Chart: Identify and characterize interdependent research thrusts and activities at fundamental knowledge, enabling technology, and systems-level testbed(s) scales. Integration of research activities must be graphically depicted on a clearly legible version of the ERC Program's 3-Plane Strategic Planning Chart ( https://erc-assoc.org/content/strategic-planning-research-3-plane-chart ) that is tailored to the proposed ERC. The chart should be at least half a page, but a full page is recommended for legibility, as this chart is used at several stages of the NSF review process.

Research Thrusts: Each thrust description should start with a table that lists the thrust leader and other faculty/research participants by name, department, and institution. International partners, if any, who may be involved in the early stages of the thrust efforts must also be listed. Discuss the goals and objectives of the thrust vis-à-vis the goals of the ERC and the convergent research strategic plan and how these thrusts will support each other. Provide information on fundamental knowledge and technology deliverables. Identify the gaps and barriers the thrust will address in the context of the ERC's strategic plan. Discuss the convergent cross-disciplinary mix of expertise needed to achieve the goals of the thrust, as well as how the proposed team fulfills that need. Describe how future team building will support the convergent approach. Benchmark the research proposed for the thrust with respect to the state-of-the-art. Discuss the role of the thrust's research relative to the ERC's 3- Plane Strategic Planning Chart.

Project-level descriptions of specific research activities for each thrust must describe the proposed research and link it to the thrust goals. Describe a few exemplar projects in depth to allow judgment of the quality of the effort proposed, rather than superficially describing all projects. For these projects, provide examples of fundamental barriers the research will address, the need for a convergent approach, and project-level methods to address the barriers.

Demonstrate that the desired results constitute breakthroughs and are attainable in ten years. Discuss how projects support and integrate with other thrusts, enabling technologies, and systems-level testbeds in an overall convergent research approach.

Testbeds: Enabling- and systems-level testbeds must include a description of proposed proof-of-concept demonstration(s) in each testbed and personnel needed to construct and implement each proposed testbed. The research program budget should support technical staff to work with students and faculty to build these testbeds.

Note: NSF funds may not be used to support clinical trials. If the research involves vertebrate animals or includes human subjects, PAPPG requirements must be followed for the full proposal.

V. Engineering Workforce Development (EWD)

The ERC EWD program is driven by the future education, workforce development, and labor market needs relevant to the proposed Center. A proposed evidence-based program for building human capacity for the future engineering and technical workforce must be described. The proposed program should provide strategic goals for the ERC as well as targeted and specific outcomes related to workforce development and education.

Workforce Development occurs at all levels of the Center and provides opportunities for all ERC members including students, faculty, and external partners as appropriate. Proposed activities should logically lead to targeted outcomes and support diverse pathways and experiences for participants. Engineering workforce activities should contribute to a diverse, globally competitive, and team-oriented engineering workforce that has experience in convergent research, technology advancement, industrial practice, and innovation. Rather than a comprehensive set of training opportunities (general public, faculty, professional, vocational, graduate students, undergraduate students, and K-12), EWD programs should include a strategic selection of targeted activities that logically connect to each other and that will enable the long-term vision of the Center ERCs should leverage team and institutional expertise and resources to maximize impact with targeted activities.

At least 6 non-ERC students must enroll in a Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program budgeted at a minimum of $80K per year from the ERC base budget, as well as at least 6 participants must be engaged in a Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) program budgeted at a minimum of $60K per year from the ERC base budget. Awarded ERCs are encouraged to submit proposals to the annual Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Site and Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) Site competitions to expand the Center's workforce development impact. Partnerships with inner city, rural, or other high needs schools are especially encouraged, as is participation of the full spectrum of diverse talent in STEM. Suitable metrics to assess progress towards meeting the ERC's goals should be described, and feedback loops should be in place for continuous program improvement.

Describe how the leadership team will effectively support workforce development and educational programming and their growth. This section should also clearly describe how the proposed workforce development program will interact with existing educational or training systems at all partner institutions. Include a description of plans for engaging with partners, recruiting participants, and anticipated participant experiences. Educational partnerships may be leveraged to support the program and provide opportunities to engage with potential participants. All Engineering Workforce Development program participants, whether internal or external to the ERC, should have opportunities that are unique and would otherwise not be possible without the ERC.

VI. Diversity and Culture of Inclusion (DCI)

Describe the vision and plans for nurturing a culture that ensures participation of the full spectrum of diverse talent in STEM. A culture of inclusion has many important aspects that are essential for deep collaboration, including the participation of members from diverse scientific backgrounds and training which is necessary for true convergent research and innovation. A culture of inclusion must also foster participation of a diversity of partner institutions, including industry and practitioners, that will bring different perspectives to bear on the goals of the ERC. At least one core partner institution that enrolls and graduates a high percentage of underrepresented students in engineering and STEM fields must be included.

Describe preliminary ideas to create and nurture a culture that fosters the engagement of all ERC participants, including those from a diverse range of scientific backgrounds. This section should include evidence-based and intentional programming to support the inclusion of all talent that integrates and strengthen convergent research efforts across all institutions. Suitable metrics to assess the ERC's goals should be described, and feedback loops should be in place for independent assessment and continuous improvement in all dimensions of ERC operation.

In this section, describe how the leadership team will effectively create an inclusive culture for the ERC in which all members feel valued and welcomed, creatively contribute, and gain mutual benefit from participating. Include a description of plans for recruiting, mentoring, and retaining undergraduates, graduate students, and members of the research and leadership team from full spectrum of diverse talent in engineering. Describe the role of all partners, including plans to connect with ERC’s research and innovation goals in meaningful way, benefiting the students and faculty in the Center.

The ERC program is committed to including the participation of the full spectrum of diverse talent in STEM.

VII. Innovation Ecosystem (IE)

At its core, the innovation ecosystem is a network formed among trusted partners working together towards the common goal of creating and enhancing the capacity for innovation within the ecosystem.

In this section, discuss how the ERC will foster the creation of societal value from innovations (e.g., inventions, goods, services, businesses) that benefit society in a sustainable fashion (i.e., value creation). Identify the innovation ecosystem stakeholders relevant to realizing the proposed vision and societal impact.

Describe the strategy to form relationships with stakeholders to garner support for the Center's vision. Specifically, include the ERC's plans for developing and fostering industrial/practitioner memberships and involvement; technology transfer to member and non-member firms; if included, the role of university and state and local government as facilitators of entrepreneurship, civics, economic/workforce development and innovation; or regulatory agencies as influencers of the ERC innovation , end users or customers as beneficiaries of the ERC innovation, and plans for supporting translational research when appropriate.

To maximize positive social impact, any anticipated potential negative consequences caused by the introduction of the ERC technology should be addressed. In these cases, make sure to include stakeholder(s) that will work to mitigate the negative impacts, such as through consideration of regulation and ethics.

Provide a description of how the proposed member firms (e.g., innovation partners, facilitators, influencers, and beneficiaries) align to the proposed ERC's technology area. That is, as the ERC's research program evolves, note at which points in time in the ERC development over its 10-year lifespan different types of stakeholders engage with the ERC to enable success and create societal value. Some stakeholders may be engaged for the entire 10 years, and others may be involved with focused research activities at critical points in time (e.g., testbed development).

Discuss the integration of all stakeholders into the governance and operations of the ERC. Include a letter of collaboration ( please make sure to use the template provided in the PAPPG ) from each stakeholder that identifies their commitment to work with the ERC as described in the project description. The letters should be uploaded in the Supplementary Documents section.

Legal Frameworks: The different stakeholder groups/organizations/partners operate under very different legal frameworks that can make seamless collaboration difficult. Consequently, the ERC must work within the university structure to create an environment where the frameworks can be modified so that the different entities can come together for productive interaction. In advance of anyone joining the ERC, it is important to put in place legal agreements that protect the interests of the stakeholder entities and the university partners. Therefore, at a minimum, all ERCs require two legal frameworks to handle (1) intellectual property and (2) industry/practitioner membership agreements. The specifics of the ERC vision and the nature of the stakeholder community will determine whether additional legal frameworks are necessary.

• Intellectual Property: Describe the overall Intellectual Property (IP) strategy consistent with planned value creation in the ERC, and the corresponding management of the ERC IP across the lead and partner institutions and the approaches that will enable licensing of ERC's IP and/or adopting of other ERC outcomes. This plan must discuss management of possible conflicts-of-interest of any ERC researchers and the ERC's technology transfer endeavors. If an award is made, the IP policy must be prepared and submitted within 90 days of the award.
• Industry/Practitioner Membership Agreement: Discuss the terms of the draft membership agreement including the proposed fee structure and benefits. Describe the type(s) of support to be received. A letter of commitment (one page maximum for each) from each firm/practitioner organization committed to joining the ERC as a member and providing (cash and/or in-kind) support in the event that an award is made must be uploaded in Supplementary Documents.

Based on the goals and desired outcomes of the ERC strategic plan, a proposed evaluation plan is required that includes all four foundational components as well as a risk analysis . The purpose of ERC evaluation is to provide feedback on progress towards meeting Center goals. The evaluation plan should include formative aspects that allow the Center to make evidence-based decisions about changes in its activities and summative aspects to provide evidence of impact across all elements of the ERC. This section should include the evaluation questions, as well as, a description of the type of evaluation design and methods that will be used to address each question. This section should specify the mechanisms and timeline for how the results and recommendations from evaluation and assessment will be fed back into ERC goals, objectives, and milestones to ensure continual progress and attainment of goals, targets, and impacts during the project period. It should also identify the person(s) who will lead the ERC evaluation and briefly describe their academic training and professional experience that qualifies them to serve as an evaluator. Evaluator(s) may be internal or external to ERC institutions but should be positioned to carry out the evaluation plan as objectively as possible.

Awardees may be required to participate in program-level evaluation activities by which NSF can assess implementation processes and progress toward program level outcomes. NSF, an NSF contractor, or a grantee on behalf of NSF, may periodically conduct program evaluations or special projects that necessitate access to project level staff and data. This activity may occur at any time during the award period and could occur after NSF support has ended. ERC participation includes responding to inquiries, interview and other methods of common data collection and/or aggregation across ERCs. In addition, PIs and ERC evaluators may be asked to assist in developing program evaluation activities that will mutually benefit the agency and ERC participants.

Discuss the plans for financial and in-kind support from all sources, except cost sharing. Include plans for allocation of those resources to fulfill the goals of the ERC. Include a functional budget table, showing only the estimated proportional distribution of effort across the ERC in its first 5 years without showing the support levels from any sources. The table must not show the sources of support, since the reviewers cannot have access to the level of academic support. A template of the table can be found on bullet #3: http://erc-assoc.org/content/templates-proposal-preparation-0 .

This section of the proposal must also include a pie chart showing the allocation of resources and committed levels of support for the first five years from industrial or practitioner member firms and any additional non-member commitments from state and/or local governments for cash and/or in-kind support. A template of the table for Pie Chart Showing Allocation of Resources and Committed Levels of Support can be found on bullet #4: http://erc-assoc.org/content/templates-proposal-preparation-0 .

Provide a pie chart showing the planned distribution of the requested NSF funds for year one between the lead, each domestic partner university, and each university contributing affiliated faculty.

If the Director and Lead PI (if different) identified on the proposal have received prior NSF support, including any award with an end date in the past five years or current funding including any no-cost extensions, the intellectual merit and broader impacts accomplished under that award should be discussed. In cases where the Director and Lead PI have received more than one award (excluding amendments to existing awards), they should only report on the award that is most closely related to the proposal (for each, if the Director and Lead PI are different people) . See PAPPG II.D.2.iii for the required format of this section. Recommended length – no more than one page.

In addition, the proposal must also include these documents and information.

References Cited: See PAPPG for format guidelines.

Budgetary Information: Travel Funds for ERC Leadership Team's Participation in Biennial Meetings: Members of the ERC Leadership Team are required to participate in the ERC Biennial Meeting (typically held in odd years) and the cross- ERC Leadership Team retreats (which are typically held annually). The purpose of biennial meeting is to share successes and failures across the ERCs, receive updates on the ERC Program, and provide input for future ERC Program improvements. The purpose of the retreats is to focus on issues and best practices specific to the different leadership team groups. The biennial meetings are held in the Washington DC area for 2.5 days. Retreats are held in various locations for 1-2 days. Travel funds must be included in each annual budget to support participation in alternating biennial and leadership retreats for each person identified.

Note: The budget justification section should only identify items that are not cost shared. A justification and explanation of cost shared items needs to be appended to the cost sharing tables that are submitted in the single-copy documents section of the proposal.

Cost sharing is mandatory and is specific to the ERC solicitation . The percentage of cost share is determined using the Cost Sharing Formula in the Budgetary Information section of this solicitation. Lead and core partner institutions are responsible for cost share on their entire portion of NSF funds, including sub-awards from their institutions to affiliate partners or other payees. Please see the Budgetary Information section of this solicitation for additional information.

Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources . In this section, please include ONLY facilities, equipment, and personnel that are directly relevant and unique to the proposed ERC. Briefly discuss such laboratories, facilities, cyberinfrastructure, personnel, and equipment, particularly those shared by the ERC team members. Distinguish existing facilities and equipment from any that will be acquired by the ERC (see PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.i). Space must be identified on the campus of the lead academic institution for the ERC headquarters. Describe the headquarters, including the size, functionality, and features. Discuss how the cyberinfrastructure, facilities, and equipment of the ERC will be used to form and sustain a collaborative ERC team with shared resources and information.

Letters of commitment should be included in the supplementary documents for facilities, equipment, etc. that are being provided by institutions or collaborators which are not from the lead institution or the core partners.

Senior/Key Personnel Documents

In accordance with the guidance in the PAPPG, the following information must be provided for all individuals designated as Senior/Key Personnel. This includes the Lead PI, Center Director if different from the Lead PI, co-PIs, all members of the ERC Leadership Team and key faculty.

• Biographical Sketch
• Current and Pending (Other) Support
• Collaborators & Other Affiliations Information
• Synergistic Activities

Supplementary Documents . In addition to the requirements contained in the PAPPG, the following items must be provided as supplementary documents.

Table of Academic/Other Participants and Industrial/Practitioner Members: The table should be created using the table format available on the ERC Association website on bullet #5 at: http://erc-assoc.org/content/templates-proposal-preparation-0 . Download and use the Word file named " ERC Participants Table Template for Inclusion in Full Proposal. " Provide all the required information in each section of the table.

Letters of Commitment : These letters should express commitment, but should not praise or advocate for the project, and must follow the format for letters of collaboration given in the PAPPG. Submit the following required letters as indicated:

• Lead university: Senior university administrators (Dean of Engineering plus one other higher-level university official) for the lead university attesting to the institutional commitment to the goals of the ERC and a commitment to headquarters space in both letters. The letters should not mention cost sharing, as that information cannot be revealed to reviewers. The letters should indicate the institutional commitment to all major aspects of the ERC, including each of the four foundational components, and assure the development of a cross-ERC IP policy within 90 days, if an award is made.
• Each Core Partner University: A senior administrator (Dean or equivalent) attests to the partner's institutional commitment to the goals of the ERC.
• If applicable, officials from any participating federal laboratories indicating their involvement in the ERC and their commitment to provide support for their staff participating in the ERC.
• Member Organizations: A letter of commitment (one page maximum for each) from each firm/practitioner organization committed to joining the ERC as a member and providing (cash and/or in-kind) support.

Letters of Collaboration

The following Letters of Collaboration are required if applicable to the proposed ERC. These letters should state generic willingness to collaborate, but should not provide specific details on types or amounts of contributions and must follow the format for letters of collaboration given in the PAPPG:

• Officials of firms and agencies able to commit to membership.
• An administrator of each proposed pre-college or community college partners committing to their roles in the ERC as described in the Project Description.
• State or local government agencies and other organizations committed to partnership with the ERC.
• Domestic affiliated facult y if their projects are planned to be in place during years one through five. Note that no letters are required from the administrators of the universities providing affiliated faculty.
• Foreign collaborators , if any.

All letters should be addressed to:

ERC Program

Division of Engineering Education and Centers

U.S. National Science Foundation

All signed letters must be scanned and uploaded in the Other Supplementary Documents section of the proposal. Please instruct the letter writers not to mail, email, or fax copies to the NSF, as they will not be considered.

Draft Membership Agreement . Submit draft industry/practitioner membership agreement.

Data Management and Sharing Plan . Provide a Data Management and Sharing Plan according to guidance in the PAPPG. Go to ENG Data Management Plans | NSF - National Science Foundation ( https://www.nsf.gov/eng/general/dmp.jsp ) for Engineering-specific guidance.

Mentoring Plan . If applicable, provide a mentoring plan for postdoctoral scholars or graduate students who will be supported by ERC funds.

Single Copy Documents . Viewable only by NSF (also refer to the PAPPG Chapter II.C.1 on "Single-Copy Documents" for additional information):

Optional List of Suggested Reviewers or Reviewers Not to Include: Proposers may include in the single copy documents section a list of suggested reviewers who they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal. Proposers also may designate persons they would prefer not to review the ERC proposal, indicating why. These suggestions are optional. PAPPG Exhibit II-2 contains information on conflicts of interest that may be useful in the preparation of this list. The cognizant Program Officer handling the proposal considers the suggestions and may contact the proposer for further information. However, the decision whether to use the suggestions remains with the Program Officer.

Required Cost Sharing Tables and Justification: Complete and submit the following tables: " Committed Cash and In-Kind Academic Support, Years 1-5 " and, if applicable, a table showing the " Nature of In-Kind Support " identifying any in-kind commitments and the sources of the commitments. A template of those tables can be found at (bullet #6): http://erc-assoc.org/content/templates-proposal-preparation-0 . The tables should be uploaded into the single copy documents section of the full proposal. Appended to the cost sharing tables will be a justification/explanation of the source, nature, amount, and availability of any proposed cost sharing. The Proposers are directed not to include these tables and the cost sharing justification in any other part of the proposal, as cost sharing commitments are not provided to the reviewers. Refer to the section on Budgetary Information and Cost Sharing in this solicitation for information on cost sharing requirements and policies.

Proposal Update: If the proposed ERC is evaluated by a Site Visit Team (SVT), a 10-page reply that integrates changes in the proposed ERC based on comments from the SVT members and the Site Visit Report will be requested to facilitate the final stages of the review process.

INVITED FULL PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

(Note: This is NOT a total list of the ERC proposal requirements. Refer to the ERC Solicitation and the PAPPG for complete requirements).

Post Proposal Submission to NSF: Other Required Documents

Cost Sharing:

Cost Sharing is required.

Invited full proposals will include a budget for each of the five years. Research.gov or Grants.gov will automatically provide a cumulative budget. Provide separate budgets for subawards to the domestic core partner institutions and any affiliated institutions whose faculty and students would be supported by the ERC's budget. Allowable budgets for the first five years are as follows: The budget for year one may be no more than $3,500,000, no more than $4,500,000 for year two, no more than $6,000,000 for year three, no more than $6,000,000 for year four, and for year five.

Cost Sharing: Mandatory Cost Sharing is required but inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Mandatory Cost Sharing Requirements and Policies: Cost sharing is required of the lead university and core partner university(ies) to support and sustain the ERC. Cost sharing is not a review criterion for the ERCs; it is an eligibility criterion. Because cost sharing is not a review criterion, details on cost sharing will not be shared with the reviewers.

Upon issuance of the award, the lead university is responsible to secure, retain, manage, and certify to NSF the ERC cost sharing (cash and in-kind), at the level stated in the cooperative agreement. The total level of cost sharing proposed must be calculated using the "Cost Sharing Formula" below.

Cost sharing must not exceed the mandatory level stated in the ERC cost sharing formula. This would be considered "voluntary committed cost sharing" which is specifically prohibited according to NSF's cost sharing policies. ERC proposals that include cost sharing amounts in excess of the specified formula will be returned without review or declined.

Instructions for Disclosure and Non-Disclosure of Cost Sharing within the Proposal:

Cost Sharing and Letters of Commitment: Since cost sharing is not to be seen or considered by reviewers, any letters of commitment should not mention any cost sharing (cash or in-kind), since the reviewers will see these letters. See Section V.A for details concerning the letters of commitment.

Cost Sharing in the Budget Submission: The proposed cost sharing (including the estimated value of any in-kind cost sharing), according to the formula below, must be shown on Line M of the NSF proposal budget form. (Line M is masked from reviewers.)

Cumulative cost sharing should be entered for all 5 years on Line M of the first-year budget. Do not include the cost sharing figures on Line M of the budget for years 2-5. Do not include the justification / explanation for any cost-shared items in the budget justification section of the proposal. Only the non-cost shared items should be explained in the budget justification section, identifying the source, nature, amount and availability of non-cost shared items.

Cost Sharing Tables and Justification: The cost sharing commitment of the ERC must be documented in the proposal and the details presented in the tables of committed support. The lead institution is instructed to provide a table of "Committed Cash and In-Kind Academic Support, Years 1-5" (including any partner university providing cash for years 1-5). Proposers must also complete the table "Nature of In-Kind Support" identifying in-kind commitments and the sources of the commitments. A template of those tables can be found at (bullet #6) http://erc-assoc.org/content/templates-proposal-preparation-0 . The tables should be uploaded into the "Single Copy Documents" section of the proposal. Append to the cost sharing tables a justification / explanation of the source, nature, amount and availability of any proposed cost sharing. Do not include these tables and the cost sharing justification in any other part of the proposal, as cost sharing commitments are not to be provided to reviewers.

Cost Sharing Formula:

ERC cost sharing requirements are determined based on classification at the time of the LOI submission deadline as defined in the "Carnegie Foundation's Classification of Institutions of Higher Education." Limited financial resources at smaller colleges and universities that lack high research activity may present significant challenges to cost sharing. Therefore:

• RU/VH: Research Universities - required cost sharing level is 20% of the allocation of the NSF budget to the lead or core partner university;
• RU/H: Research Universities - required cost sharing level is 15% of the allocation of the NSF budget to the lead or core partner university;
• DRU: Doctoral/Research Universities - cost sharing level is 10% of the allocation of the NSF budget to that core partner university.
• Master's L: Master's Colleges and Universities - cost sharing level is 10% of the allocation of the NSF budget to that core partner university/college;
• Bac/Diverse: Baccalaureate Colleges--Diverse Fields - cost sharing level is 5% of the allocation of the NSF budget to that core partner college.

If the university is classified in more than one Carnegie category, it must cost share at the highest cost sharing category as described above. The Carnegie classification shall remain throughout the duration of the competition and any subsequent award. The total ERC cost share shall be 20% or less, depending upon the Carnegie classifications for each of the partners.

ERC Support Cost-Sharing Sources:

The proposed cost sharing must be shown on Line M on the proposal budget. For purposes of budget preparation, the cumulative cost sharing amount must be entered on Line M of the first year’s budget. Should an award be made, the organization’s cost sharing commitment, as specified on the first year’s approved budget, must be met prior to award expiration.

Such cost sharing will be an eligibility, rather than a review criterion. Proposers are advised not to exceed the mandatory cost sharing level or amount specified in the solicitation.

When mandatory cost sharing is included on Line M, and accepted by the Foundation, the commitment of funds becomes legally binding and is subject to audit. When applicable, the estimated value of any in-kind contributions also should be included on Line M. An explanation of the source, nature, amount and availability of any proposed cost sharing must be provided in the budget justification. Contributions may be made from any non-Federal source, including non-Federal grants or contracts, and may be cash or in-kind. 2 CFR § 200.306 describes criteria and procedures for the allowability of cash and in-kind contributions in satisfying cost sharing and matching requirements. It should be noted that contributions derived from other Federal funds or counted as cost sharing toward projects of another Federal agency must not be counted towards meeting the specific cost sharing requirements of the NSF award.

Failure to provide the level of cost sharing required by the NSF solicitation and reflected in the NSF award budget may result in termination of the NSF award, disallowance of award costs and/or refund of award funds to NSF by the awardee.

The overall ERC-level budget should be prepared to assure sufficient funding from all sources to achieve the goals of the ERC. Hence, this budget would include faculty and staff to support the research, education, diversity and culture of inclusion, industrial collaboration/innovation, and management of the ERC. Budgets should include resources for reporting, site visit costs, and travel for cross-ERC collaboration and NSF meetings. The budget submitted to NSF will include an allocation plan for the NSF funding only.

     May 09, 2025

D. Research.gov/Grants.gov Requirements

For Proposals Submitted Via Research.gov:

To prepare and submit a proposal via Research.gov, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.research.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html . For Research.gov user support, call the Research.gov Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected] . The Research.gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the Research.gov system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:

Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: https://www.grants.gov/applicants . In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: [email protected] . The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.

Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to Research.gov for further processing.

The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov informational page provides submission guidance to applicants and links to helpful resources including the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide , Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov how-to guide , and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Frequently Asked Questions . Grants.gov proposals must pass all NSF pre-check and post-check validations in order to be accepted by Research.gov at NSF.

When submitting via Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends applicants initiate proposal submission at least five business days in advance of a deadline to allow adequate time to address NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting organization's local time on the deadline. Please note that some errors cannot be corrected in Grants.gov. Once a proposal passes pre-checks but fails any post-check, an applicant can only correct and submit the in-progress proposal in Research.gov.

Proposers that submitted via Research.gov may use Research.gov to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.

VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures

Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ .

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Leading the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Talent Development and the Delivery of Benefits from Research - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 - 2026 . These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.

1. Merit Review Principles

These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

• All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
• NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.
• Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project.

With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.

These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

2. Merit Review Criteria

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i). contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal.

When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

• Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and
• Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

• Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
• Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
• To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
• Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
• How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?
• Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and other underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

PRELIMINARY Proposal Additional Review Criteria:

Reviewers should consider these high-level questions:

How well does the preliminary proposal narrative address the following in the project description?

• What is the compelling new idea and what is the potential high societal impact?
• What is the engineered system? Is it high-risk but high payoff?
• Is the 3-plane chart well-conceived and justified?
• How does the proposed Center's research benchmark against the state-of-the-art?
• What is the proposed management structure for the ERC? How will the proposed organization and management structure integrate and implement the four foundational components (CR, EWD, DCI, and IE) and foster team-formation?
• Does the proposed ERC create an inclusive environment where all the ERC participants learn to work on a team towards a common goal?

FULL Proposal Additional Review Criteria:

• What is the engineered system?
• Why is the proposed vision compelling?
• Why is the proposed research competitive when benchmarked against the state-of-the-art?
• How well does the proposed ERC justify the need for a center or institute-like approach?

High Societal Impact

• What is the potential for high societal impact?
• How realistic is the proposed plan for high societal impact?
• If the proposed strategy is high-risk does the potential payoff from anticipated impacts justify the investment?

Convergence Research

• Does the proposed research require a convergent approach and is its implementation well documented?
• How well justified is the argument that convergence is necessary for the desired impact?
• How well has the convergent approach been fully integrated into the proposal?
• What is the likelihood the research will lead to significant fundamental advances, new discoveries, and technological developments?
• How well does the proposed research use the testbeds to integrate and to advance proofs-of-concept to achieve the proposed vision?
• Are there well-defined implementation milestones for convergence research?

Stakeholder Engagement

• Are effective mechanisms to gather, engage, and implement feedback from appropriate stakeholders in place (i.e., collaborators, supporters, advisory boards, external committees)?

Team Formation

• How does the team formation and the implementation of team science support the proposed convergent research?
• How well has the ERC demonstrated strategies to overcome barriers for effective, dynamic teaming?

Strategic Plan

• How well does the Center present an integrated strategic plan for the ERC to address the key elements of each foundational component and their integration?
• How well does the proposal present an appropriate and compelling management structure and plan to carry out Center activities?

Management and Organization

• How appropriate are the qualifications of proposed leadership and management team?
• How well does the proposal present appropriate and compelling management structure and plan to carry out Center activities?
• Are effective mechanisms to gather and implement feedback from appropriate stakeholders in place, including advisory boards and external committees?

Engineering Workforce Development

• To what extent is the proposed program coherent and aligned with the overall goals and vision of the ERC?
• Do the proposed Engineering Workforce Development plans include appropriate strategies for recruiting participants and engaging with partners?
• Are the proposed Engineering Workforce Development plans evidence-based and likely to achieve the desired experiences, outcomes, and impact described?

Diversity and Culture of Inclusion

• How well does the discussion include a clear strategy to support Diversity and Culture of Inclusion?
• To what extent does the program propose evidence-based approaches for Diversity and Culture of Inclusion that are integrated with all dimensions of ERC operation?
• How well does the management plan include clear accountability for Diversity and Culture of Inclusion aspects of the ERC across all partners?

Innovation Ecosystem

• How well does the proposal describe a plan to build a network of trusted partners for innovation capacity?
• How appropriate is the proposed structure and processes for value creation to move from ideation to implementation?

Evaluation Plan

• How well has the Center developed a logic evaluation framework to guide the implementation of the strategic plan and evaluate Center performance?
• How well does the evaluation plan include formative aspects that allow the Center to make evidence-based decisions about changes in its activities and summative aspects to provide evidence of impact across all elements of the Center?

Financial Support and Resources

• Are the estimated budget allocations reasonable to achieve the proposed ERC vision?
• Does the Center have adequate capital (i.e., facilities, equipment, cyberinfrastructure) and procedural (i.e., safety, environmental) resources?
• Does the Center have a convincing plan for data sharing and management?

B. Review and Selection Process

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by

Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review, Site Visit Review, or Reverse Site Review.

For Additional Review Criteria (see above listing)

Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new recipients may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

VII. Award Administration Information

A. notification of the award.

Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)

B. Award Conditions

An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF . Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

Administrative and National Policy Requirements

Build America, Buy America

As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers (86 FR 7475), it is the policy of the executive branch to use terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards to maximize, consistent with law, the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.

Consistent with the requirements of the Build America, Buy America Act (Pub. L. 117-58, Division G, Title IX, Subtitle A, November 15, 2021), no funding made available through this funding opportunity may be obligated for an award unless all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States. For additional information, visit NSF’s Build America, Buy America webpage.

Special Award Conditions:

TBD - Programmatic Terms and Conditions: TBD - Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions:

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final annual project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.

Failure to provide the required annual or final annual project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final annual project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

NSF requires ERCs to submit annual reports that are more extensive in scope than those required of single investigator awards. NSF provides guidelines for these reports. NSF also requires ERCs to collect and submit to NSF data on indicators of progress, outcome, impact, and financial management. NSF provides data definition guidelines and templates for the recording and submission of these data through a secure web site.

VIII. Agency Contacts

Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:

• NSF Help Desk: 1-800-381-1532
• Research.gov Help Desk e-mail: [email protected]

For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: [email protected] .

IX. Other Information

The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences . Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website .

Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at https://www.grants.gov .

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.F.7 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314 (NSF Information Center) (703) 292-5111 (703) 292-5090 Send an e-mail to: or telephone: (703) 292-8134 (703) 292-5111 Privacy Act And Public Burden Statements The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by proposers will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding proposers or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See System of Record Notices , NSF-50 , "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," and NSF-51 , "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records.” Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne H. Plimpton Reports Clearance Officer Policy Office, Division of Institution and Award Support Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management National Science Foundation Alexandria, VA 22314 A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. About CDC Approach to Program Evaluation CDC Program Evaluation Framework Related Topics: About Office of Policy, Performance, and Evaluation CDC Approach to Program Evaluation Program evaluation allows you to determine how effective and efficient your programs, policies, and/or organizations are in reaching their outcomes. Collecting and analyzing data regularly and consistently is necessary for effective Program evaluation. Program evaluation is crucial to inform decisions, act on findings, and drive continuous program improvement. Program Evaluation is one of the ten essential functions of public health . It can help clarify: How to improve existing programs and build upon their strengths. Why a program is or is not being implemented as planned or producing intended results. Why certain trends or patterns are observed in existing data sources. Why it's important Program Evaluation helps provide answers to important questions regarding: Program implementation (Are program activities being completed as planned?) Effectiveness (Is the program achieving what was intended?) Attribution (Did the outcomes achieved happen because of the program?) Contribution (Are factors that could contribute to outcomes identified?) Efficiency (Is the program operating using the appropriate resources?) Our approach CDC uses Program Evaluation to answer important questions about public health programs through methodical and intentional engagement with interest holders. This can lead to an understanding of the program, what should be evaluated, and how it should be evaluated. Program Evaluation produces findings that: Translate evidence to recommendations for action Demonstrate accountability to funders, policymakers, and participants of the program Document progress and ensure optimal use of resources Help inform decisions about areas for program improvement Types of Program Evaluations There are many types of evaluations 1 that can be used for different purposes. Formative evaluation is typically conducted to assess whether a program, policy, or organizational approach is feasible, appropriate, and acceptable before it is fully implemented. It can include process or outcome measures and focuses on learning and improvement 2 . Process/Implementation evaluation assesses how well program implementation followed the original plan. It often includes information on content, quality, quantity, and structure of what is being assessed 3 . Outcome evaluation measures how well a program, policy, or organization has achieved its intended outcomes. It cannot determine what caused specific outcomes (causality), only whether they have been achieved 3 . Impact evaluation compares the outcomes of a program, policy, or organization to estimates of what the outcomes would have been without it. It usually seeks to determine whether the activities caused the observed outcomes 3 . Economic evaluation examines programmatic effects relative to program costs. Common approaches include cost analysis, cost-benefit analysis, and cost-utility analysis. Difference Between Program Evaluation, Research, Surveillance, and Monitoring While evaluation is often used interchangeably with these terms that also use systematic approaches to answer questions, they each have their own distinct purpose. Program Evaluation Compared with Research Research and evaluation are scientific activities that use similar methods 3 . Research aims to contribute to generalizable knowledge. Evaluation aims to continuously improve organizations, findings, and recommendations for decision making. Program Evaluation Compared with Surveillance Surveillance is the ongoing, systematic collection, analysis, and interpretation of health-related data. Surveillance data are often used as data sources for program activities. However, surveillance data alone are often insufficient to answer evaluation questions. Program Evaluation Compared with Measuring/Monitoring Performance Measurement is the ongoing monitoring and reporting of program accomplishments, particularly progress toward pre-established goals. These data can be used to identify increasing or decreasing performance that may warrant further investigation. Program Evaluation helps you to identify the reason behind these changes and potential areas of improvement. Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President, OMB M-20-12, Phase 4 Implementation of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018: Program Evaluation Standards and Practices .2020;Available from M-20-12 (whitehouse.gov) Office of Management and Budget. OMB M-21-27 (2021). Evidence-Based Policymaking: 1291 Learning Agendas and Annual Evaluation Plans . Retrieved from 1292 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/M-21-27.pdf Kidder, D., Fierro L et al. CDC Program Evaluation Framework. 2024, MMWR Program Evaluation The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention develops essential public health evaluation standards, tools and resources, and capacity-building support. Subscribe Follow Watch Director's Messages Partners in research: communities and nih working together to promote health for all. This Director’s Message was written in collaboration with the  NIH Common Fund  Community Partnerships to Advance Science for Society (ComPASS) Program . Have you heard about NIH’s innovative research program designed to create lasting change by addressing the underlying structural factors that shape health? Through the Community Partnerships to Advance Science for Society (ComPASS) Program , NIH is directly funding research projects led by community organizations.  Instead of tackling health disparities one disease at a time, the ComPASS program addresses structural factors that contribute to multiple diseases and health conditions. The projects study interventions that focus on factors that can promote health, such as improving economic stability, employment opportunities, access to healthy food, safe spaces, transportation, and quality healthcare. Communities and researchers work together as equal partners throughout the research process — from developing and launching structural interventions to sustaining and disseminating findings. To receive ComPASS program announcements and information about funding opportunities, join the ComPASS listserv .  How ComPASS is advancing prevention research ODP has enthusiastically partnered with ComPASS to support and shape this innovative program. ODP helped develop and promote ComPASS funding opportunities and provided technical assistance to applicants and awardees. Our office remains actively involved in promoting ComPASS and the success of community-led research programs to advance prevention research and health equity. ComPASS embodies several priorities and cross-cutting themes from ODP’s Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2024–2028: Creating a Healthier Future for All , including promoting collaborative research, addressing health disparities and social determinants of health (SDOH), developing and testing interventions, and building research capacity. We are excited to highlight a few ways in which ComPASS is integrating the principles of prevention and transforming research into sustainable solutions that promote health equity and create lasting change in communities nationwide. Unlike traditional research studies, ComPASS projects are led by community organizations that collaborate with academic researchers and other community partners.  ComPASS researchers study ways to reduce health disparities and improve health by addressing structural factors within communities. Indigenous healthy homes and healthy communities: A community-led initiative to improve health and support Indigenous Resilience in the US Southwest   Reducing Health Disparities through Enhanced Mobility Support and Access Cancer in Your Community: Strategies to Reduce Cancer and Chronic Disease in the Arkansas Delta Synergies between ComPASS and ODP initiatives ComPASS is one of many recent NIH initiatives to address SDOH and foster health equity. ODP is contributing to this area by leading additional funding opportunities emphasizing multilevel preventive intervention research.  The Developing and Testing Multi-level Physical Activity Interventions to Improve Health and Well-Being Notice of Special Interest (NOSI) , which is open until November 14, 2027, focuses on social and structural interventions and includes 10 other NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices (ICOs). The NOSI seeks research applications on new ideas that work at two or more levels of influence (e.g., changing the physical environment and public policy or impacting individual behavior and community resources) to help people increase their physical activity levels.  Our Multi-Sectoral Preventive Interventions Research Network   funding opportunity will support projects to test preventive interventions involving multiple service sectors (like education, housing, and transportation) and community-based organizations that address SDOH in populations that experience health disparities. ODP issued this funding opportunity with 13 participating NIH ICOs as part of the ADVANCE: Advancing Prevention Research for Health Equity initiative , an NIH-wide effort to develop and evaluate preventive interventions that address health disparities. We expect to announce the awarded projects next spring.  To cultivate a diverse workforce of scientists who can appropriately design and evaluate preventive interventions, the ODP-coordinated ADVANCE initiative published a Predoctoral T32 Training Program funding opportunity . The awarded training grants will train graduate students across three linked areas: (1) health disparities and health equity research, (2) development and implementation of multilevel preventive interventions, and (3) methods for the design and analysis of studies to evaluate multilevel preventive interventions. Programs are also strongly encouraged to collaborate with and involve community partners in their training activities. With the help of ComPASS and ODP’s aligned initiatives, we look forward to progressing toward a healthier and more equitable future. Subscribe to ODP’s listserv to get updates on all these funding opportunities and upcoming awards! 472 IMAGES FREE 11+ Sample Research Plan Templates in MS Word 14+ Research Plan Templates Research Plan Choose from 40 Research Proposal Templates & Examples. 100% Free 14+ Research Plan Templates FREE 11+ Sample Research Plan Templates in MS Word VIDEO How to Write a Research Proposal Research Paper Format For High Impact Journals Overview of a Research Proposal Basic Structure of Research Proposal 6.Research Format & Research Process in Education RESEARCH II. Q1 Module 4. How to Write a Research Plan (Part 2) COMMENTS How to write a research plan: Step-by-step guide Here's an example outline of a research plan you might put together: Project title. Project members involved in the research plan. Purpose of the project (provide a summary of the research plan's intent) Objective 1 (provide a short description for each objective) Objective 2. Objective 3. How To Write a Research Plan (With Template and Examples) If you want to learn how to write your own plan for your research project, consider the following seven steps: 1. Define the project purpose. The first step to creating a research plan for your project is to define why and what you're researching. Regardless of whether you're working with a team or alone, understanding the project's purpose can ... How to Write a Research Plan Examining real-world sample research plan can provide valuable insights into effective strategies. Here are a few diverse scenarios: Clinical Health Project Proposal. Dive into a sample research proposal focusing on clinical health projects. Gain insights into framing research objectives and methodologies in the realm of healthcare. How to Write a Research Proposal Research proposal examples. Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We've included a few for you below. Example research proposal #1: "A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management". Research Plan: What Is It & How To Write It [with Templates] A research plan is a comprehensive document that outlines the entirety of your research project. It details the research process, from defining the problem statement and research objectives to selecting the research method and outlining the expected outcomes. This plan serves as a blueprint for your research activities, ensuring a focused and ... Research Plan A research plan is a framework that shows how you intend to approach your topic. The plan can take many forms: a written outline, a narrative, a visual/concept map or timeline. It's a document that will change and develop as you conduct your research. Components of a research plan. 1. Research conceptualization - introduces your research question. Research Proposal Example (PDF + Template) Research Proposal Example/Sample. Detailed Walkthrough + Free Proposal Template. If you're getting started crafting your research proposal and are looking for a few examples of research proposals, you've come to the right place. In this video, we walk you through two successful (approved) research proposals, one for a Master's-level ... How To Write A Research Proposal (With Examples) Make sure you can ask the critical what, who, and how questions of your research before you put pen to paper. Your research proposal should include (at least) 5 essential components: Title - provides the first taste of your research, in broad terms. Introduction - explains what you'll be researching in more detail. How to Write a Research Plan Writing a Research Plan. To write out your research plan, begin by restating your main thesis question and any secondary ones. They may have changed a bit since your original proposal. If these questions bear on a particular theory or analytic perspective, state that briefly. In the social sciences, for example, two or three prominent theories ... How to Write a Research Proposal Research proposal aims. Relevance. Show your reader why your project is interesting, original, and important. Context. Demonstrate your comfort and familiarity with your field. Show that you understand the current state of research on your topic. Approach. Make a case for your methodology. Demonstrate that you have carefully thought about the ... How To Write A Research Proposal Here is an explanation of each step: 1. Title and Abstract. Choose a concise and descriptive title that reflects the essence of your research. Write an abstract summarizing your research question, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes. It should provide a brief overview of your proposal. 2. What Is A Research Proposal? Examples + Template The purpose of the research proposal (its job, so to speak) is to convince your research supervisor, committee or university that your research is suitable (for the requirements of the degree program) and manageable (given the time and resource constraints you will face). The most important word here is "convince" - in other words, your ... Write Your Research Plan Format of Your Research Plan. To write the Research Plan, you don't need the application forms. Write the text in your word processor, turn it into a PDF file, and upload it into the application form when it's final. Because NIH may return your application if it doesn't meet all requirements, be sure to follow the rules for font, page limits ... How to Write a Research Proposal: (with Examples & Templates) Research Proposal Example Here is a research proposal sample template (with examples) from the University of Rochester Medical Center. 4 The sections in all research proposals are essentially the same although different terminology and other specific sections may be used depending on the subject. Structure of a Research Proposal Writing a Research Proposal The goal of a research proposal is twofold: to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. ... Cited works should always use a standard format that follows the writing style advised by the discipline of your course [e.g., education=APA; history ... How to Write a Research Proposal Research proposals, like all other kinds of academic writing, are written in a formal, objective tone. Keep in mind that being concise is a key component of academic writing; formal does not mean flowery. Adhere to the structure outlined above. Your reader knows how a research proposal is supposed to read and expects it to fit this template. Writing a Research Proposal Research proposal formats vary depending on the size of the planned research, the number of participants, the discipline, the characteristics of the research, etc. The following outline assumes an individual researcher. This is just a SAMPLE; several other ways are equally good and can be successful. Research Proposal Template (Free Template for Academics) A research proposal format is usually as follows: 1. abstract (a brief description of the topic) 2. introduction 3. literature review (to demonstrate that you have done your homework and know what to base your work on) 4. explanation of originality of your research 5. main objectives 6. methods 7. proposed contents 8. limitations 9. timeline 10 ... How to Write a Research Proposal in 2024: Structure, Examples & Common A research proposal outline's content typically varies in length, from 3 to 35 pages, with references (and appendices, if necessary). But like any academic activity, start the research proposal template writing process by first carefully reading the instructions. Writing a Research Plan One person I spoke to said that a research plan should be "about three pages of 1.5-spaced text, and NEVER more than five." Another source prefers "three semi-independent (but related) sub-proposals not more than about three to four pages (single-spaced) each with a half page of important and relevant references." 10 Free Research Plan Templates for Teams and Professionals 1. ClickUp User Research Plan Template. ClickUp User Research Plan Template. One of the first things that comes to mind when you say "research plan template" is user research. For development and project teams, this is one step of the process where strategy and staying organized is essential. How to write a research proposal? A proposal needs to show how your work fits into what is already known about the topic and what new paradigm will it add to the literature, while specifying the question that the research will answer, establishing its significance, and the implications of the answer. [2] The proposal must be capable of convincing the evaluation committee about ... 40 Best Research Proposal Templates & Format Examples A research proposal template can help simplify the task of proposing research for a dissertation, job, or research grant approval. While the template helps in designing a proposal that helps a supervisor or governing body understand your theories and methods, it is also a paper that helps you in developing an understanding of how to continue ... Research Proposal The proposal should be between 400 and 600 words, double spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman, 1" margins. I love subheads [e.g. Research Question(s), Topic Description, Questions and Concerns, References], but you are welcome to use the system of organization that works best for you, just make sure to include all components in a clear and ... Crafting a Research Proposal: Theory, Frameworks & Literature -A sample is a smaller number of observations taken from the total population. -A sampling techniques is how a sample is selected, it can be through RANDOM SAMPLING (simple random sampling, proportional random sampling, systematic random sampling) and STRATIFIED SAMPLING. RESEARCH INSTRUMENT -depending on the research design adopted by the study. Research Proposal and Thesis Format This is a written presentation of an intended research specifying the problem, the purpose, scope/objectives, methodology, references and the financial plan/budget. A synopsis is an outline of the research proposal of 3-5 pages length (including references) which is currently required for provisional admission to Ph.D and other doctoral degree studies at Makerere University. NSF 24-576: Gen-4 Engineering Research Centers The research thrusts, testbeds, team formation, and other major aspects of the research plan should support a convergent approach. Stakeholder Engagement: The intentional and early-stage engagement of all parties who may contribute to the ERC or may be impacted by the ERC along its capacity-building and value creation responsibilities ... Information about PIER Plans "All applications must provide a Promoting Inclusive and Equitable Research (PIER) Plan as an appendix to the research proposal narrative. The PIER plan should describe the activities and strategies of the applicant to promote equity and inclusion as an integral element to advancing scientific excellence in the research project within the ... CDC Approach to Program Evaluation Process/Implementation evaluation assesses how well program implementation followed the original plan. It often includes information on content, quality, quantity, and structure of what is being assessed 3 . ... Research and evaluation are scientific activities that use similar methods 3. Research aims to contribute to generalizable knowledge. Partners in Research: Communities and NIH Working Together to Promote ComPASS embodies several priorities and cross-cutting themes from ODP's Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2024-2028: Creating a Healthier Future for All, including promoting collaborative research, addressing health disparities and social determinants of health (SDOH), developing and testing interventions, and building research capacity. We ... essay homework paper phd project resume review speech thesis