1 / 5

Writing Successful Proposals

Writing Successful Proposals. Chen-Ching Liu Advanced Power Technologies Center University of Washington. Funding Agencies. NSF and other Government agencies - fundamental research, education component

ruby-yang
Download Presentation

Writing Successful Proposals

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Writing Successful Proposals Chen-Ching Liu Advanced Power Technologies Center University of Washington

  2. Funding Agencies • NSF and other Government agencies - fundamental research, education component • Industry - Cost/benefits of the work, implementation in a practical environment is important • Internal funding at universities - show seed money leads to more opportunities for external funding

  3. A Good Proposal • Solving a real problem • Starting a new field • Potential impact to the state-of-the-art • Potential impact to industry • Novelty of ideas, imaginative concepts • Sufficient details of the technical approach • Illustration with simple examples • Generalization from simple examples

  4. Example Problems • Discuss the past work in detail but little about what will be done if awarded • Incremental improvement of technology • Obvious weakness in presentation • Not putting work in the context of the state-of-the-art (important work cited??) • Too ambitious

  5. Example Problems - Conti. • Proposal sent to wrong programs • Weak track record in research • Broad coverage without focus • Problem areas no longer of interest • Making incorrect statements • Poor reviewers can hurt too.

More Related