Reviewers don't "read" proposals the way we read articles. They scan, compare, and score. Your job is to reduce friction: a clean structure makes your work feel credible before a reviewer even reaches the details.
Rule: If a section is worth points, it deserves a heading-and it should be easy to find.
Start with the rubric
Build your outline directly from the scoring criteria. If the rubric says "Need, Approach, Evaluation, Budget," your headings should match that order and language.
The narrative-workplan-budget triangle
Most proposals fail when these drift. Keep them locked:
Narrative
The case: what, why, and how it works.
Workplan
The plan: who does what, when.
Budget
The resourcing: what it costs and why.
Micro-technique
Use the same activity labels across narrative, timeline, and budget notes (Activity 1, 2, 3...). It reads instantly "organized."
A reusable outline
Use this structure for most opportunities:
- Executive summary: one-page story with outcomes, scope, and ask.
- Need: data-backed problem + baseline.
- Approach: activities + evidence + delivery plan.
- Team & partners: roles, qualifications, commitments.
- Evaluation: metrics, tools, schedule, learning loop.
- Sustainability: plan beyond the grant.
- Budget narrative: line items mapped to the plan.
Make risk visible (and manageable)
Reviewers trust teams that acknowledge challenges and show mitigation. Include risks like recruitment, data access, procurement delays, staffing changes-and state your contingency plan.
A proposal without risks sounds unaware. A proposal with risks + mitigation sounds capable.
A final strength pass
Before submission, do a "strength pass" focused on clarity and scoring:
Want a reviewer-ready proposal package?
We can structure your narrative, align your workplan and budget, and tighten compliance so the full submission reads fundable.
Contact The Grant Ship
