| Introduction | Yes | No | Comments |
| It is clear WHO is writing this proposal | |||
| It is clear WHAT the proposal is about | |||
| It is clear WHAT the solution is | |||
| It is clear HOW MUCH is wanted | |||
| Situation Analysis | Yes | No | Comments |
| The overall issue (the WHAT IS) is clearly identified | |||
| The quantitative data supports the issue (the WHAT IS) | |||
| The qualitative data (stories) provides the emotional tie to the issue (the WHAT IS) | |||
| It is clear what the grantee (WHO is writing) is doing now on the issue | |||
| It is clear WHAT others are doing now on the issue | |||
| It is clear WHY the opportunity or need still exists (the WHY) | |||
| The final paragraph clearly articulates a need (wraps up the Situation Analysis) and introduces the Solution | |||
| Would the grant committee care enough about this issue as presented to continue reading? Why or why not? | |||
| Objectives | Yes | No | Comments |
| The objectives are in priority order | |||
| There is a clear link between the objectives and items mentioned in the Situation Analysis | |||
| The objectives are measurable | |||
| Numbers (and percentages if applicable) are present and tied to items in Situation Analysis |
| Solution | Yes | No | Comments |
| The overall Solution (the WHAT COULD BE) is clearly identified (the big picture) | |||
| Each part of the Solution (the WHAT COULD BE) is explained in detail | |||
| There is a direct tie to an objective from each part of the Solution | |||
| It is clear that the grantee (WHO is writing) has the expertise and credibility to implement the Solution | |||
| There is information that relates the problem and solution to the grant description | |||
| The solution is sustainable | |||
| The final paragraph clearly articulates the overall Solution, the costs and includes a statement of benefits (The WHAT COULD BE is powerfully explained) |
From your perspective, is the solution as outlined in the proposal desirable for the constituency, financially viable for the amount of money being asked for and feasible (the organization has the capability to do it)? Explain:
| Technical Plan | Yes | No | Comments |
| The steps listed in the technical plan are linked to the Solution | |||
| The date and timeline make sense (it starts after receiving the grant) | |||
| WHO from the organization and WHAT they are to do is clearly identified | |||
| Costs (HOW MUCH) are identified and differentiated (i.e. start up) if applicable |
| Conclusion | Yes | No | Comments |
| Summarizes why this Solution is the best one to target this problem or opportunity (The WHAT COULD BE) | |||
| Shows how the Solution makes an impact | |||
| Clearly states a call to action (what is the grant committee to do) and reiterates the costs. Again, the WHAT COULD BE is highlighted. |
Finally, if you were the grant committee with a large number of requests for limited funds, would you fund this proposal? Why or why not?
