A Perspective on a Good Proposal

"A good proposal is a document that tells the story of a bad situation so succinctly and
effectively that it excites positive interest and mobilizes convergent opinions and
resources around the bad situation to fix it in a most efficient manner"
Author - Unknown.
Some Do's
1. Define the problem(s) clearly and concisely. It is better to state or list a set of
problems in concise statements than to have a long winding statement that lumps
different problems together in a single statement or paragraph.
2. Verify that the problem(s) identified are at the heart of the issue and that
addressing them will result in removing bottlenecks and improve the situation
markedly.
3. For each problem define an objective or a set of objectives (which may also
transform into strategies) whose realization are aimed at resolving the problems.
4. Choose Key Activities under each objective in an action/budget plan (to
implement a specific strategy) that provide products or outputs which feed (by
synergy or complementarity) into achieving the defined objective(s) under
consideration.
5. Define key activities to fit the strategy and objective (the implementation of each
should contribute directly to achieving objective under consideration). Likewise
the sub-activities or major tasks under the key activities should bear relevance to
contributing or directly produce the expected results the key activity is set for.
6. Ensure a coherent and logical sequencing of Key Activities that are (and subactivities/major tasks) self-explanatory and self-evident (requiring no
supplementary explanation or need for query). They should be expressed in very
concise statements.
7. Include elements of in-built review mechanisms in the workplan, for more
efficient and effective implementation.
8. Describe the complete (total) situation even if the proposal is aimed to fix a part
of the whole. Let it be clear what else is happening, will happen or has happened
already, to which the proposal in question will add to. Demonstrate the gap - to be
filled by the proposal!
9. Finalize the final draft proposal document well (4-5 weeks) ahead of submission
dead-line.
10. Arrange a mock internal review of your proposal by in-country persons who
should have studied the proposal guidelines and forms thoroughly but who were
not part of the proposal preparation process. Receive comments and reconvene the
proposal write-up/preparation team to consider the comments from the mock
internal review and revise the proposal as may be indicated or necessary. Plan for
this process to be completed at least 3-4 weeks before the application submission
deadline.

Some Don'ts
1. Fail to take a cue from point 8 in Do's. A description of the problem/burden and
demonstrating the gap helps put the proposal/grant request in a proper context)
2. Inconsistency and incoherence in describing/stating problems, objectives and
strategies and key activities. The major components or steps should be
consistent and link up logically or be technically sound for results. Do not state
problem(s) whose solutions will not change the status quo, or objectives that have
no relevance to the critical problems, or strategies and or activities that are not
relevant and for that matter will not resolve the problems identified.
3. Unrealistic "Shopping-List", without obvious justifications. Each item on the
to-buy list must be essential for execution of the activities planned and it should
be quite obvious that they are needed for the realization of the objectives,
otherwise be ready to provide justification when asked to do so.
4. Repetitive procurement lists and training sessions across the different disease
components but aimed for same target levels of service provision and
providers. It is better to harmonize needs across and integrate solutions for these.
This is one of the ways to build and strengthen systems. Plan for a good balance
between the time workers are away for training programmes/meetings and the
actual time available to them to work if possible avoid situations of one and the
same M&E officer or Nurse having to be away very often for training
programmes ran separately and exclusively by each disease component for their
individual HIS needs.
5. Commodities and services costs inflation and under-budgeting; be realistic
with budgeting. Quote realistic or current market commodities and services costs
as much as possible; check for recognized or recommended sources for price
listing if applicable.
6. Incentives/salary top-ups that may distort or undermine the sector budget or
cause disaffection and demotivation among workers. This requires careful
framing! Remuneration may be generally low but adequate and satisfactory pay
reward should be offered on the basis of the particular expertise being procured or
called into action. The proposal is better off offering expertise-based and resultslinked salary incentive instead of project-linked incentives/salary.
7. Fail to plan and budget for recruitment of key personnel vital for systems
strengthening. Do not exclude important actions like hiring or appropriately
training essential staff which will ensure personnel who are well trained and
possess the right expertise are available as a necessary input for the system
strengthening. Providing the infrastructure alone without adequately addressing
the essential HR needs may not help to realize HIS improvement.
8. Fail to justify proposed actions in concise terms. Each activity or action listed
should bear relevance and contribute to the realization of stated objectives or
goals; in other words do not be superfluous with activities.

Some Don'ts continued:

9. Conceal or deliberately under-report on other partners actions or inputs to
the area of work. It is important to show other resource/funding opportunities
that are available and demonstrate the gap that the proposal is expected to fill
having taken cognizance of the other resource opportunities.
10. Fail to provide adequate linkage or reference to the current proposal and
previous grants (currently running, terminated, ended. Do not fail to provide
information on whether the current proposal has any link up or not with previous
grants implementation and show how the current proposal seeks to build on or
add value to the previous; show what lessons from implementing previous grants
have been incorporated or applied to guide the formulation of the current proposal
for better outcomes/results.