table of content of a research proposal

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Structure the Table of Contents for a Research Paper

4-minute read

• 16th July 2023

So you’ve made it to the important step of writing the table of contents for your paper. Congratulations on making it this far! Whether you’re writing a research paper or a dissertation , the table of contents not only provides the reader with guidance on where to find the sections of your paper, but it also signals that a quality piece of research is to follow. Here, we will provide detailed instructions on how to structure the table of contents for your research paper.

Steps to Create a Table of Contents

• Insert the table of contents after the title page.

Within the structure of your research paper , you should place the table of contents after the title page but before the introduction or the beginning of the content. If your research paper includes an abstract or an acknowledgements section , place the table of contents after it.

• List all the paper’s sections and subsections in chronological order.

Depending on the complexity of your paper, this list will include chapters (first-level headings), chapter sections (second-level headings), and perhaps subsections (third-level headings). If you have a chapter outline , it will come in handy during this step. You should include the bibliography and all appendices in your table of contents. If you have more than a few charts and figures (more often the case in a dissertation than in a research paper), you should add them to a separate list of charts and figures that immediately follows the table of contents. (Check out our FAQs below for additional guidance on items that should not be in your table of contents.)

• Paginate each section.

Label each section and subsection with the page number it begins on. Be sure to do a check after you’ve made your final edits to ensure that you don’t need to update the page numbers.

• Format your table of contents.

The way you format your table of contents will depend on the style guide you use for the rest of your paper. For example, there are table of contents formatting guidelines for Turabian/Chicago and MLA styles, and although the APA recommends checking with your instructor for formatting instructions (always a good rule of thumb), you can also create a table of contents for a research paper that follows APA style .

• Add hyperlinks if you like.

Depending on the word processing software you’re using, you may also be able to hyperlink the sections of your table of contents for easier navigation through your paper. (Instructions for this feature are available for both Microsoft Word and Google Docs .)

To summarize, the following steps will help you create a clear and concise table of contents to guide readers through your research paper:

1. Insert the table of contents after the title page.

2. List all the sections and subsections in chronological order.

3. Paginate each section.

4. Format the table of contents according to your style guide.

5. Add optional hyperlinks.

If you’d like help formatting and proofreading your research paper , check out some of our services. You can even submit a sample for free . Best of luck writing your research paper table of contents!

What is a table of contents?

A table of contents is a listing of each section of a document in chronological order, accompanied by the page number where the section begins. A table of contents gives the reader an overview of the contents of a document, as well as providing guidance on where to find each section.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

What should I include in my table of contents?

If your paper contains any of the following sections, they should be included in your table of contents:

●  Chapters, chapter sections, and subsections

●  Introduction

●  Conclusion

●  Appendices

●  Bibliography

Although recommendations may differ among institutions, you generally should not include the following in your table of contents:

●  Title page

●  Abstract

●  Acknowledgements

●  Forward or preface

If you have several charts, figures, or tables, consider creating a separate list for them that will immediately follow the table of contents. Also, you don’t need to include the table of contents itself in your table of contents.

Is there more than one way to format a table of contents?

Yes! In addition to following any recommendations from your instructor or institution, you should follow the stipulations of your style guide .

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

How to Write a Research Proposal

Once you’re in college and really getting into  academic writing , you may not recognize all the kinds of assignments you’re asked to complete. You know what an essay is, and you know how to respond to readings—but when you hear your professor mention a research proposal or a literature review, your mind might do a double take. 

Don’t worry; we’ve got you. Boiled down to its core, a research proposal is simply a short piece of  writing that details exactly what you’ll be covering in a larger research project. You’ll likely be required to write one for your  thesis , and if you choose to continue in academia after earning your bachelor’s degree, you’ll be writing research proposals for your master’s thesis, your dissertation , and all other research you conduct. By then, you’ll be a research proposal pro. But for now, we’ll answer all your questions and help you confidently write your first one. 

Here’s a tip: Want to make sure your writing shines? Grammarly can check your spelling and save you from grammar and punctuation mistakes. It even proofreads your text, so your work is extra polished wherever you write.

Your writing, at its best Grammarly helps you communicate confidently Write with Grammarly

What is the goal of a research proposal?

In a research proposal, the goal is to present the author’s plan for the research they intend to conduct. In some cases, part of this goal is to secure funding for said research. In others, it’s to have the research approved by the author’s supervisor or department so they can move forward with it. In some cases, a research proposal is a required part of a graduate school application. In every one of these circumstances, research proposals follow the same structure.

In a research proposal, the author demonstrates how and why their research is relevant to their field. They demonstrate that the work is necessary to the following:

• Filling a gap in the existing body of research on their subject
• Underscoring existing research on their subject, and/or
• Adding new, original knowledge to the academic community’s existing understanding of their subject

A research proposal also demonstrates that the author is capable of conducting this research and contributing to the current state of their field in a meaningful way. To do this, your research proposal needs to discuss your academic background and credentials as well as demonstrate that your proposed ideas have academic merit. 

But demonstrating your research’s validity and your personal capability to carry it out isn’t enough to get your research proposal approved. Your research proposal also has to cover these things:

• The research methodology you plan to use
• The tools and procedures you will use to collect, analyze, and interpret the data you collect
• An explanation of how your research fits the budget and other constraints that come with conducting it through your institution, department, or academic program

If you’ve already read our post on literature reviews , you may be thinking that a research proposal sounds pretty similar. They’re more than just similar, though—a literature review is part of a research proposal. It’s the section that covers which sources you’re using, how you’re using them, and why they’re relevant. Think of a literature review as a mini-research proposal that fits into your larger, main proposal. 

How long should a research proposal be?

Generally, research proposals for bachelor’s and master’s theses are a few pages long. Research proposals for meatier projects, like Ph.D. dissertations and funding requests, are often longer and far more detailed. A research proposal’s goal is to clearly outline exactly what your research will entail and accomplish, so including the proposal’s word count or page count isn’t nearly as important as it is to ensure that all the necessary elements and content are present. 

Research proposal structure

A research proposal follows a fairly straightforward structure. In order to achieve the goals described in the previous section, nearly all research proposals include the following sections:

Introduction

Your introduction achieves a few goals:

• Introduces your topic
• States your problem statement and the questions your research aims to answer
• Provides context for your research

In a research proposal, an introduction can be a few paragraphs long. It should be concise, but don’t feel like you need to cram all of your information into one paragraph. 

In some cases, you need to include an abstract and/or a table of contents in your research proposal. These are included just before the introduction. 

Background significance

This is where you explain why your research is necessary and how it relates to established research in your field. Your work might complement existing research, strengthen it, or even challenge it—no matter how your work will “play with” other researchers’ work, you need to express it in detail in your research proposal.  

This is also the section where you clearly define the existing problems your research will address. By doing this, you’re explaining why your work is necessary—in other words, this is where you answer the reader’s “so what?” 

In your background significance section, you’ll also outline how you’ll conduct your research. If necessary, note which related questions and issues you won’t be covering in your research. 

Literature review

In your  literature review , you introduce all the sources you plan to use in your research. This includes landmark studies and their data, books, and scholarly articles. A literature review isn’t merely a list of sources (that’s what your bibliography is for); a literature review delves into the collection of sources you chose and explains how you’re using them in your research. 

Research design, methods, and schedule

Following your research review, you’ll discuss your research plans. In this section, make sure you cover these aspects:

• The type of research you will do. Are you conducting qualitative or quantitative research? Are you collecting original data or working with data collected by other researchers?
• Whether you’re doing experimental, correlational, or descriptive research
• The data you’re working with. For example, if you’re conducting research in the social sciences, you’ll need to describe the population you’re studying. You’ll also need to cover how you’ll select your subjects and how you’ll collect data from them. 
• The tools you’ll use to collect data. Will you be running experiments? Conducting surveys? Observing phenomena? Note all data collection methods here along with why they’re effective methods for your specific research.

Beyond a comprehensive look at your research itself, you’ll also need to include:

• Your research timeline
• Your research budget
• Any potential obstacles you foresee and your plan for handling them

Suppositions and implications

Although you can’t know your research’s results until you’ve actually done the work, you should be going into the project with a clear idea of how your work will contribute to your field. This section is perhaps the most critical to your research proposal’s argument because it expresses exactly why your research is necessary. 

In this section, make sure you cover the following:

• Any ways your work can challenge existing theories and assumptions in your field
• How your work will create the foundation for future research
• The practical value your findings will provide to practitioners, educators, and other academics in your field
• The problems your work can potentially help to fix
• Policies that could be impacted by your findings
• How your findings can be implemented in academia or other settings and how this will improve or otherwise transform these settings

In other words, this section isn’t about stating the specific results you expect. Rather, it’s where you state how your findings will be valuable. 

This is where you wrap it all up. Your conclusion section, just like your conclusion paragraph for an essay , briefly summarizes your research proposal and reinforces your research’s stated purpose. 

Bibliography

Yes, you need to write a bibliography in addition to your literature review. Unlike your literature review, where you explained the relevance of the sources you chose and in some cases, challenged them, your bibliography simply lists your sources and their authors.

The way you write a citation depends on the style guide you’re using. The three most common style guides for academics are MLA , APA , and Chicago , and each has its own particular rules and requirements. Keep in mind that each formatting style has specific guidelines for citing just about any kind of source, including photos , websites , speeches , and YouTube videos .

Sometimes, a full bibliography is not needed. When this is the case, you can include a references list, which is simply a scaled-down list of all the sources you cited in your work. If you’re not sure which to write, ask your supervisor. 

Here’s a tip: Grammarly’s  Citation Generator  ensures your essays have flawless citations and no plagiarism. Try it for citing journal articles in MLA , APA , and Chicago  styles.

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. It’s crucial that you present your research proposal in a clear, logical way. Every question the reader has while reading your proposal should be answered by the final section. 

Editing and proofreading a research proposal

When you’re writing a research proposal, follow the same six-step writing process you follow with every other kind of writing you do. 

After you’ve got a first draft written, take some time to let it “cool off” before you start proofreading . By doing this, you’re making it easier for yourself to catch mistakes and gaps in your writing. 

Common mistakes to avoid when writing a research proposal

When you’re writing a research proposal, avoid these common pitfalls: 

Being too wordy

As we said earlier, formal does not mean flowery. In fact, you should aim to keep your writing as brief and to-the-point as possible. The more economically you can express your purpose and goal, the better.   

Failing to cite relevant sources

When you’re conducting research, you’re adding to the existing body of knowledge on the subject you’re covering. Your research proposal should reference one or more of the landmark research pieces in your field and connect your work to these works in some way. This doesn’t just communicate your work’s relevance—it also demonstrates your familiarity with the field. 

Focusing too much on minor issues

There are probably a lot of great reasons why your research is necessary. These reasons don’t all need to be in your research proposal. In fact, including too many questions and issues in your research proposal can detract from your central purpose, weakening the proposal. Save the minor issues for your research paper itself and cover only the major, key issues you aim to tackle in your proposal. 

Failing to make a strong argument for your research

This is perhaps the easiest way to undermine your proposal because it’s far more subjective than the others. A research proposal is, in essence, a piece of persuasive writing . That means that although you’re presenting your proposal in an objective, academic way, the goal is to get the reader to say “yes” to your work. 

This is true in every case, whether your reader is your supervisor, your department head, a graduate school admissions board, a private or government-backed funding provider, or the editor at a journal in which you’d like to publish your work. 

Polish your writing into a stellar proposal

When you’re asking for approval to conduct research—especially when there’s funding involved—you need to be nothing less than 100 percent confident in your proposal. If your research proposal has spelling or grammatical mistakes, an inconsistent or inappropriate tone, or even just awkward phrasing, those will undermine your credibility. 

Make sure your research proposal shines by using Grammarly to catch all of those issues. Even if you think you caught all of them while you were editing, it’s critical to double-check your work. Your research deserves the best proposal possible, and Grammarly can help you make that happen. 

How To Write A Research Proposal

A Straightforward How-To Guide (With Examples)

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | August 2019 (Updated April 2023)

Writing up a strong research proposal for a dissertation or thesis is much like a marriage proposal. It’s a task that calls on you to win somebody over and persuade them that what you’re planning is a great idea. An idea they’re happy to say ‘yes’ to. This means that your dissertation proposal needs to be   persuasive ,   attractive   and well-planned. In this post, I’ll show you how to write a winning dissertation proposal, from scratch.

Before you start:

– Understand exactly what a research proposal is – Ask yourself these 4 questions

The 5 essential ingredients:

• The title/topic
• The introduction chapter
• The scope/delimitations
• Preliminary literature review
• Design/ methodology
• Practical considerations and risks 

What Is A Research Proposal?

The research proposal is literally that: a written document that communicates what you propose to research, in a concise format. It’s where you put all that stuff that’s spinning around in your head down on to paper, in a logical, convincing fashion.

Convincing   is the keyword here, as your research proposal needs to convince the assessor that your research is   clearly articulated   (i.e., a clear research question) ,   worth doing   (i.e., is unique and valuable enough to justify the effort), and   doable   within the restrictions you’ll face (time limits, budget, skill limits, etc.). If your proposal does not address these three criteria, your research won’t be approved, no matter how “exciting” the research idea might be.

PS – if you’re completely new to proposal writing, we’ve got a detailed walkthrough video covering two successful research proposals here . 

How do I know I’m ready?

Before starting the writing process, you need to   ask yourself 4 important questions .  If you can’t answer them succinctly and confidently, you’re not ready – you need to go back and think more deeply about your dissertation topic .

You should be able to answer the following 4 questions before starting your dissertation or thesis research proposal:

• WHAT is my main research question? (the topic)
• WHO cares and why is this important? (the justification)
• WHAT data would I need to answer this question, and how will I analyse it? (the research design)
• HOW will I manage the completion of this research, within the given timelines? (project and risk management)

If you can’t answer these questions clearly and concisely,   you’re not yet ready   to write your research proposal – revisit our   post on choosing a topic .

If you can, that’s great – it’s time to start writing up your dissertation proposal. Next, I’ll discuss what needs to go into your research proposal, and how to structure it all into an intuitive, convincing document with a linear narrative.

The 5 Essential Ingredients

Research proposals can vary in style between institutions and disciplines, but here I’ll share with you a   handy 5-section structure   you can use. These 5 sections directly address the core questions we spoke about earlier, ensuring that you present a convincing proposal. If your institution already provides a proposal template, there will likely be substantial overlap with this, so you’ll still get value from reading on.

For each section discussed below, make sure you use headers and sub-headers (ideally, numbered headers) to help the reader navigate through your document, and to support them when they need to revisit a previous section. Don’t just present an endless wall of text, paragraph after paragraph after paragraph…

Top Tip:   Use MS Word Styles to format headings. This will allow you to be clear about whether a sub-heading is level 2, 3, or 4. Additionally, you can view your document in ‘outline view’ which will show you only your headings. This makes it much easier to check your structure, shift things around and make decisions about where a section needs to sit. You can also generate a 100% accurate table of contents using Word’s automatic functionality.

Ingredient #1 – Topic/Title Header

Your research proposal’s title should be your main research question in its simplest form, possibly with a sub-heading providing basic details on the specifics of the study. For example:

“Compliance with equality legislation in the charity sector: a study of the ‘reasonable adjustments’ made in three London care homes”

As you can see, this title provides a clear indication of what the research is about, in broad terms. It paints a high-level picture for the first-time reader, which gives them a taste of what to expect.   Always aim for a clear, concise title . Don’t feel the need to capture every detail of your research in your title – your proposal will fill in the gaps.

Need a helping hand?

Ingredient #2 – Introduction

In this section of your research proposal, you’ll expand on what you’ve communicated in the title, by providing a few paragraphs which offer more detail about your research topic. Importantly, the focus here is the   topic   – what will you research and why is that worth researching? This is not the place to discuss methodology, practicalities, etc. – you’ll do that later.

You should cover the following:

• An overview of the   broad area   you’ll be researching – introduce the reader to key concepts and language
• An explanation of the   specific (narrower) area   you’ll be focusing, and why you’ll be focusing there
• Your research   aims   and   objectives
• Your   research question (s) and sub-questions (if applicable)

Importantly, you should aim to use short sentences and plain language – don’t babble on with extensive jargon, acronyms and complex language. Assume that the reader is an intelligent layman – not a subject area specialist (even if they are). Remember that the   best writing is writing that can be easily understood   and digested. Keep it simple.

Note that some universities may want some extra bits and pieces in your introduction section. For example, personal development objectives, a structural outline, etc. Check your brief to see if there are any other details they expect in your proposal, and make sure you find a place for these.

Ingredient #3 – Scope

Next, you’ll need to specify what the scope of your research will be – this is also known as the delimitations . In other words, you need to make it clear what you will be covering and, more importantly, what you won’t be covering in your research. Simply put, this is about ring fencing your research topic so that you have a laser-sharp focus.

All too often, students feel the need to go broad and try to address as many issues as possible, in the interest of producing comprehensive research. Whilst this is admirable, it’s a mistake. By tightly refining your scope, you’ll enable yourself to   go deep   with your research, which is what you need to earn good marks. If your scope is too broad, you’re likely going to land up with superficial research (which won’t earn marks), so don’t be afraid to narrow things down.

Ingredient #4 – Literature Review

In this section of your research proposal, you need to provide a (relatively) brief discussion of the existing literature. Naturally, this will not be as comprehensive as the literature review in your actual dissertation, but it will lay the foundation for that. In fact, if you put in the effort at this stage, you’ll make your life a lot easier when it’s time to write your actual literature review chapter.

There are a few things you need to achieve in this section:

• Demonstrate that you’ve done your reading and are   familiar with the current state of the research   in your topic area.
• Show that   there’s a clear gap   for your specific research – i.e., show that your topic is sufficiently unique and will add value to the existing research.
• Show how the existing research has shaped your thinking regarding   research design . For example, you might use scales or questionnaires from previous studies.

When you write up your literature review, keep these three objectives front of mind, especially number two (revealing the gap in the literature), so that your literature review has a   clear purpose and direction . Everything you write should be contributing towards one (or more) of these objectives in some way. If it doesn’t, you need to ask yourself whether it’s truly needed.

Top Tip:  Don’t fall into the trap of just describing the main pieces of literature, for example, “A says this, B says that, C also says that…” and so on. Merely describing the literature provides no value. Instead, you need to   synthesise   it, and use it to address the three objectives above.

Ingredient #5 – Research Methodology

Now that you’ve clearly explained both your intended research topic (in the introduction) and the existing research it will draw on (in the literature review section), it’s time to get practical and explain exactly how you’ll be carrying out your own research. In other words, your research methodology.

In this section, you’ll need to   answer two critical questions :

• How   will you design your research? I.e., what research methodology will you adopt, what will your sample be, how will you collect data, etc.
• Why   have you chosen this design? I.e., why does this approach suit your specific research aims, objectives and questions?

In other words, this is not just about explaining WHAT you’ll be doing, it’s also about explaining WHY. In fact, the   justification is the most important part , because that justification is how you demonstrate a good understanding of research design (which is what assessors want to see).

Some essential design choices you need to cover in your research proposal include:

• Your intended research philosophy (e.g., positivism, interpretivism or pragmatism )
• What methodological approach you’ll be taking (e.g., qualitative , quantitative or mixed )
• The details of your sample (e.g., sample size, who they are, who they represent, etc.)
• What data you plan to collect (i.e. data about what, in what form?)
• How you plan to collect it (e.g., surveys , interviews , focus groups, etc.)
• How you plan to analyse it (e.g., regression analysis, thematic analysis , etc.)
• Ethical adherence (i.e., does this research satisfy all ethical requirements of your institution, or does it need further approval?)

This list is not exhaustive – these are just some core attributes of research design. Check with your institution what level of detail they expect. The “ research onion ” by Saunders et al (2009) provides a good summary of the various design choices you ultimately need to make – you can   read more about that here .

Don’t forget the practicalities…

In addition to the technical aspects, you will need to address the   practical   side of the project. In other words, you need to explain   what resources you’ll need   (e.g., time, money, access to equipment or software, etc.) and how you intend to secure these resources. You need to show that your project is feasible, so any “make or break” type resources need to already be secured. The success or failure of your project cannot depend on some resource which you’re not yet sure you have access to.

Another part of the practicalities discussion is   project and risk management . In other words, you need to show that you have a clear project plan to tackle your research with. Some key questions to address:

• What are the timelines for each phase of your project?
• Are the time allocations reasonable?
• What happens if something takes longer than anticipated (risk management)?
• What happens if you don’t get the response rate you expect?

A good way to demonstrate that you’ve thought this through is to include a Gantt chart and a risk register (in the appendix if word count is a problem). With these two tools, you can show that you’ve got a clear, feasible plan, and you’ve thought about and accounted for the potential risks.

Tip – Be honest about the potential difficulties – but show that you are anticipating solutions and workarounds. This is much more impressive to an assessor than an unrealistically optimistic proposal which does not anticipate any challenges whatsoever.

Final Touches: Read And Simplify

The final step is to edit and proofread your proposal – very carefully. It sounds obvious, but all too often poor editing and proofreading ruin a good proposal. Nothing is more off-putting for an assessor than a poorly edited, typo-strewn document. It sends the message that you either do not pay attention to detail, or just don’t care. Neither of these are good messages. Put the effort into editing and proofreading your proposal (or pay someone to do it for you) – it will pay dividends.

When you’re editing, watch out for ‘academese’. Many students can speak simply, passionately and clearly about their dissertation topic – but become incomprehensible the moment they turn the laptop on. You are not required to write in any kind of special, formal, complex language when you write academic work. Sure, there may be technical terms, jargon specific to your discipline, shorthand terms and so on. But, apart from those,   keep your written language very close to natural spoken language   – just as you would speak in the classroom. Imagine that you are explaining your project plans to your classmates or a family member. Remember, write for the intelligent layman, not the subject matter experts. Plain-language, concise writing is what wins hearts and minds – and marks!

Let’s Recap: Research Proposal 101

And there you have it – how to write your dissertation or thesis research proposal, from the title page to the final proof. Here’s a quick recap of the key takeaways:

• The purpose of the research proposal is to   convince   – therefore, you need to make a clear, concise argument of why your research is both worth doing and doable.
• Make sure you can ask the critical what, who, and how questions of your research   before   you put pen to paper.
• Title – provides the first taste of your research, in broad terms
• Introduction – explains what you’ll be researching in more detail
• Scope – explains the boundaries of your research
• Literature review – explains how your research fits into the existing research and why it’s unique and valuable
• Research methodology – explains and justifies how you will carry out your own research

Hopefully, this post has helped you better understand how to write up a winning research proposal. If you enjoyed it, be sure to check out the rest of the Grad Coach Blog . If your university doesn’t provide any template for your proposal, you might want to try out our free research proposal template .

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 .

You Might Also Like:

30 Comments

Thank you so much for the valuable insight that you have given, especially on the research proposal. That is what I have managed to cover. I still need to go back to the other parts as I got disturbed while still listening to Derek’s audio on you-tube. I am inspired. I will definitely continue with Grad-coach guidance on You-tube.

Thanks for the kind words :). All the best with your proposal.

First of all, thanks a lot for making such a wonderful presentation. The video was really useful and gave me a very clear insight of how a research proposal has to be written. I shall try implementing these ideas in my RP.

Once again, I thank you for this content.

I found reading your outline on writing research proposal very beneficial. I wish there was a way of submitting my draft proposal to you guys for critiquing before I submit to the institution.

Hi Bonginkosi

Thank you for the kind words. Yes, we do provide a review service. The best starting point is to have a chat with one of our coaches here: https://gradcoach.com/book/new/ .

Hello team GRADCOACH, may God bless you so much. I was totally green in research. Am so happy for your free superb tutorials and resources. Once again thank you so much Derek and his team.

You’re welcome, Erick. Good luck with your research proposal 🙂

thank you for the information. its precise and on point.

Really a remarkable piece of writing and great source of guidance for the researchers. GOD BLESS YOU for your guidance. Regards

Thanks so much for your guidance. It is easy and comprehensive the way you explain the steps for a winning research proposal.

Thank you guys so much for the rich post. I enjoyed and learn from every word in it. My problem now is how to get into your platform wherein I can always seek help on things related to my research work ? Secondly, I wish to find out if there is a way I can send my tentative proposal to you guys for examination before I take to my supervisor Once again thanks very much for the insights

Thanks for your kind words, Desire.

If you are based in a country where Grad Coach’s paid services are available, you can book a consultation by clicking the “Book” button in the top right.

Best of luck with your studies.

May God bless you team for the wonderful work you are doing,

If I have a topic, Can I submit it to you so that you can draft a proposal for me?? As I am expecting to go for masters degree in the near future.

Thanks for your comment. We definitely cannot draft a proposal for you, as that would constitute academic misconduct. The proposal needs to be your own work. We can coach you through the process, but it needs to be your own work and your own writing.

Best of luck with your research!

I found a lot of many essential concepts from your material. it is real a road map to write a research proposal. so thanks a lot. If there is any update material on your hand on MBA please forward to me.

GradCoach is a professional website that presents support and helps for MBA student like me through the useful online information on the page and with my 1-on-1 online coaching with the amazing and professional PhD Kerryen.

Thank you Kerryen so much for the support and help 🙂

I really recommend dealing with such a reliable services provider like Gradcoah and a coach like Kerryen.

Hi, Am happy for your service and effort to help students and researchers, Please, i have been given an assignment on research for strategic development, the task one is to formulate a research proposal to support the strategic development of a business area, my issue here is how to go about it, especially the topic or title and introduction. Please, i would like to know if you could help me and how much is the charge.

This content is practical, valuable, and just great!

Thank you very much!

Hi Derek, Thank you for the valuable presentation. It is very helpful especially for beginners like me. I am just starting my PhD.

This is quite instructive and research proposal made simple. Can I have a research proposal template?

Great! Thanks for rescuing me, because I had no former knowledge in this topic. But with this piece of information, I am now secured. Thank you once more.

I enjoyed listening to your video on how to write a proposal. I think I will be able to write a winning proposal with your advice. I wish you were to be my supervisor.

Dear Derek Jansen,

Thank you for your great content. I couldn’t learn these topics in MBA, but now I learned from GradCoach. Really appreciate your efforts….

From Afghanistan!

I have got very essential inputs for startup of my dissertation proposal. Well organized properly communicated with video presentation. Thank you for the presentation.

Wow, this is absolutely amazing guys. Thank you so much for the fruitful presentation, you’ve made my research much easier.

this helps me a lot. thank you all so much for impacting in us. may god richly bless you all

How I wish I’d learn about Grad Coach earlier. I’ve been stumbling around writing and rewriting! Now I have concise clear directions on how to put this thing together. Thank you!

Fantastic!! Thank You for this very concise yet comprehensive guidance.

Even if I am poor in English I would like to thank you very much.

Thank you very much, this is very insightful.

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

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 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.

• Visit the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
• Apply to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
• Give to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Search Form

Components of a research proposal.

In general, the proposal components include:

Introduction: Provides reader with a broad overview of problem in context.

Statement of problem: Answers the question, “What research problem are you going to investigate?”

Literature review: Shows how your approach builds on existing research; helps you identify methodological and design issues in studies similar to your own; introduces you to measurement tools others have used effectively; helps you interpret findings; and ties results of your work to those who’ve preceded you.

Research design and methods: Describes how you’ll go about answering your research questions and confirming your hypothesis(es). Lists the hypothesis(es) to be tested, or states research question you’ll ask to seek a solution to your research problem. Include as much detail as possible: measurement instruments and procedures, subjects and sample size.

The research design is what you’ll also need to submit for approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) or the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) if your research involves human or animal subjects, respectively.

Timeline: Breaks your project into small, easily doable steps via backwards calendar.

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 21 May 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.

The Plagiarism Checker Online For Your Academic Work

Start Plagiarism Check

Editing & Proofreading for Your Research Paper

Get it proofread now

Online Printing & Binding with Free Express Delivery

Configure binding now

• Academic essay overview
• The writing process
• Structuring academic essays
• Types of academic essays
• Academic writing overview
• Sentence structure
• Academic writing process
• Improving your academic writing
• Titles and headings
• APA style overview
• APA citation & referencing
• APA structure & sections
• Citation & referencing
• Structure and sections
• APA examples overview
• Commonly used citations
• Other examples
• British English vs. American English
• Chicago style overview
• Chicago citation & referencing
• Chicago structure & sections
• Chicago style examples
• Citing sources overview
• Citation format
• Citation examples
• College essay overview
• Application
• How to write a college essay
• Types of college essays
• Commonly confused words
• Definitions
• Dissertation overview
• Dissertation structure & sections
• Dissertation writing process
• Graduate school overview
• Application & admission
• Study abroad
• Master degree
• Harvard referencing overview
• Language rules overview
• Grammatical rules & structures
• Parts of speech
• Punctuation
• Methodology overview
• Analyzing data
• Experiments
• Observations
• Inductive vs. Deductive
• Qualitative vs. Quantitative
• Types of validity
• Types of reliability
• Sampling methods
• Theories & Concepts
• Types of research studies
• Types of variables
• MLA style overview
• MLA examples
• MLA citation & referencing
• MLA structure & sections
• Plagiarism overview
• Plagiarism checker
• Types of plagiarism
• Printing production overview
• Research bias overview
• Types of research bias
• Example sections
• Types of research papers
• Research process overview
• Problem statement
• Research proposal
• Research topic
• Statistics overview
• Levels of measurment
• Frequency distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Measures of variability
• Hypothesis testing
• Parameters & test statistics
• Types of distributions
• Correlation
• Effect size
• Hypothesis testing assumptions
• Types of ANOVAs
• Types of chi-square
• Statistical data
• Statistical models
• Spelling mistakes
• Tips overview
• Academic writing tips
• Dissertation tips
• Sources tips
• Working with sources overview
• Evaluating sources
• Finding sources
• Including sources
• Types of sources

Your Step to Success

Plagiarism Check within 10min

Printing & Binding with 3D Live Preview

Table of Contents

How do you like this article cancel reply.

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

A guide to the table of contents page

Inhaltsverzeichnis

• 1 Definition: Table of Contents
• 3 Everything for Your Thesis
• 5 Create in Microsoft Word
• 6 In a Nutshell

Definition: Table of Contents

The table of contents is an organized listing of your document’s chapters, sections and, often, figures, clearly labelled by page number. Readers should be able to look at your table of contents page and understand immediately how your paper is organized, enabling them to skip to any relevant section or sub-section. The table of contents should list all front matter, main content and back matter, including the headings and page numbers of all chapters and the bibliography . A good table of contents should be easy to read, accurately formatted and completed last so that it is 100% accurate. Although you can complete a table of contents manually, many word processing tools like Microsoft Word enable you to format your table of contents automatically.

When adding the finishing touches to your dissertation, the table of contents is one of the most crucial elements. It helps the reader navigate (like a map) through your argument and topic points. Adding a table of contents is simple and it can be inserted easily after you have finished writing your paper. In this guide, we look at the do’s and don’ts of a table of contents; this will help you process and format your dissertation in a professional way.

When adding the finishing touches to your dissertation, the table of contents is one of the most crucial elements. It helps the reader navigate (like a map) through your argument and topic points. Adding a table of contents is simple and can be inserted easily after you have finished writing your paper. In this guide, we look at the do’s and don’ts of a table of contents; this will help you process and format your dissertation in a professional way.

• ✓ Post a picture on Instagram
• ✓ Get the most likes on your picture
• ✓ Receive up to $300 cash back

What is a table of contents?

A table of contents is a list, usually on a page at the beginning of a piece of academic writing , which outlines the chapters or sections names with their corresponding page numbers. In addition to chapter names, it includes bullet points of the sub-chapter headings or subsection headings. It usually comes right after the title page of a research paper.

How do you write a table of contents

To write a table of contents, you first write the title or chapter names of your research paper in chronological order. Secondly, you write the subheadings or subtitles, if you have them in your paper. After that, you write the page numbers for the corresponding headings and subheadings. You can also very easily set up a table of contents in Microsoft Word.

Where do you put a table of contents?

The table of contents is found on a page right at the beginning of an academic writing project. It comes specifically after the title page and acknowledgements, but before the introductory page of a writing project. This position at the beginning of an academic piece of writing is universal for all academic projects.

What to include in a table of contents?

A sample table of contents includes the title of the paper at the very top, followed by the chapter names and subtitles in chronological order. At the end of each line, is the page number of the corresponding headings. Examples of chapter names can be: executive summary,  introduction, project description, marketing plan, summary and conclusion. The abstract and acknowledgments are usually not included in the table of contents, however this could depend on the formatting that is required by your institution. Scroll down to see some examples.

How important is a table of contents?

A table of contents is very important at the beginning of a writing project for two important reasons. Firstly, it helps the reader easily locate contents of particular topics itemized as chapters or subtitles. Secondly, it helps the writer arrange their work and organize their thoughts so that important sections of an academic project are not left out. This has the extra effect of helping to manage the reader’s expectation of any academic essay or thesis right from the beginning.

Everything for Your Thesis

A table of contents is a crucial component of an academic thesis. Whether you’re completing a Bachelor’s or a postgraduate degree, the table of contents is a requirement for dissertation submissions. As a rule of thumb, your table of contents will usually come after your title page , abstract, acknowledgement or preface. Although it’s not necessary to include a reference to this front matter in your table of contents, different universities have different policies and guidelines.

Although the table of contents is best completed after you have finished your thesis, it’s a good idea to draw up a mock table of contents in the early stages of writing. This allows you to formulate a structure and think through your topic and how you are going to research, answer and make your argument. Think of this as a form of “reverse engineering”. Knowing how your chapters are going to be ordered and what topics or research questions are included in each will help immensely when it comes to your writing.

The table of contents is not just an academic formality, it allows your examiner to quickly get a feel for your topic and understand how your dissertation will be presented. An unclear or sloppy table of contents may even have an adverse effect on your grade because the dissertation is difficult to follow.

Examiners are readers, after all, and a dissertation is an exercise in producing an argument. A clear table of contents will give both a good impression and provide an accurate roadmap to make the examiner’s job easier and your argument more persuasive.

Your table of contents section will come after your acknowledgements and before your introduction. It includes a list of all your headers and their respective pages and will also contain a sub-section listing your tables, figures or illustrations (if you are using them). In general, your thesis can be ordered like this:

1. Title Page 2. Copyright / Statement of Originality 3. Abstract 4. Acknowledgement, Dedication and Preface (optional) 5. Table of Contents 6. List of Figures/Tables/Illustrations 7. Chapters 8. Appendices 9. Endnotes (depending on your formatting) 10. Bibliography / References

The formatting of your table of contents will depend on your academic field and thesis length. Some disciplines, like the sciences, have a methodical structure which includes recommended subheadings on methodology, data results, discussion and conclusion. Humanities subjects, on the other hand, are far more varied. Whichever discipline you are working in, you need to create an organized list of all chapters in their order of appearance, with chapter subheadings clearly labelled.

Sample table of contents for a short dissertation:

Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ii Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. iii Dedication ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. iv List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. x List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. xi Chapter 1: Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Chapter 2: Literature Survey ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13 Chapter 3: Methodology ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 42 Chapter 4: Analysis ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 100 Chapter 5: Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 129 Appendices ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 169 References ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 172

When producing a more significant and longer dissertation, say for a Master’s degree or even a PhD, your chapter descriptions should contain all subheadings. These are listed with the chapter number, followed by a decimal point and the subheading number.

Sample table of contents for a PhD dissertation:

Chapter 1 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Literature Review 1.3 Data 1.4 Findings 1.5 Conclusion

Chapter 2, and so on.

The key to writing a good table of contents is consistency and accuracy. You cannot list subheadings for one chapter and forget them for another. Subheadings are not always required but they can be very helpful if you are dealing with a detailed topic. The page numbers in the table of contents must match with the respective pages in your thesis or manuscript.

What’s more, chapter titles and subheading titles must match their corresponding pages. If your first chapter is called “Chapter 1: The Beginning”, it must be written as such on both the table of contents and first chapter page. So long as you remain both accurate and consistent, your table of contents will be perfect.

Create in Microsoft Word

Fortunately, the days of manually writing a contents page are over. You can still produce a contents page manually with Microsoft Word, but consider using their automatic feature to guarantee accuracy and save time.

To produce an automatically-generated table of contents, you must first work with heading styles. These can be found in the home tab under “Styles”. Select top-level headings (your chapter titles) and apply the Heading 1 style. This ensures that they will be formatted as main headings. Second-level headings (subheadings) can be applied with the Heading 2 style. This will place them underneath and within each main heading.

Once you have worked with heading styles, simply click on the “References” tab and select “Table of Contents”. This option will allow you to automatically produce a page with accurate page links to your document. To customize the format and style applied to your table of contents, select “Custom Table of Contents” at the bottom of the tab. Remember to update your table of contents by selecting the table and choosing “Update” from the drop-down menu. This will ensure that your headings, sub-headings and page numbers all add up.

Thesis Printing & Binding

You are already done writing your thesis and need a high quality printing & binding service? Then you are right to choose BachelorPrint! Check out our 24-hour online printing service. For more information click the button below :

In a Nutshell

• The table of contents is a vital part of any academic thesis or extensive paper.
• It is an accurate map of your manuscript’s content – its headings, sub-headings and page numbers.
• It shows how you have divided your thesis into more manageable chunks through the use of chapters.
• By breaking apart your thesis into discrete sections, you make your argument both more persuasive and easier to follow.
• What’s more, your contents page should produce an accurate map of your thesis’ references, bibliography, illustrations and figures.
• It is an accurate map of the chapters, references, bibliography, illustrations and figures in your thesis.

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential, while others help us to improve this website and your experience.

• External Media

Individual Privacy Preferences

Cookie Details Privacy Policy Imprint

Here you will find an overview of all cookies used. You can give your consent to whole categories or display further information and select certain cookies.

Accept all Save

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.

Show Cookie Information Hide Cookie Information

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.

Content from video platforms and social media platforms is blocked by default. If External Media cookies are accepted, access to those contents no longer requires manual consent.

Privacy Policy Imprint

Free Research Proposal Table Of Contents Template

Free Download this Research Proposal Table Of Contents Template Design in Word, Google Docs, Apple Pages, Publisher Format. Easily Editable, Printable, Downloadable.

Our Research Proposal Table Of Contents Template helps you organize and structure your research proposal. Our template includes all the necessary sections for a comprehensive proposal outline, so you can focus on writing and researching your proposal. Simplify your research proposal process with our Research Proposal Table Of Contents Template.

Already a premium member?  Sign in

• , Google Docs
• , Apple Pages
• , Publisher

You may also like

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 24-575: epscor centers of research excellence in science and technology (epscor crest centers), program solicitation, document information, document history.

• Posted: May 17, 2024

Program Solicitation NSF 24-575

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

     July 07, 2025

     First Monday in July, Annually Thereafter

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

     December 06, 2024

Important Information And Revision Notes

Recipients are required to use the NSF Education and Training Application (ETAP) to manage participants supported by EPSCoR CREST Centers.

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:

EPSCoR Centers of Research Excellence in Science and Technology (EPSCoR CREST Centers)

In alignment with the CREST Program goals, through this solicitation, the CREST Program seeks to expand its geographic diversity and reach by explicitly calling for proposals led by and for efforts in Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) jurisdictions. The U.S. National Science Foundation's EPSCoR program pursues a mission to enhance the research competitiveness of targeted jurisdictions (state, territory or commonwealth) by strengthening science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) capacity and capability through a diverse portfolio of investments from talent development to local infrastructure. For a list of EPSCoR jurisdictions visit https://new.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/epscor/epscor-criteria-eligibility . EPSCoR CREST Center awards provide support to enhance the research capabilities of institutions through the establishment of centers that effectively integrate education and research in EPSCoR jurisdictions. EPSCoR CREST Center awards promote the development of new knowledge, enhancements of the research productivity of individual faculty, and an expanded presence of students from EPSCoR jurisdictions in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Successful EPSCoR CREST Center proposals will demonstrate a clear vision and integration of STEM research and education and will align with the mission of the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM (EES) with respect to the development of a STEM workforce. EPSCoR CREST Centers are also expected to provide leadership by meaningfully involving the efforts of all individuals in STEM at all levels. Centers are required to use evidence-based and innovative strategies to address workforce development issues, such as recruitment, retention, and mentorship of participants from EPSCoR jurisdictions. Successful proposals are expected to achieve national research competitiveness, broaden participation in STEM, and generate sustained, non-CREST funding from Federal, state, and/or private-sector sources. Phase I and Phase II EPSCoR CREST Center Awards Both Phase I and Phase II EPSCoR CREST Center awards provide multi-year support for institutions that demonstrate a strong research base. Phase I EPSCoR CREST Center awards provide funding for five years of research on a specific NSF-supported topic. Institutions may submit a Phase II EPSCoR CREST Center proposal requesting funding to continue research in the same disciplinary area as the Phase I EPSCoR Center or may submit a Phase I proposal focused on a disciplinary area that is significantly different from those of the previous award(s). EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplement requests are invited from current EPSCoR CREST Center recipients. Supplements support the establishment or strengthening of partnerships and collaborations with active CREST Centers and other nationally or internationally recognized research centers (including NSF-supported research centers), private sector research laboratories, K-12 schools, and/or informal science entities, including museums and science centers, as appropriate. Such partnerships and collaborations should aid EPSCoR CREST Centers’ quest in advancing knowledge and education on a research theme of national significance.

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.

Tomasz Durakiewicz, Lead Program Director, telephone: (703) 292-4892, email: [email protected]

Sonal S. Dekhane, Program Director, telephone: (703) 292-5029, email: [email protected]

Regina Sievert, Program Director, telephone: (703) 292-2808, email: [email protected]

Nicole E. Gass, Program Specialist, telephone: (703) 292-8378, email: [email protected]

• 47.076 --- STEM Education

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant

The number of awards and funding for EPSCoR CREST Centers (Phase I and Phase II) and EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements are contingent upon the availability of funds and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious proposals.

The annual budget of a EPSCoR CREST Center award will not exceed $1,500,000 per year/$7,500,000 during a five-year period. EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements will not exceed $100,000.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Eligible institutions are Institutions of Higher Education that offer doctoral degrees in NSF STEM areas and are located in EPSCoR jurisdictions and are Emerging Research Institutions. Emerging Research Institutions are those that have less than $50,000,000 in research expenditures per year as reported at https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site?method=rankingBySource&ds=herd in three of the last five years. Funding of partnering organizations should be requested via subawards in the proposal; separately submitted collaborative proposals will not be accepted. EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements are accepted only from current EPSCoR CREST Center recipients. An institution can hold a CREST-RISE award at the same time.

Who May Serve as PI:

The Principal Investigator (PI) must hold a full-time faculty appointment at the institution submitting the proposal.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 1

Only one proposal may be submitted per eligible institution and due date. An institution may have only one active CREST Center award at one time, irrespective of focus area or CREST Center funding solicitation number. Institutions that have completed a Phase I or Phase II award in a disciplinary area may re-compete in other disciplinary areas that are significantly different from those of the previous award(s). To be significantly different, all personnel for the new project must not have been part of the previous award(s) and the new project must be associated with a different 6-digit Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) code ( https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cipcode/browse.aspx?y=55 ). Institutions with active Phase I funding should submit the Phase II proposal by the due date one year prior to the expiration of their Phase I award. After 10 years of CREST Centers support, including a combination of EPSCoR CREST Centers or CREST Centers, an institution must wait five years before submitting another proposal for CREST Centers support.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 1

Eligible individuals may be listed as the PI or co-PI on only one CREST Center proposal at the time of proposal submission.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. proposal preparation instructions.

• Letters of Intent: Not required
• Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required

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:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

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

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

EPSCoR Centers of Research Excellence in Science and Technology (EPSCoR CREST Centers) is managed by the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM (EES). Across the agency and with guidance from the National Science Board, NSF is working to increase STEM skills and advance STEM opportunities for all Americans.

NSF expects that awards made under the CREST program will catalyze institutional transformation in the development of research capabilities in alignment with the institution's mission and long-term goals and that the institutions will evaluate the impact of the award in effecting this transformation. Demonstrated leadership in the involvement of all groups in STEM is expected at all levels - students, postdoctoral researchers, and faculty. The research activities supported by CREST are expected to enable the full participation of faculty, graduate students, and undergraduates in a nationally competitive research enterprise. Outcomes and activities such as publications, involvement in regional, national, and international research forums, patents and commercial dissemination of research results, professional development of postdoctoral research associates, training of doctoral and master's students, and involvement of undergraduates in research activities should all occur in ways that establish the potential for national leadership.

The ability of EPSCoR CREST Centers to leverage funding from Federal, state, and local agencies as well as to foster industrial and academic collaborations as part of a sustainable research enterprise independent from CREST Centers funding, are important outcomes. At the same time, the projects will promote synergy between education and research; develop outreach activities for pre-college students, K- 12 educators, and the general public; and serve as a model for research scholarship throughout the institution.

II. Program Description

A) EPSCoR CREST Centers

1) General Characteristics

Both Phase I and Phase II EPSCoR CREST Centers provide multi-year support for institutions that demonstrate strengths in NSF-supported fields, as evidenced by a capacity to offer doctoral degrees in one or more STEM disciplines. The EPSCoR CREST Center proposal should clearly demonstrate a strong potential for the EPSCoR CREST Center to achieve national research competitiveness and to generate future non-CREST funding from Federal, state, or private-sector sources.

EPSCoR CREST Centers integrate research and education, and must promote the development of new knowledge, enhance faculty research productivity, and increase diverse representation in STEM disciplines. EPSCoR CREST Center awards are typically 60-month continuing grants of up to $7.5 million. These funds are used to improve elements that the institution has identified as being critical to strengthening its future research capacity to increase extramural funding and research productivity in the form of publications, patents, and other research products.

The proposed EPSCoR CREST Center Director must be prepared to provide leadership in developing and overseeing an inclusive diverse team positioned to fulfill the vision of the EPSCoR CREST Center. EPSCoR CREST Centers will engage students, postdoctoral researchers, and faculty from all groups in numbers that can have a significant impact on broadening participation in the STEM workforce.

EPSCoR CREST Centers may be organized around the development of groups of individual scientists or engineers; one or more science or engineering departments; or interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary research areas. Typically, a EPSCoR CREST Center consists of three to five scientifically meritorious research projects (referred to as subprojects in this solicitation) led by independent investigators, which are relevant to the unifying central research focus and overall objective of the EPSCoR CREST Center. These interrelated research projects are supported by a common administrative core. For more details, please refer to the Proposal Preparation Instructions.

It is expected that EPSCoR CREST Center awards will add substantial, measurable value to the existing STEM research capability in areas of high national and institutional priority. Examples of areas of high national priority are data science and analytics; advanced materials, manufacturing, and robotics; cybersecurity; plant genetics/agricultural technologies; quantum information sciences; nanotechnology; semiconductors/microelectronics technologies; climate change and clean energy; and areas outlined in the resources below:

• CHIPS and Science Act of 2022
• Industries of the Future
• Understanding the Brain
• DOE Earthshots

2) Commitment and Sustainability

Organizational commitment from administrators and leaders to the proposed activities is vital for successful EPSCoR CREST Centers and for financial and organizational sustainability of promising activities. A letter of support from the provost or equivalent university official with authority related to faculty, research, facilities and/or equipment, and education is required and should be submitted as a supplementary document.

Proposals should discuss the commitment of leadership to research capacity-building either with additional awards and/or through changes to current practices. Proposals should discuss how the successful components developed under the EPSCoR CREST Center will be sustained. Awards are expected to lead to long-term organizational changes in the ways that the institution supports faculty members in increasing their research productivity. Therefore, awards are expected to consider the sustainability and institutionalization of the EPSCoR CREST Center's activities from the beginning of the project.

3) Leadership, Management, and Oversight of the EPSCoR CREST Center

The proposed EPSCoR CREST Center team must provide the leadership to develop and lead a diverse team to fulfill the vision of the EPSCoR CREST Center. EPSCoR CREST Centers will engage students, postdoctoral researchers, and faculty from all groups in numbers that can have a significant impact on building a diverse STEM workforce. CREST is committed to a culture and climate of research that results in an inclusive and diverse workforce. For this reason, CREST strongly encourages the participation of the full spectrum of diverse talent in the identified leadership teams for EPSCoR CREST Centers.

Each proposed EPSCoR CREST Center shall convene, at least annually, an external advisory committee (EAC). The function of the EAC is to provide guidance and advice to the EPSCoR CREST Center as well as to ensure that the EPSCoR CREST Center's activities are consistent with its vision, goals, and objectives. The advisors should include representatives from those served by the EPSCoR CREST Center (e.g., IHEs, industry, state and local agencies, and national laboratories) and reflect the gamut of participants inherent in the citizenry of the United States. NSF highly encourages industry members in the EAC that can advise on intellectual property issues, acquisition of Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) funding, and other means to support the financial and organizational sustainability of the EPSCoR CREST Center. Persons with a financial, institutional, or collaborative connection to the EPSCoR CREST Center may not serve as members of the EAC. Do not identify members of the EAC in the proposal.

Each EPSCoR CREST Center shall also have an internal steering committee to include the PI, co-PIs, and other stakeholders.

4) Collaborations / Partnerships

Collaborative efforts involving industry, other IHEs, federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCs), national laboratories, K-12 schools, museums, and science centers, and/or other national, state, or regional research and development organizations are required. Subawards to such collaborating organizations are permitted, subject to restrictions outlined in the PAPPG. The total amount of funding to all subawardee organizations cannot exceed 10% of the cumulative budget going to the prime institution.

5) Evaluation Plan

EPSCoR CREST Centers must develop a robust evaluation plan. The evaluation plan should be designed to gauge the accomplishment of the EPSCoR CREST Center’s identified goals and objectives and the impacts of the EPSCoR CREST Center. Evaluation should be based on benchmarks, indicators, or expected outcomes related to EPSCoR CREST Center goals and activities.

EPSCoR CREST Centers should design evaluations that are appropriate to the EPSCoR CREST Center’s proposed activities. Plans for assessing progress toward realizing the EPSCoR CREST Center’s outputs, outcomes, and impacts should rely on measures that have been validated in the context in which they will be used.

Evaluation plans should be based on a theoretical model that relates the EPSCoR CREST Center’s goals to activities and to outputs, outcomes, and impacts (i.e., immediate, short-term, and intermediate-term expected changes). Evaluation plans should be appropriate to the scope of the EPSCoR CREST Center and should include both formative aspects that will provide information to guide the EPSCoR CREST Center in making evidence-based decisions about changes in its activities, and summative aspects that will provide evidence of the overall impacts of the project.

The budget must include adequate resources for evaluation. The evaluation should be led by an expert independent evaluation team.

B) EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements

EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements support the establishment or strengthening of partnerships and collaborations between existing EPSCoR CREST Centers and nationally or internationally recognized research centers including NSF-supported research centers, K-12 schools, and museums and science centers. Support may be requested for activities that have a direct positive influence on the competitiveness of participating scientists and engineers, and the quality of the institution's research and training.

Supportable activities may include but are not limited to: exploratory research projects; acquisition of materials, supplies, research equipment, and instrumentation; hiring nationally competitive scientists and/or engineers; visiting scientists and engineers as short- or long-term consultants; faculty attendance at professional meetings and seminars; faculty sabbaticals and exchange programs; education activities directed toward the development of a diverse, internationally competitive and globally engaged workforce of scientists, engineers, and citizens well-prepared for a broad set of career paths; undergraduate and graduate research activities; development of outreach and other enhancement programs with neighboring institutions; and strengthening technical support personnel. The benefits to all parties in the proposed collaboration must be clearly articulated. Awarded partnership supplements will be made for a maximum of $100,000 per supplement.

C) Other Types of Funding Opportunities

For these funding opportunities, proposers must contact the cognizant NSF Program Officer and request authorization to submit a proposal.

CREST also accepts the following types of proposals: Planning proposals; Conferences; Early-concept Grants for Exploratory Research (EAGER), Research Advanced by Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering (RAISE), and Rapid Response Research (RAPID) awards. Guidance on the preparation and submission of these types of proposals is contained in PAPPG Chapter II.F.

The CREST Program also accepts supplemental funding requests to existing awards. Supplemental funding requests are different from the EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements described above. Supplemental funding requests can be requested for up to 20% of the original award total. Guidance on the preparation and submission of supplemental funding requests is contained in PAPPG Chapter VI.E.

III. Award Information

EPSCoR CREST Center awards are for up to 60 months with an annual budget up to $1,500,000 (i.e., a maximum of $7,500,000). Center awards are made as standard or continuing grants.

The progress and plans of each EPSCoR CREST Center will be reviewed by NSF annually, prior to approving continued NSF support. Centers that are not meeting expectations may have their level of funding reduced or may be terminated. Institutions may not receive more than two consecutive EPSCoR CREST Center awards in the same scientific area. An institution may have only one active EPSCoR CREST Center award at one time, irrespective of focus area or CREST Center funding solicitation number. This information applies to Phase I and Phase II awards.

Partner organizations external to the prime institution must be budgeted as subawardees. The total amount of funding to subawardee organizations must reflect the organization’s effort and is limited to no more than $150,000 per organization per year. The total amount of funding to all subawardee organizations cannot exceed 10% of the total award made to the prime institution, for example, $750,000 for a $7,500,000 budget.

Partnership supplements will be made for a maximum amount of $100,000 per supplement, in amounts that vary with need and are subject to the availability of funds. A supplement will be an amendment to an existing CREST award.

The estimated EPSCoR CREST Center and EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplement budgets, number of awards, and award size and duration are subject to the availability of funds.

IV. Eligibility Information

V. proposal preparation and submission instructions.

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.

Eligible proposers intending to submit a proposal are encouraged to participate in informational webinars that will be webcast after the release of this solicitation. See the NSF CREST webpage for dates.

Proposals that are not compliant with the guidelines will be returned without review. It is the proposing organization’s responsibility to ensure that the proposal is compliant with all applicable guidelines and that only one proposal is submitted by the institution.

Proposals must contain the items listed below and adhere strictly to the specified page limitations. No additional information may be provided as appendices or through links to web pages. Figures and tables must be included within the applicable page limit.

Proposals must contain sufficient detail to allow for the assessment of the intellectual merit and broader impacts of the proposed EPSCoR CREST Center, as well as the solicitation-specific review criteria identified in Section VI. below. The proposal should contain specific, measurable, and obtainable outcomes that will be used to measure the progress of the proposed EPSCoR CREST Center if funded.

EPSCoR CREST Center Proposal Structure

EPSCoR CREST Center proposals consist of the EPSCoR CREST Center Project Description and its associated research subproject narratives. The EPSCoR CREST Center proposal includes discussion of the proposer's overall plan for improving the status of STEM research and training and for broadening the participation of a diverse student population in STEM, as codified by the EPSCoR CREST Center's unifying theme or focus. The EPSCoR CREST Center proposal overview should present a clear explanation of the proposed improvement plan from a scientific, educational, and administrative or fiscal point of view. The proposal Project Summary will provide an overview of the proposed activities and will clearly delineate the NSF criteria of Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts. The Project Summary also describes the synergy anticipated by the choice of a minimum of three subprojects (maximum of five) that are consistent with the unifying theme of the EPSCoR CREST Center. The subprojects are not pilot projects. All subprojects must be located at the institution submitting the proposal.

Consistent with the objective of broadening the participation of U.S. citizens, nationals, or permanent residents in STEM fields, the proposal should address increasing opportunities for all with the goal of broadening participation in the EPSCoR CREST Center. The contribution/role of partner organizations to the objectives should also be described.

Proposed activities should be presented in sufficient detail to allow assessment of their intrinsic merit and potential effectiveness.

EPSCoR CREST Center Research Subprojects (3 to 5 subprojects)

Each proposal must include a minimum of three (maximum of five) individual (albeit related) research projects, each of which is pertinent to the central goal of the EPSCoR CREST Center. All subprojects must be based at the same institution. Each proposed subproject may involve a subset of EPSCoR CREST Center investigators but should have a single subproject leader. The budget of the subprojects must allow for significant research to take place and must be commensurate with the scope of the projects. The subprojects are not pilot projects. Do not divide subprojects into sub-subprojects. The subprojects should result in data that can be used for the submission of a proposal to NSF or other funding sources. More details on the subproject narrative requirements are provided in section 3.i below.

Special Considerations for EPSCoR CREST Phase II Proposals

A current EPSCoR CREST Center nearing the completion of its initial five years of funding may submit a proposal for an additional five years of support. A proposal will undergo merit review alongside proposals for new EPSCoR CREST Centers. Accordingly, the achievements and future plans of existing EPSCoR CREST Centers will be evaluated comprehensively relative to progress and direction and weighed against the competition for available funds. The results from the Phase I research and broadening participation activities should be articulated clearly in parallel with the institutional transformation arising from the other EPSCoR CREST Center accomplishments of the first five years.

The Project Description for a Phase II Center should demonstrate a clear vision for a synergistic team of investigators positioned within the second five years of support to achieve major national recognition for their accomplishments including research that has the potential to be transformative. The Project Description as well as the subproject narratives should provide a systematic articulation of the research, educational, and outreach accomplishments of the Phase I Center and how these will drive the future activities of the EPSCoR CREST Center, especially in terms of a new vision and organization. The Phase II Center should be well-positioned to demonstrate a transformation of the institutional capacity for engaging individuals from EPSCoR jurisdictions in STEM. A simple continuation of the Phase I EPSCoR CREST Center, even if the scientific merits of the various research activities are strong, will not yield a competitive Phase II proposal.

A recommendation for a Phase II EPSCoR CREST Center award will be subject to the availability of funds, as well as the demonstrated potential that funding as a Phase II EPSCoR CREST Center will lead to institutional transformation in line with the aim of this solicitation. Renewed EPSCoR CREST Centers will continue to be monitored by NSF. Centers that are not meeting the exceptional expectations of a Phase II EPSCoR Center may have their level of funding reduced or terminated.

EPSCoR CREST Center Proposal Contents

Proposals must include all the following items. In cases where requirements given in this document differ from those given in the PAPPG, the guidelines provided in this solicitation take precedence.

Proposal Set-Up: Select "Prepare New Proposal" in Research.gov. Search for and select this solicitation title in Step One of the Proposal wizard. Select "Single proposal (with or without subawards)." Separately submitted collaborative proposals will be returned without review.

Title: The Title of the Proposed Project must begin with "EPSCoR CREST Phase I Proposal: Center for " or "EPSCoR CREST Phase II Proposal: Center for ". The title must be informative and descriptive of the project, concise (20 words or less), and use Title Case. The title should not include the institution name, any acronyms ("STEM" excepted), or quotation marks.

Senior/Key Personnel: The proposed project director must be designated as the PI.

1. Cover Sheet

For planning purposes, September 1, of the award year should be shown as the start date.

2. Project Summary (1 page)

The Project Summary must be no more than one page and consist of three sections: overview, intellectual merit, and broader impacts.

The Project Summary Overview section provides a clear and concise description of the project including its mission and vision, describes the research focus, goals for education and broadening participation, the integrative nature of the EPSCoR CREST Center, and articulate the potential legacy and national impact of the EPSCoR CREST Center if funded.

The Project Summary Intellectual Merit section describes the research focus and subprojects' synergy consistent with the unifying theme of the EPSCoR CREST Center. All subprojects must be located at the same institution.

The Project Summary Broader Impacts section describes goals for education, professional development, and broadening participation.

At the end of the Broader Impacts section add no more than five 6-digit Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) codes that most associate with the proposed center. CIP codes are available at https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cipcode/browse.aspx?y=55 . Example: 26.0202, 26.0203, 26.0204

3. Project Description (Sections 3.a to 3.h - 15 pages; Section 3.i - 5 pages per subproject)

The Project Description must contain only Sections 3.a through 3.i. Sections 3.a to 3.h are limited to 15 total pages including tables and illustrations. Phase II proposals must include a progress report.

The Project Description should:

• Contain specific, measurable, and obtainable objectives that will be used to measure the progress of the EPSCoR CREST Center, if funded.
• Summarize the subproject's importance to the overall proposal plan, including synergy with the other subprojects and a discussion of how they support the overall goals and objectives of the EPSCoR CREST Center proposal.

Progress Report (Phase II Proposals Only) (1 page)

The Progress Report should provide the reviewers with an overview of the progress made during the Phase I period of support. The progress report cannot exceed 1 page. The Progress Report should:

• Provide the beginning and ending dates for the period covered.
• Summarize the objectives of the previous project period and the progress made toward their achievement.
• Explain changes to the objectives and any new directions.
• Discuss previous participants (e.g., recruitment, retention, inclusion of individuals from EPSCoR jurisdictions in STEM, including persons with disabilities).
• Discuss career development at the faculty, postdoctoral, and student levels.

3.a Problem Description and Rationale for Selected Approach

Articulate a vision for the proposed EPSCoR CREST Center that clearly outlines the research thrusts being addressed. The proposed research should be sufficiently complex, large-scale, and long-term to justify a EPSCoR CREST Center and flexible enough to permit change as the research proceeds. The proposed approaches must be innovative, and it must be clear how they will transform or significantly impact the research area. This section should:

• Describe the comprehensive plan to achieve and sustain national competitiveness, independent from CREST Centers funding, in a clearly defined area of national significance in STEM research.
• State the overall vision and long-range goals of the integrated EPSCoR CREST Center.
• Explain the unique opportunities that a EPSCoR CREST Center will provide that could not be achieved with individual support.
• Describe the proposed research areas/themes and how they integrate with each other.
• Describe how an integrated EPSCoR CREST Center is aligned with the mission of the institution and the long-term strategic goals of building the institution’s research capacity.

3.b Description of the Research Objectives

Describe the proposed research areas/themes and how they integrate with each other to realize the EPSCoR CREST Center's research vision. This section should:

• Provide 5-year timelines for the activities.
• Indicate the specific role of each partner organization or participant in the research topic/goal area.
• Provide a research plan with sufficient detail to allow assessment of the scientific merit and to justify the necessity for the EPSCoR CREST Center mode of operation.
• Indicate the potential impact or expected significance the EPSCoR CREST Center's research will have on the Nation's scientific knowledge and/or technological base.

3.c Description of the Education and Career Development Objectives

Describe how the EPSCoR CREST Center will provide professional development and other appropriate opportunities to young faculty members affiliated with the EPSCoR CREST Center to assist them in establishing an independent research agenda. This section should:

• Describe how research and education will be integrated with career development objectives. Education programs and activities should be evidence-based practices developed in the context of current educational research and be monitored through a formal evaluation effort led by independent evaluators as described in 3.g.
• Describe plans for attracting and retaining students.
• Describe plans for preparing students for the submission of fellowship applications to NSF and other funders.
• Describe proposed activities in sufficient detail to allow assessment of their intrinsic merit and potential effectiveness.

3.d Broader Impacts

Describe the broader impacts objectives and outline strategies for achieving them. This section should:

• Describe plans for broadening participation through the inclusion of individuals from EPSCoR jurisdictions in STEM.
• Describe the contribution/role of students and faculty members and how they will be integrated into activities.
• Explain how mentoring will be used to provide a supportive environment for all project participants.
• Explain how progress will be measured and how strategies will be adapted, as appropriate.
• Describe proposed activities in sufficient detail to allow assessment of the intrinsic merit and potential effectiveness of the activities.

3.e Collaborations / Partnerships

Describe collaborative efforts involving industry, other IHEs, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), national laboratories, K-12 entities, museums, and science centers, or other national, state, or regional research and development organizations and how these collaborations will strengthen the EPSCoR CREST Center.

3.f Management Plan

Describe the plan for the management of the proposed EPSCoR CREST Center to ensure optimal performance. This section should:

• Present a management plan, including a diagram to explain the organizational relationships and reporting structure among the key areas of responsibility.
• Identify key members of the management team and explain their specific roles and areas of responsibility.
• Explain the role of each key participant/component.
• Describe the processes to be used to prioritize activities, allocate funds and equipment across activities, and select a replacement PI, if needed.
• Identify members of the Internal Steering Committee and an independent evaluator, external to the project.

3.g Evaluation Plan

All proposals should include an evaluation section that describes how the project evaluator/evaluation team will gauge the accomplishment of project goals and the impacts of the project. The budget must include adequate resources for project evaluation. This section should:

• Include a logic model (required) with short-term, and intermediate-term expected outcomes.
• Include a description of the evaluation design, methods, and measures that will be used.
• Include in the evaluation plan formative aspects that will provide information to guide the EPSCoR CREST Center in making evidence-based decisions about changes in its activities, and summative aspects that will provide evidence of overall impacts of the project.
• Include an evaluation design based on benchmarks, indicators, or expected outcomes related to project goals, objectives, and activities.
• Identify the person(s) who will lead the 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 EPSCoR CREST institutions but should be external to the EPSCoR CREST Center itself and positioned to carry out the evaluation plan independently.

3.h Results from Prior NSF Support (included in the Project Description)

See NSF PAPPG for guidelines.

3.i Individual Subproject Narratives (5-page limit per subproject) (Minimum 3, Maximum 5 subprojects)

The subproject narratives will contain the elements of an abbreviated NSF research proposal limited to a total of 5 pages per subproject. This is in addition to the 15 pages of the project description. Begin each subproject with the subproject number, subproject title, and subproject leader. Example: Subproject 1: Research on new materials. PI: Samantha Smith. Continue with the Subproject Summary that includes Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts and then the remainder of the Subproject Narrative. Subproject references are to be included in the References Cited section of the EPSCoR CREST Center proposal (See section 5 below). Do not divide subprojects into sub-subprojects. The subprojects should result in data that can be used for the submission of a proposal to NSF or other funding sources.

4. Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources (1-page limit)

Provide a synopsis of institutional resources that will be available (dedicated space, access to facilities and instrumentation, faculty and staff positions, including plans to make cluster hires if appropriate, access to programs that assist with curriculum development or broadening participation, or other institutional programs that could provide support). The description should be narrative in nature and must not include any quantifiable financial information.

5. References Cited (5-page limit)

See NSF PAPPG for format guidelines.

6. Budget and Budget Justification

EPSCoR CREST Center awards will not exceed $1,500,000 annually / $7,500,000 during a five-year period.

Provide a budget for each year of the project. A cumulative budget will be generated automatically. The proposed budget should be consistent with the needs and complexity of the proposed activity. Funds also should be included for attendance at the annual PI meeting.

Submission of a budget justification outlining all requested expenditures is required. Identify items of equipment costing more than $25,000. Full justification for these is required.

Partner organizations external to the prime institution must be budgeted as subawardees. The total amount of funding to subawardee organizations must reflect the organization’s effort and is limited to no more than $150,000 per organization per year. The total amount of funding to all subawardee organizations cannot exceed 10% of the cumulative budget going to the prime institution, for example $750,000 for a $7,500,000 budget.

Financial support may be provided to student participants under EPSCoR CREST projects. However, financial support may only be provided to students that are U.S. citizens, nationals, or permanent residents. Student support should be included on the "stipends" line under the "Participant Support Costs" section of the budget. Stipends to students should not replace other need-based grants and scholarships already awarded to the students.

Participants need to be paid according to institutional practices. If using a different scale, its use must be justified in the application.

7. 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 (PI and any faculty members whose research, education, or broadening participation efforts will be supported).

• Biographical Sketch
• Current and Pending (Other) Support
• Collaborators & Other Affiliations Information
• Synergistic Activities

8. Special Information and Supplementary Documents

Required information to be included in the Supplementary Documents section.

8.a Identification of Partner Organization(s) and Project Personnel (2-page limit)

(a) List all project personnel who have a role in the management, research, education, and evaluation components of the EPSCoR CREST Center. Use the following format:

Project Personnel:

Last name, first name, institution/organization, role in the project

(b) List all project partner organizations who have a role in the management, research, education, and evaluation components of the EPSCoR CREST Center. Use the following format:

Partner institution(s) and organization(s):

Institution/organization, role in the project

8.b Ethics Plan (1-page limit)

Provide a clear statement of the EPSCoR CREST Center's proposed policies on ethics training, responsible conduct of research, and intellectual property rights. A program of training in ethics and responsible conduct of research for all faculty, postdoctoral researchers, and graduate and undergraduate students involved in the EPSCoR CREST Center is required. Training topics should include the nature of the research, methodologies used, ownership of research and ideas, roles and responsibilities regarding intellectual property, and civil treatment of colleagues.

8.c Shared Experimental Facilities (1-page limit)

When appropriate, describe the shared facilities to be established, including research instrumentation.

The following elements should be addressed in this section: maintenance and operation of facilities, including assurance of organizational commitments/support; infrastructure and technical expertise to ensure effective usage; and provisions for user fees and plans for ensuring maintenance and operation of facilities after the end of the award.

8.d Data Management and Sharing Plan (2-page limit)

Describe how the proposal conforms to NSF policy on the storage, dissemination and sharing of data and research results.

8.e Mentoring Plan (1-page limit)

Each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral scholars or graduate students must include a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. Proposers are advised that the mentoring plan may not be used to circumvent the Project Description page limitation.

8.f Undergraduate Student Mentoring Plan (1-page limit)

Each proposal that requests funding to support undergraduate students must include a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. Proposers are advised that the mentoring plan may not be used to circumvent the Project Description page limitation. Please note that this is different than the Mentoring Plan required by the PAPPG.

8.g Letter of Support (2-page limit) and Letters of Collaboration (2-page limit each)

A letter of support from the provost or equivalent university official with authority related to faculty, research, facilities and/or equipment, and education must be submitted describing the prime institution's support for and commitment to the award (including space). The institution must commit to implementing systemic changes to increase research productivity. The letter of support must express awareness of, support for, and specific commitments to the project.

The letter of support should include information related to financial and organizational sustainability and commitment of the provost or equivalent university official to the project. A letter of support that merely endorses the project or offers nonspecific support for the project activities should not be included and the proposal will be returned without review if a general support letter is submitted.

Letters of collaboration must be provided by major partnering organizations and the program evaluator. "Major" is defined as those organizations receiving budgetary resources from the award or contributing to the impacts of the proposed work. Letters of collaboration should not be limited to the recommended language in the NSF PAPPG.

Proposals submitted without a letter of support and letters of collaboration will be returned without review.

8.h Quotes for Equipment

Include quotes for equipment costing more than $25,000.

9. Information to be submitted to NSF via the Single Copy Documents Section

Submit a list of subproject PIs. List the individual’s last name, first name, middle initial, and e-mail address. These individuals must also be designated as Senior/Key Personnel in the Manage Personnel section of Research.gov and must submit Biographical Sketches, and Current and Pending (Other) Support, Collaborators and Other Affiliations information, and Synergistic Activities.

No other items or appendices are to be included.

Proposals containing items other than those required above will be returned without review.

EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements Contents

Supplemental funding requests should be prepared in accordance with the guidance contained in the PAPPG and must be submitted via Research.gov.

• EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements Project Summary

Begin the Summary of Proposed Work section with "This EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplement"

Cost Sharing:

EPSCoR CREST Partnership Supplements will not exceed $100,000.

Budget Preparation Instructions:

Financial support may be provided to student participants under the EPSCoR CREST Center. However, financial support may only be provided to students that are U.S. citizens, nationals, or permanent residents. Student support should be included on the "stipends" line under the "Participant Support Costs" section of the budget. Stipends to students should not replace other need-based grants and scholarships already awarded to the students.

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.D.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.D.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 and Sharing Plan and the Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

Reviewers will be asked to consider the integrative nature of the proposed EPSCoR CREST Center. Questions to be considered include:

• Is there a demonstrated need for EPSCoR CREST Centers funding in order to expand the institution’s research capacity?
• What is the potential of the proposed EPSCoR CREST Center to achieve national research competitiveness?
• Does the institution offer a Ph.D. in the center's research area and are the EPSCoR CREST investigators funded in the center's research area?
• What is the potential for the proposed EPSCoR CREST Center to increase representation in a STEM area?
• What is the potential for the proposed EPSCoR CREST Center to increase the career success of faculty, postdoctoral researchers, and students from EPSCoR jurisdictions in STEM?
• To what extent are the educational activities innovative and well-integrated with the research, and how do the educational activities contribute to the unifying mission of the proposed Center?
• To what extent are the institutional and other commitments appropriate to ensure the success of the proposed Center?
• What is the potential of the proposed EPSCoR CREST Center to achieve sustainability from non-CREST funding?
• To what extent are the collaborations/partnerships appropriate to support the goals of the proposed Center?
• Was significant progress achieved on Phase I? (For Phase II proposals)

B. Review and Selection Process

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by

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:

Recipients may expect site visits and reverse site visits by NSF-appointed evaluators per the applicable terms and conditions referenced in the award notice.

Each EPSCoR CREST Center shall convene, at least annually, an external advisory committee (EAC). The advisors should include representatives from those served by the EPSCoR CREST Center (e.g., IHEs, industry, state and local agencies, national laboratories) and reflect the gamut of participants inherent in the citizenry of the United States. NSF highly encourages industry members in the EAC that can advise on intellectual property issues, acquisition of SBIR funding, and other means to support the sustainability of the EPSCoR CREST Center. Persons with a financial, institutional, or collaborative connection to the EPSCoR CREST Center may not serve as members of the EAC.

Each EPSCoR CREST Center shall have an internal steering committee to include the PI, co-PIs, and other applicable stakeholders.

EPSCoR CREST personnel will be expected to participate in convocations of the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM (EES) activities and PI meetings.

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 .

Additional Reporting Requirements:

Recipients are required to use the NSF Education and Training Application (ETAP) to manage participants applications for CREST support.

PIs must include their unobligated balance in the Accomplishments section of the annual project report under the heading "What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?".

Acknowledgment of Support and Disclaimer

All publications, presentations, and creative works based on activities conducted during the award must acknowledge NSF CREST support and provide a disclaimer by including the following statement in the Acknowledgements or other appropriate section:

"This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation EPSCoR CREST Centers under Award No. (NSF award number). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. National Science Foundation."

Program Evaluation

The Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM (EES) conducts evaluations to provide evidence on the impact of the EES programs (i.e., EPSCoR CREST Centers) on individuals' career progress, as well as professional productivity; and to provide an understanding of the program policies in achieving the program goal. Additionally, it is highly desirable to have a structured means of tracking recipients to assess the impact EPSCoR CREST Centers have had on their career. Accordingly, EPSCoR CREST Centers support recipients may be contacted for updates on various aspects of their employment history, professional activities and accomplishments, participation in international research collaborations, and other information helpful in evaluating the impact of the program. EPSCoR CREST Centers support recipients and their institutions agree to cooperate in program-level evaluations conducted by the NSF and/or contracted evaluators.

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.

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

ZSR Library

• Fri 5/24 8AM – 5PM
• Sat 5/25 CLOSED
• Sun 5/26 CLOSED
• Mon 5/27 CLOSED
• Tue 5/28 8AM – 10PM
• Wed 5/29 8AM – 10PM
• Thu 5/30 8AM – 10PM
• See more hours ›

Maia and Jemma at NC Live 2024

On Monday, we gave our first conference presentation: “Making, Managing, and Marketing a Wellness Collection in an Academic Library” at NC Live’s Annual Conference , a conference fittingly focused on Wellness in Libraries! It was a great first time experience for us both in submitting a proposal, and preparing and giving a presentation.

From the time we submitted the proposal to when we gave the presentation represented roughly a third of our new Wellness Collection ’s short circulation life. Unfortunately, we didn’t achieve the runaway engagement and circulation numbers during this time period that would’ve proved it to be a resounding success! Instead, we were challenged to slightly pivot the focus of the presentation and include both what worked and what we thought was less successful in order to explain these results.

Of the presentations we caught between setting up and practicing for our own, one of the most interesting and relevant was “Cultivating Resilience in College Students with a Library Wellbeing Collection,” presented by librarians Sydney Adams and Ashley Mills of Davidson College. They recently launched a new collection quite similar to ours, although with some interesting differences:

• Their collection is heavily focused on board games (which we happily already have!)
• They did get an animatronic cat (which we considered, but ultimately did not acquire)
• They also set up a very cool Lego communal project table in the library, similar to the one in the entry of the Wakerspace
• An interesting item we hadn’t considered that they acquired was a weighted lap pad (similar to this )
• Their collection is much more physically accessible (or looked that way in the pictures they shared): out on a shelf for people to “browse,” rather than behind a circulation desk and only available by request. Our access model may be hampering awareness of the collection!

We also took the opportunity to avoid the circus of campus on Commencement Day and did our conference attending/prep/presenting all from a reserved room at Wake Downtown. Cannot recommend enough! Our background was so cool that several people asked if it was fake!

If you can’t find us in the future, we’re likely at our new downtown office!

Add Your Comment

• * Your Name
• * Your Email (will not be published)
• * Your Comment