1. Developing a proposal Dónal O’Mathúna, PhD Senior Lecturer in Ethics, Decision-Making & Evidence donal.omathuna@dcu.ie700-7808

2. What is the purpose? An academic assignment A higher degree To get work To obtain funding To obtain a fellowship Ethical approval

3. Before you write Read the instructions Re-read the instructions Read them again Talk to someone who wrote the instructions Talk to someone who was successful in the past Find someone who will read your draft proposal

4. Before you write, know the: Eligibility criteria Submission format – web? hard-copy? Submission date Peer review time Budgetary allowances Additional requirements, e.g. –References –Prior approvals, signatures –Supervisor

5. The basics You want an interesting topic that brings something new that is relevant, important. Technical merit Realistic and achievable Information presented clearly, concisely in an easy-to-read format Guidelines adhered – including spelling and grammar Draft, review, edit, re-write and proof-read

6. Important Tips Put yourself in the mind of the reviewers: Why should they give you what you want? How does your proposal fit in with their agenda? On a superficial level, adhering to their guidelines shows them you can cooperate. Good grammar shows you can communicate well. Spelling and maths show you can take care of the details.

7. Content of the Proposal Title of the project Summary/IntroductionBackground Aims and objectives Methods Ethical issues Budget LimitationsDissemination Evaluation plan Time-lineConclusionReferencesAppendices

8. Title Short, concise and to the point – not cute or cryptic Usually not a question Remove unnecessary words ‘An evaluation of whether or not nurses with undergraduate degrees give better care to older people.’ ‘Evaluating the care baccalaureate nurses give older people.’

9. Summary/Introduction/Abstract This is very important: it may be all that is read in an initial screening. Summarise the proposal clearly and concisely: ‘paint a picture’. Best to write this after everything else. Make sure the reviewer does not end this thinking: Not an original idea Rationale is weak Writing is vague Uncertain outcomes Problem is not important Proposal is unfocused Project is too large

10. Background Information May be a literature review This is a justification for your project. Why is this project worth doing? Why should I give you my/our money? Put this project into a context.

11. Show that you know the area; that you are qualified to do this research. Critical appraisal of key studies. Murphy (1996) did this and then Jones (2004) showed that, leading Smith et al (2007) to decide to do the other thing. Murphy (1996) did this, but used a survey that had not been validated. Jones (2004) showed a statistically significant change, but the clinical significance of her results are questionable because Smith et al (2007) found that patients are not concerned about this factor. In addition, Smith et al decided to validate their instrument before using it. How will you add to the field? How will you avoid mistakes or overcome limitations? Mention preliminary work you have done or future larger projects. Describe real or potential collaborations.

12. Aims and Objectives Aims: broad goals that you hope to achieve but usually difficult to measure. –e.g. improve health care services Objectives: specific, measurable outcomes of your project. Projects are evaluated based on whether objectives are met and to what extent. Give a few objectives, in order of priority, each in a sentence or two. Link your aims and objectives to those of the funding agency.

13. Methods Pick methods that will achieve your objectives. Objective Methods evaluate effectiveness of an intervention conduct interviews explore experiences of people with cancer quantitative questionnaire determine proportion of population satisfied with the health services randomised controlled trial

14. What sort of data do you need to address your aims and objectives? Do your methods require collaboration with others with needed skills, experience? Do you need training? cost? where? Where will you get the data? participants? What instruments will you use? Why? Give the exact procedures. How will you analyse the data? Why that way?

15. Sampling Issues Statistical issues: expected and acceptable size of effects, degrees of power, sample size necessary (power) Evidence of sample availability Inclusion and exclusion criteria Justification for population you’re focusing on.

16. Ethical issues

17. Resources and budget Realistic appraisal Personnel – experience, supervision Accurately appraise your needs Equipment Overheads/indirect costs TravelConsultantsPublication Seek advice

18. Other parts LimitationsDissemination Evaluation plan Time-line Conclusion: reaffirm what you’ll do and why it’s important References – make sure you use the format in the guidelines. Appendices: letters, permissions, instruments

19. Further Resources The instructions given http://www.learnerassociates.net/proposal/ http://www.biu.ac.il/RA/www/rserch/writing/ write1.html http://www.meaning.ca/articles/writing_res earch_proposal_may02.htm http://www.research.umich.edu/proposals/ pwg/pwgcontents.html

20. Questions? Dónal O’Mathúna, PhD donal.omathuna@dcu.ie700-7808