The first step in putting together a great proposal is to carefully read the Call for Proposals 2009, available in the links on the left hand navigation pane. The same criteria that we used to review the original abstracts still applies, so it's important that your proposal attempts to capture the ways in which your proposal meets the spirit of the requirements.

The second step is to carefully read the proposal entry form. The sections listed there are the sections that we expect to be included in a full proposal, in an order that hopefully makes for a clear, logical document. The Talking Points (formerly known as MiKnow) proposal follows the structure described on the website in a clear and concise manner, and is an excellent example of the format the judges are looking to see.

All that being said, there is some amount of latitude in the proposal format. Because no two GROCS projects are the same in intent or process, proposals take different forms. Talking Points was a project that was driven by the prototype, and their proposal reflects the technical focus of the team, while still taking care to explain the context of the project. The Ourobouros proposal eventually evolved into an interactive theater performance, and the team was not able to include the same amount of technical detail because the "wrap" or end goal of the project was not as clearly defined. Their proposal focused on the theoretical, historical and social context of the project, and the format and content changed accordingly.

To see the MiKnow proposal, search "MiKnow Proposal" in the BlueStream search bar on the right hand side of the blog. To see the Ourobouros/Enjoy Your Flight Proposal, search "Enjoy Your Flight Proposal" in the same box.

A question that has come up often in meetings and in Tea is the importance of the "wrap" or project conclusion to the review process. Reviewers are looking to see the entire trajectory of the project in order to determine feasibility, and to make sure that the project has a goal or milestone in mind. The exact details of the "wrap" are not crucial. Projects shift and change over the course of the grant, and we of course understand and anticipate that. Reviewers are more interested in seeing the process the team plans to employ to explore their research question and its links to collaboration and community, rather than the exact details of a prototype or performance.

As always, feel free to contact grocs.info@umich.edu for any questions about your proposal, team formation, "wrap" ideas or GROCS in general. There is still one more Wednesday Afternoon Tea before the submission deadline, and Tea is always a great place to bounce ideas off of alumni, Linda, or other GROCS hopefuls!