Search SPR
Advanced Search

Return to Syllabi List

HEDU 6500-1
Spring 2003

Instructor: Karol L. Kumpfer, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Health Promotion and Education
Annex, Room 2005
Telephone: 581-7718
Fax: 581-5872

Class Times: Thursday
4:35 - 7:00 pm
Location: HPER N-226

Course Objectives

This course is designed to teach students practical skills needed for planning and writing program and research proposals for federal, state, or local funding primarily in the areas of health and human services although students from many other disciplines have taken this course. Students will write a complete grant proposal by the ending of the course--preferably one that they would actually submit for funding. The specific learning objectives for the course are the following:

1. Increased familiarity with sources of grant funds and the grant procurement process
2. Increased knowledge and skills in planning and writing grant proposals
3. Increased ability to effectively critique and review grants
4. Increased understanding of methods for assuring effective relations with funders prior to and after receiving a grant

Teaching Methods

The ability to see a needed service, plan the service, attract funding, and implement the program is a very marketable job skill. Good proposal writing takes creativity, hard work, and perseverance. These ingredients, and the ability to write a satisfactory college-level composition, will enable students to master the art and the craft of proposal writing. When students complete this course they will have a useful skill that they will always retain.

The course includes lectures, readings, audiovisual presentations, group discussion, group grant reviews, and practical "hands-on" experience in proposal writing and proposal review for each participant. This course teaches proposal writing by taking students through each step in the process experientially. Students first identify a needed service, search for a funding source, and submit concept papers geared to the funding agency's guidelines. They will complete their proposal with all needed appendix materials and form review committees to review the proposals on a standard set of review criteria. In the spirit of creating as real an experience as possible, deadlines are strictly upheld.


Required Text:

1. Kumpfer, K. Grant Writing, Instructor's Handbook, which contains copies of the lecture notes, overheads, web sites for locating grants (GrantsNet), Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Guidelines on Developing and Writing a Grant Proposal, a sample copy of the Federal Register, Budget Guidelines for Grant Writing At The University of Utah, and sample Independent Review Forms to be used for proposal reviews. Other materials will be handed out in class when needed, such as other sample grants and grant reviews.

Coley, S.M.& Scheinberg, C.A. (2000). Proposal Writing, 2nd edition. Sage Publications. (Short review of what content should go into each section of a grant).

Other recommended texts include:

Ries and Leukefeld (1995). Applying for Research Funding. Sage Press. (Useful primarily for those students wanting skills in writing federal research grants)
They are available from the University of Utah Bookstore or from the Instructor.

The Foundation Center (2000) Guide To Grantseeking on the Web (available in Instructor's office as a resource book)

3. Office of Sponsored Projects, University of Utah, Principal Investigator's Handbook. Salt Lake City, Utah, Free, compliments of the Office of Sponsored Projects.

Funding Search Web Site Resources

Useful resource materials for locating funding available for applying for grants or contracts can be found on many Web sites. See GrantsNet ( for federal health, medical, and social services grants. For locating the specific Web sites of other federal agencies see the Federal Web Locator ( or the NonProfit Gateway (, both of which are a one-stop shopping points for all federal agency grant information, or FedWorld ( sponsored by the National Technical Information Service. For links to funding availability only (not including other federal agency information) see EZ/EC Notices of Funding Availability (, which cuts the Federal Register down to only the announcements of grants or contracts available, the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) (, The Federal Information Exchange (FEDIX) (, and Grants Web ( The Foundation's Links to Nonprofit Resources, Government Resources ( is also useful for government grants. Their Grantmaker Information directory on-line has links to nearly 900 grantmaker Web sites, including. For state and local government grants (including arts councils) see: State and Local Government on the Net ( For foundation or corporation grants see the Foundation Centers web sites Foundation Finder ( or Foundation Directory Online ( Also see The Foundation Center's Guide to Grantseeking on the Web (2000 Edition). Dr. Kumpfer has this resource book in her office. The Eccles Library or Marriott Library librarians can also help you access grants available resources on the web or you can see the Business and Science Department of the Salt Lake City Public Library (363-5733), which is a cooperating library with the Foundation Center Library located in New York City and San Francisco.

Course Requirements

1. Two Sample Proposal Reviews (due Jan 16th). In first class session, class members will take two sample grants with them to review on standard review criteria. The purpose of this activity is to help students get an idea of that a complete grant looks like and what represents a quality proposal. This review should include the following:
(a) 25 to 35 line summary of the proposal (could be taken from the grant abstract if complete enough or modified)
(b) Summary of Strengths (one paragraph based on critique below) and a Summary of Weaknesses (one paragraph based on critique below)
(c) Critique of each section of the grant with points assigned and a total score.
The proposal summary, and summary of strengths and weaknesses should be typed. You will be graded on the quality of your critiques and presentation to the class on the grant you are assigned to be the primary reviewer.

2. Program Summary (Abstract) (due Jan. 23). A page, single spaced (25-35 lines) summary of the proposed program should be written up. The summary should include at least one sentence on sections 1-10 of the mini-proposal. The final sentence should include information on how you plan on disseminating your results. Be prepared to discuss your proposed grant and summary in class.

3. Needs, Rationale, Goals & Objectives, & Logic Model (due Feb.20). One page for each section should be typed to follow section 2-4 of the mini-proposal (see below). In addition a one page Logic Model should be created for the proposed project.

4. Mini-proposal Paper (due Mar 6th). Each class member will be required to complete a 3 to 5 page mini-proposal with a cover letter of transmittal. A mini-proposal is defined as a concise identification of a fundable idea you or your organization wishes to have reviewed by the funding source. Letters of Transmittal are generally prepared in the form of a regular business letter. This letter should identify the funding source and be only about three paragraphs long (include a sentence or two on what you are requesting money for, who will be served and how long the project will last, how much you want, why they should be interested, and why your organization is best suited to develop this project.) The 3 to 5 page Mini-proposal (also called a concept paper or letter proposal) should include a title, summary and abstract, and separate titled sections for a program proposal as follows. For a research proposal follow the sections in parens as shown below.

1. Summary of Proposal (Abstract)
2. Need or Purpose (Specific Aims)
3. Rationale (Background and Significance) (includes Literature Review)
4. Goals and Objectives/Logic Model (Progress Report/Preliminary Studies, including your hypothesis or questions to be addressed through planned comparisons)
5. Target Population (Sample)
6. Approach or Method (Design)
7. Evaluation Plan (Instrumentation, Data Collection and Data Analysis Procedures, Dissemination of Results)
8. Implementation Plan
9. Project Management Plan, including Organizational Structure and Staffing (Personnel)
10. Resources: Organizational Capability/Equipment/Facilities (Research Capability)
11. Other Support
12. Confidentiality and Other Ethical Concerns Regarding Target Population (Human Subjects)
13. Budget (keep short by including only major categories as lump sums (e.g. only totals for Personnel, Travel, Consultants, Equipment, Supplies, and Other, Indirect Rate and Total Requested).

This proposal should be typewritten on a computer for ease of corrections. The graded paper will be returned by the next week. You can correct and resubmit for a higher grade.

5. Mini-Proposal Presentation (Mar 6th). Class members will be expected to do a 10-minute presentation of their proposals to the class. These presentations should be as professional as possible as if you were proposing your concept to a corporation or foundation-granting board, or to an internal grant review committee. You should be prepared with handouts and overheads if deemed useful. These should be as professionally prepared as possible. In the spirit of the occasion, you could consider dressing for the presentation depending on the "corporate nature" of the funding source.

6. Federal Grant Proposal (due April 17th). Class members will be required to prepare and submit 3 copies of a "full blown" grant proposal to a designated funding source. The narrative of each grant should be at least 15 pages single spaced. Applications requiring shorter proposals must be approved by instructors and will require additional detail in planning, budgets, and appendices. In this proposal, the applicant should follow the stated guidelines in the Request for Proposal (RFP). Be sure to submit a copy of the RFP with the grant so this can be checked. Also prepare a review criteria sheet that matches the points assigned for each section by the funding source. This is usually included in the RFP. If not, then develop your own based on other similar examples in the Instructor's Manual. This proposal must be original and the topic must be approved by the instructor in advance of any preparation. Three copies are to be submitted at the beginning of class on the date due. One copy is for the instructor's review, and one each for the primary and secondary reviewer. Students will be told their total scores on their grant during the grant review on April 24th. However, these materials will have to be taken by the instructor for grading. The instructor determines the final grade on the proposal, not the student reviewers. Graded materials will be available by 5:00 pm on Monday, May 5th and can be picked up in Dr. Kumpfer's office (Annex 2007).

7. Two Graded Proposal Reviews (due April 24th). Class members will take two grants with them for review on standard review criteria or criteria tailored to the RFP. This review should include the following:
(a) 25 to 35 line summary of the proposal (could be taken from the grant abstract if complete enough or modified)
(b) Summary of Strengths (1 paragraph) and a Summary of Weaknesses (one paragraph)
(c) Critique of each section of the grant with points assigned and a total score.
The proposal summary, and summary of strengths and weaknesses should be typed. Please bring two copies of these to the grant review (one for the grant writer and one for the instructor to grade). You will be graded on the quality of your critiques and presentation to the class of this grant. The proposal reviews will follow that actually used in reviewing federal Public Health Service Grants. The class will role play as an external peer review panel. The instructor will serve as the Executive Secretary of the External Review Panel, by assigning participants to reviews of grants, calling the reviews, asking the primary reviewer to summarize and briefly critique each grant to the panel, calling for additional comments by the secondary reviewer and for questions to the reviewers by class members, calling for a vote on approval or disapproval and total points, ranking the grants and determining how many can be funded. As with all grant reviews, no copies of the reviewed grants can be kept and all must be returned to the Grant Executive Secretary (Instructor) with the review sheets. Depending on the size of the class, the class may need to be split into two grant review panels. The instructor's grades on the two grant reviews will be available by 5:00 pm on Monday, May 5th in Annex 2007.

Course Management and Grading

The instructor responsible for the class will grade all assignments. As is true of all grants, due dates for assignments are real deadlines. Failure to complete your grant on time will mean that another student will not receive it to review. As is true with many grant writing deadlines, everything that can go wrong will go wrong on the final day assignments are due. Hence, students should complete assignments a day or two earlier or have back-up plans for faulty equipment or software. All assignments should be written on a computer (except the points assigned and your comments on the sections of the grants) and you should always keep an extra hard and soft computer copy in your possession of all materials submitted. During each session, the instructors will impart techniques, strategies and tips which have been used in various grant proposals. Individual problems and circumstances will be addressed in class. Individuals are expected to do their own work. No previously prepared or submitted grants are acceptable.

Grades are earned, not given. Grading of the assignments will be based on the quality of the work, evidence of compliance with stated standards or guidelines, thoroughness of the work, organization, resourcefulness and originality.

The instructor's intent is to provide each class member with the best skills, insight and knowledge to be successful in grant writing. Our hope is that in the future your ideas will be funded by an external agency. This requires that the class member attends every class, comes prepared for each session, uses the syllabus, completes all assignments in a quality manner and utilizes library and computer resources available at the university.

Each class member can accumulate up to 1000 points. The following point values are assigned to each assignment. Final grades assigned will be based on a class curve with break-off points. Based on previous classes the following grading standard is likely (but not absolute):

Points Cumulative Equivalent

Assignment Possible Points Cumulative Point Range Letter Grade
Sample Grant Reviews (50 each) 100 1000-900 A
Program Summary 25 899-875 A-
Needs, Rationale, & Goals & Obj. 25 874-850 B+
Logic Model 25 849-825 B
Mini-proposal: 150 824-800 B-

Mini-proposal Presentation:
100 799-775 C+
Final Proposals: 325 774-750 C
2 Proposal Reviews: (50 each) 100 749-700 C-
Review Presentation: (25 each) 50 699-600 D
Class Participation: 100 599 or less F
Total Points 1000    

Course Outline

JAN 9 Course Overview: Ch 1 Proposal Writing Dr. Kumpfer
What's a Proposal? Ch 4 R&L

JAN 16 Corporate, Foundation, & Private Donors Ch 2 PW Dr. Kumpfer
& 13 R&L
Assignment: Review Sample Proposals
(Use Project Review Score Sheet p. 131)
Present in Class Your critique
of 2 sample proposals

JAN 23 Review of Proposal Ideas
Assignment: #SYMBOL \f "WP TypographicSymbols"50 page single-spaced Program
Summary to review in class.

JAN 30 Locating Funders: Appendix B PW Tara Henderson
Computer Search for Funding Availability
Search Guide to Web Eccles Library

FEB 6 Establishing Needs, Needs Assessments
Etiological Literature Reviews,
Risk and Protective Factors Ch 3 & 4 PW Dr. Kumpfer

FEB 13 Selecting the Best Interventions,
Intervention Literature Review, Matching Needs,
Clarifying Goals and Objectives,
Developing Your Logic Model Ch 5 PW

FEB 20 Program Activities: Detailed Specification linked
to Logic Model
(Who? What? When? Where? How?) Ch 5 PW Dr. Kumpfer
Assignment: Section #2-4 (Needs, Rationale,
& Goals & Obj.) and Logic Model

FEB 27 Program Activities II Continued
Staffing. Timeframes, Developing GANTT Charts Ch 5 PW & App. A Dr. Alvarado

MAR 6 Mini-Proposal Presentations Class members
(Potluck Dinner [No prizes...just good food!])
Assignment: Letter of Transmittal
and 3 to 5 page Mini-proposals Due
Mini-proposal Presenations

MAR 13 Budgeting and Application Process Ch 7 PW Abbey Strong
Approvals, Document Summary Sheets PI Handbook
*Bring Hand Calculator for exercises
"Guidelines for Grant Writing" Ch 11 R&L

MAR 20 Spring Break, NO CLASS!

MAR 27 Program Evaluation I: Process Evaluations Ch 6 PW Dr. Kumpfer
Documenting Participation, Staff, Fidelity

APR 3 Program Evaluation II: Outcome Evaluations Ch 6 PW Dr. Kumpfer
Outcome Measures, Data Collection, Data Sources

APR 10 Research Proposals Ch 8 PW Dr. Kumpfer
Experimental Designs, IRB Approval CH 8, 9, & 10 R&L

APR 17 Keeping A Grant: Managing Grants Dr. Kumpfer
& Agency Relations (Personnel, PI Handbook
Financial Accountability, Ch 12 R&L
Conflict of Interest, Copyrights)
Assignment: Final Grants Due
(original and two copies).
Pick up two proposals to review
as primary and secondary reviewer.

APR 24 Grant Review Presentations Ch 2 PW Class Members
Assignment: Typed Grant Reviews
on two grants are due. Be prepared
to present your primary review grants
to review committee.

MAY 5 Final scores on grants and grant reviews available to students in Instructor's Office, Annex 2007

Return to Top

Home | About SPR | Membership | Annual Meeting
Prevention Science | Early Career Network | The Prevention Connection

Society for Prevention Research
11240 Waples Mill Road, Suite 200
Fairfax, VA 22030
P 703-934-4850
f 703-359-7562