Grant Proposal Description

PUB-690 Capstone Guide Option 1 – Grant Proposal Description A grant proposal is an organized, persuasive request for funding for an intervention to address a specific issue or problem. In public health, this request for funding can be directed to foundations, nonprofit organizations, or government agencies, such as local/state health departments or federal health agencies. A grant proposal is also a means by which an organization can engage a funder as a partner in impacting change within communities to improve health outcomes. In PUB-620, you explored and practiced preparing some of the elements of a grant proposal, including goals and objectives, an implementation plan, and a budget. A completed grant proposal, in practice, will vary depending on the requirements of the funder. For the purposes of this course, your final grant proposal should include the following components: I. Abstract/Summary – A one-page summary of the overall intervention – placed at the beginning of your final proposal (before the Background/Review of Literature) for submission at the end of Topic 16. II. Background and Review of Literature – A summary of the previous research and history relevant to a proposed intervention. III. Statement of Need – Facts and evidence to support the need for a proposed intervention. This should also describe and establish the requesting organization’s ability to address the need. IV. Description of Proposed Intervention – Description of what you intend to do. It answers the questions, “What is your proposed intervention?” and “Why is it important?” and builds a case for why you should be funded. V. Goals and Objectives – Goals are the overall statements of what the proposed intervention intends to accomplish. Objectives reflect the steps toward achieving the goals. Objectives should be developed using S.M.A.R.T. criteria (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time-Oriented). VI. Methodology and Design – Description of the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses to be used to accomplish the stated goals and objectives; answers the question “How will you accomplish your stated objectives?” as well as “Why is this the best approach?” VII. Implementation Plan – A description and timeline of the specific planned activities related to the proposed intervention, data collection tools, identification of who will complete the activities, and what outcomes will be achieved. The implementation plan should be presented in a table format. © 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. VIII. Evaluation Framework and Plan – Outlines the plan for determining the success of the project during implementation (process evaluation) and at the end of implementing the project (outcome evaluation). Process and outcome measures should be described, including what data are needed and how data will be collected to determine success. IX. Dissemination of Intervention Outcomes – Description of your communication strategy to stakeholders regarding the results of this intervention. Answers the questions, “Who will you target?” and “How will you communicate results?” X. Budget and Budget Narrative – Outlines the funding requested for the proposed intervention. Budget narrative should provide justification for the requested funds and indicate how the proposed intervention will be sustainable after funding ends. Present the budget in a table format, followed by the budget narrative. XI. References Deliverables The deliverables for your grant proposal will be submitted in Topics 5, 8, 12, and 16. For Topics 5, 8, and 12, you will work on three separate parts of your project, according to the deliverable schedule provided below. In Topic 16, you will submit your final, completed project, including all revisions or suggested edits made by your instructor. For each of the four deliverables (Parts 1-3 and Final Project), include a copy of the appropriate rubric (provided in this Capstone Guide) at the end of the deliverable. Your instructor will use this rubric when reviewing and grading the deliverable. Deliverable Due Date Components Due Part 1 Topic 5 II, III Part 2 Topic 8 IV, V, VI, VII Part 3 Topic 12 VIII, IX, X Final Project Topic 16 I-XI Descriptions of the four deliverables, including criteria, requirements, and instructions for completion are provided below: MPH Capstone Project Part 1 (Topic 5) The Background and Review of Literature section synthesizes the literature related to your health issue. This section should be structured so that it summarizes previous research and history relevant to your health issue and proposed intervention, as well as how your proposed intervention, program/project, service, or initiative will help to address the health issue. You will also describe the problem this intervention addresses and the need for the proposed intervention. A helpful resource, “PUB-690: Literature Review Summary Table” (located in Course Materials attached), has been provided to assist you with organizing and preparing your literature review. This template can be used to summarize 10-15 scholarly sources related to your chosen health issue. The table allows you to summarize the research studies you will use as evidence for your capstone option. The essential components of each study, such as research design, study characteristics, data collection methods, and key findings, are to be added in each 2 section of the template to help you evaluate each study’s scientific merit, strengths, and limitations. The deliverable should be between 1,500 and 1,750 words, and will include these parts of your capstone project: II. Background and Review of Literature – A summary of the previous research and history relevant to a proposed intervention. III. Statement of Need – Facts and evidence to support the need for a proposed intervention. This should also describe and establish the requesting organization’s ability to address the need. MPH Capstone Project Part 2 (Topic 8) The deliverable for Topic 8 will focus on describing your proposed intervention goals and objectives; a description of the proposed intervention; the methodology for your proposed intervention; and an implementation plan. The deliverable should be between 1,000 and 1,250 words, not including tables, and will include the following components of your project: IV. Description of Proposed Intervention – Description of what you intend to do. It answers the questions, “What is your proposed intervention?” and “Why is it important?” and builds a case for why you should be funded. V. Goals and Objectives – Goals are the overall statements of what the proposed intervention intends to accomplish. Objectives reflect the steps toward achieving the goals. Objectives should be developed using S.M.A.R.T. criteria (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time-Oriented). VI. Methodology and Design – Description of the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses to be used to accomplish the stated goals and objectives; answers the question “How will you accomplish your stated objectives?” as well as “Why is this the best approach?” VII. Implementation Plan – A description and timeline of the specific planned activities related to the proposed intervention, data collection tools, identification of who will complete the activities, and what outcomes will be achieved. The implementation plan should be presented in a table format. MPH Capstone Project Part 3 (Topic 12) The deliverable for Topic 12 will focus on the evaluation framework and plan for the proposed intervention, a plan for dissemination of outcomes, and a budget and budget narrative. The deliverable should be between 750-1,000 words, not including the budget table, and include the following parts of your project: VIII. Evaluation Framework and Plan – Outlines the plan for determining the success of the project during implementation (process evaluation) and at the end of implementing the project (outcome evaluation); process and outcome measures should be described, including what data are needed and how data will be collected to determine success. IX. Dissemination of Intervention Outcomes – Description of your communication strategy to stakeholders regarding the results of this intervention; answers the questions: “Who will you target?” “How will you communicate results?” 3 X. Budget and Budget Narrative – Outlines the funding requested for the proposed intervention; budget narrative should provide justification for the requested funds; indicates how the proposed intervention will be sustainable after funding ends. Present the budget in a table format, followed by the budget narrative. MPH Capstone Project – Final Project (Topic 16) In Topic 16, you will submit your final, completed project. Your project should include revised sections of the parts submitted in Topics 5, 8, and 12, and include new elements that you have not previously submitted for review: The Abstract/Summary, and a complete list of References. The final project will include the following final components in the order listed: I. Abstract/Summary II. Background and Review of Literature III. Statement of Need IV. Description of Proposed Intervention V. Goals and Objectives VI. Methodology and Design VII. Implementation Plan VIII. Evaluation Framework and Plan IX. Dissemination of Intervention Outcomes X. Budget and Budget Narrative XI. References 4 Rubric: MPH Capstone Project Part 1 (Topic 5) (Capstone Option 1 – Grant Proposal) Criteria % Value % Scaling 1: Unsatisfactory 2: Less Than Satisfactory 3: Satisfactory 4: Good 5: Excellent 0% 74% 79% 87% 100% Content – 70% Literature Review 35% Literature review is not present. Literature review is presented but is incomplete. Summary of previous relevant research is incomplete or lacks consistency. N/A Literature review is presented and mostly complete but needs more detail. Summary of the previous relevant research is presented but missing minor detail. Literature review is complete and presented with enough detail to understand the background of the problem. Summary of the previous relevant research is complete and inclusive. Statement of Need 35% A statement of need for the proposed intervention is not present. A statement of need is present but is incomplete. A statement of need is presented but needs more detail or needs to be more specific. A statement of need is included but needs minor detail to be more complete. Facts and evidence to support the need for a proposed intervention is presented but needs minor detail. A statement of need is evident and clear. Facts and evidence to support the need for a proposed intervention are well described. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the Organization and Effectiveness – 20% Thesis Development and Purpose 7% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. 5 Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. purpose of the paper clear. Argument Logic and Construction 8% Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Enough justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct. Format – 10% Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5% Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. 6 Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. 7 Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. Rubric: MPH Capstone Project Part 2 (Topic 8) (Capstone Option 1 – Grant Proposal) Criteria % Value % Scaling 1: Unsatisfactory 2: Less Than Satisfactory 3: Satisfactory 4: Good 5: Excellent 0% 74% 79% 87% 100% Content – 70% Description of the Proposed Intervention 25% Description of the proposed intervention is not presented. A description of the proposed intervention is presented but is incomplete. A description of the proposed intervention is presented but needs more detail. A description of the proposed intervention is presented, but minor detail is needed. A well-developed description of the proposed intervention is presented. Goals and Objectives 25% Goals and objectives are not presented. Goals and objectives are presented but are incomplete or incorrect. Goals and objectives are presented, but need more detail, or need to be more specific. Goals and objectives are presented, but minor detail is needed. S.M.A.R.T. criteria are applied to goals and objectives but needs minor detail. Goals and objectives are well developed and aligned. S.M.A.R.T. criteria are applied appropriately to goals and objectives. Methodology and Implementation Plan 20% Methodology and timeline for implementation of activities are not presented. Methodology and timeline for implementation of activities are presented but is incomplete. Methodology and timeline for implementation of activities are presented but need to be more specific. Methodology and timeline for implementation of activities are presented and align to goals and objectives, but minor detail is needed. Methodology and timeline for implementation of activities are well developed and clearly align to goals and objectives. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the Organization and Effectiveness – 20% Thesis Development and Purpose 7% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. 8 Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. purpose of the paper clear. Argument Logic and Construction 8% Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Enough justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct. Format – 10% Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5% Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. 9 Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. 10 Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. Rubric: MPH Capstone Project Part 3 (Topic 12) (Capstone Option 1 – Grant Proposal) Criteria % Value % Scaling 1: Unsatisfactory 2: Less Than Satisfactory 3: Satisfactory 4: Good 5: Excellent 0% 74% 79% 87% 100% Content – 70% Evaluation Framework and Plan 25% Evaluation framework and plan are not presented. Evaluation framework and plan are presented but are incomplete or incorrect. Evaluation framework and plan are presented, but more detail is needed, or needs to be more specific. Evaluation framework and plan are presented and include process and outcome evaluation mea…
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Looking for a similar assignment? Get help from our qualified experts!

"Our Prices Start at $9.99. As Our First Client, Use Coupon Code GET15 to claim 15% Discount This Month!!":

Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper