Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help

Help in Homework
trustpilot ratings
google ratings


Homework answers / question archive / PHAR 4204 W/5204 Grant Proposal Directions Grant Proposal Assignment 3 Assignment Expectations You’ve introduced your plan and done your research, now you’re ready to tackle the entire grant proposal

PHAR 4204 W/5204 Grant Proposal Directions Grant Proposal Assignment 3 Assignment Expectations You’ve introduced your plan and done your research, now you’re ready to tackle the entire grant proposal

Health Science

PHAR 4204 W/5204 Grant Proposal Directions

Grant Proposal Assignment 3

Assignment Expectations

You’ve introduced your plan and done your research, now you’re ready to tackle the entire grant proposal. We strongly encourage you to refer to the peer evaluation rubric as a guide for each section of

your proposal – this is the grading rubric for this assignment and is found at the end of this document.

Your final grant proposal needs to include the following seven sections. The description and

requirements for each section are found both below and on the Google doc template found on the

Canvas course site. You can use the same Google doc that you used for the grant proposal overview and

annotated bibliography assignments.

Grant Proposal Overview

The requirements for the overview are found in the Grant Proposal Overview Directions on the Canvas

course site. Please remember to update your overview with any changes that you make to your grant

proposal.

Discussion of the Problem

This section focuses on the two questions “What is the context of this research or project?” and “what is

the significance of this project?” This section provides an in-depth and evidence-based review of the

issue, and should give the reader a sense of urgency that this issue needs to be addressed.

The context of the project includes giving background on the problem you are presenting and discussing

the breadth and severity of the problem. You should also provide contextual information on the

community or beneficiaries that are being targeted in the proposal. (Why was this community chosen?

What are the identified needs? This could include historical information, demographic information, etc.)

Use evidence to support your claims! The significance of this project includes the impact the problem

has on the community, the urgency of the problem, and the risks of inaction. Again, use evidence to

support your claims!

This page should be one of the most extensive in your grant proposal. While there are no specific word

requirements, most successful proposals include discussion of the problem sections that are 500-1000

words in length. You can organize this page according to the two main questions, or in any other way

you see fit. This is a great place to incorporate multimedia tools, figures, and videos into your proposal.

One common issue here is the problem scope. Make sure that your idea is focused enough that you can

clearly define your scope and that you are able to provide evidence for your claims.

Proposal Goals and Benchmarks

This section will list the overall goals of the proposal, as well as specific and measurable benchmarks

that you can rely on to monitor your progress. To pinpoint your goals, ask questions such as, “What is

the overarching purpose of your grant proposal?” and, “What do you hope your proposal will

accomplish if funded?” Most proposals will have one main goal. Sometimes, proposals can have two

goals, but should never have more than three.

Page 2 of 5

© Regents of the University of Minnesota. This handout is provided to facilitate the learning of participants within this course. It may not be

modified, reproduced and/or circulated for other means without the permission of the author. University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy.

Benchmarks are used to measure progress towards the goal while the project is underway. Benchmarks

should be clearly listed and should be parameters that would appropriately indicate progress. You can

have benchmarks that measure progress in the actual work of the project (examples could include

number of attendees at an event, survey responses from participants, etc.). Benchmarks can also

measure success in addressing the issue (examples could include increase in health literacy assessment

scores or decrease in patient no-show appointments). Benchmarks should be concrete, measurable, and

within a reasonable scope. For example, an effective benchmark could be ‘reducing the teen pregnancy

rate in a specific Minnesota county by 15%’ instead of ‘preventing all teen pregnancies’.

Methodology

This section outlines the evidence-based steps you will follow to address the issue at hand. Along with

the discussion of the problem, this will be one of the longer pages in your proposal. There are no word

requirements, but again, most successful proposals have a methodology that is at least 500-1000 words

in length. A reader with no prior knowledge of your idea should be able to read your methodology and

have a clear idea of the steps in your plan, the timeline, and the staff and volunteers needed. Think

about the following questions:

? What specific steps will be taken to put your grant proposal into action?

? Who is going to put your grant proposal into action? (You as a student researcher? You are

part of an organization? Make sure that your answer here matches the scope of your

proposal.)

? What is the timeline for your proposal?

Also, include a “Meet the Researcher” section in your methodology. This should include details and

background information about you, the student researcher, the organization receiving the grant funds,

or both.

Please provide evidence-based reasons for your methodology. Why is this the way the plan is designed?

And, can you provide evidence for these choices?

Evaluation

This section will identify how you will evaluate the success of your plan based on your goals and

benchmarks. This section should present a plan for measuring progress on each benchmark listed in the

“Proposal goals and benchmarks section”. What is your plan to measure each of your benchmarks and

monitor progress? Who is going to monitor the progress and evaluate the success of the proposal? What

specific components will be measured to determine your proposal’s success? The benchmarks are listed

in a previous section, but the evaluation should focus on the plan to actually measure and carry out that

evaluation.

This section should also present a plan for modifying the proposal based on the evaluation. What will

you do with the information from the evaluation? If you are not meeting the benchmarks, how you

modify the plan?

Budget

In this section you will provide a budget for your grant proposal, outlining both the total amount of

money you’re asking for and how the dollars will be used. Please outline the funding required for each

of the components of your plan. While you don’t have to be as specific as the cost of office supplies (i.e.

Page 3 of 5

© Regents of the University of Minnesota. This handout is provided to facilitate the learning of participants within this course. It may not be

modified, reproduced and/or circulated for other means without the permission of the author. University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy.

stapler, $8.95), do provide details of how your overall budget will be spent. Your budget needs to match

what is given in your overview, but here you have room for more detail.

Annotated Bibliography

Many students use additional sources when writing their grant proposal that were not included in their

initial annotated bibliography. Please do add any sources you use to the annotated bibliography. You do

not have to annotate any additional sources. All sources used in your grant proposal should have both

in-text citations and a full citation in your bibliography. Please hyperlink your in-text citations to the

annotated bibliography.

Other things to think about:

? Make sure to hyperlink your citations throughout your Google doc back to your annotated

bibliography. This allows your peer evaluators to quickly review your source if they’d like to. To

do this using our Google doc template:

o Highlight the source you referenced in your grant proposal (e.g. Smith, 2021).

o Select the link icon. Under Link, select Headings

o Scroll to Annotated Bibliography

o Select Apply

? Please proofread carefully. Nothing distracts your reader from your argument or lessens your

credibility faster than blatant spelling and grammatical errors.

You will receive one extra credit point for each peer reviewer who votes to approve your project for

inclusion on experiment.com – you want to convince your reviewers that your plan is worthwhile!

Submission Instructions

When you have finished your Google doc, please change it to a PDF and upload the file to the Final

Grant Proposal assignment in Canvas. When the deadline has passed, the course team will randomly

assign you three peers to review in Canvas using the rubric below. This assignment is worth 125 points.

Please review the Peer Review and Resubmission Directions for more information.

Page 4 of 5

© Regents of the University of Minnesota. This handout is provided to facilitate the learning of participants within this course. It may not be

modified, reproduced and/or circulated for other means without the permission of the author. University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy.

Peer Evaluation Rubric

Title of Proposal: Title of Grant Proposal

(Do NOT include your name or initials)

Proposal Writer: Proposal #

1. PROPOSAL OVERVIEW (20 pts) Included Score

a. Includes an overview of the problem and problem statement (thesis) Yes 5

b. Identifies the grant applicant and target audience or target

beneficiaries of the proposal Yes 5

c. Includes a budget overview and persuasive overview of the plan Yes 5

d. Relates to a course related issue (an issue in the US healthcare system) Yes 5

2. DISCUSSION OF THE PROBLEM (25 pts) Included Score

a. Plan is of reasonable dimensions (not trying to solve all problems) Yes 5

b. Provides sufficient background information on the issue Yes 5

c.

Provides sufficient contextual information on target beneficiaries or

community Yes 5

d. Establishes urgency of problem and identifies risks of inaction Yes 5

e. Issue is supported by credible evidence including primary literature Yes 5

3. PROPOSAL GOALS AND BENCHMARKS(15 pts) Included Score

a. Overall goals of the proposal are identified Yes 5

b. Proposal benchmarks are clearly listed and are appropriate indicators

of progress Yes 5

c. Proposal benchmarks are specific and measurable Yes 5

4. METHODOLOGY (25 pts) Included Score

a.

Provides a thorough description of plan to fix prescription drug/health

care problem, including detailed description of intervention activities Yes 5

b. Provides details and background about the researcher or research

organization Yes 5

c. Provides evidence-based reasons for the selection of activities Yes 5

d. Outlines staff/volunteers needed for proposal plan Yes 5

e.

Presents a reasonable scope of activities that can be conducted within

the time and resources of the program Yes 5

5. EVALUATION (10 pts) Included Score

a. Presents a plan to measure progress on each benchmark Yes 5

b. Presents plan for modifying program based on evaluation Yes 5

6. BUDGET (10 pts) Included Score

a. Includes total cost/amount requested Yes 5

b. Provides breakdown and explanation of how money will be used Yes 5

7. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS (25 pts) Included Score

a. Document is organized and easy to follow Yes 5

b. Is free of typos and grammatical errors Yes 5

d. Follows APA guidelines Yes 5

e. Evidence is hyperlinked to bibliography/direct source Yes 5

Total Points (please add up points) Out of 125 pts

Would you approve this project for inclusion on experiment.com? Yes

Page 5 of 5

© Regents of the University of Minnesota. This handout is provided to facilitate the learning of participants within this course. It may not be

modified, reproduced and/or circulated for other means without the permission of the author. University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy.

Peer Evaluations must be Thorough and Complete

Given the seven areas in the rubric, provide constructive feedback for each of the areas below. Write

complete sentences and cite specific examples when providing feedback. We expect that you write a

paragraph (4-5 sentences) or more for each of the seven components and will ask you to write more if

your feedback is not adequate. Don’t be hesitant to offer suggestions to make the proposal better—

that’s what peer review is all about! For example, “I understand the argument you’re making here, but I

think it would be stronger if…”; “I’m not sure that the evidence you provide here really supports your

claims…”; “Your discussion of the problem is really brief, and I think you could present a strong

argument with more specific examples for why your project is so urgent.” Be sure to comment on the

positive things, as well! We expect that for each section, reviewers will indicate an area that they found

to be positive or particularly effective and one area to work on.

Proposal Overview

Remember to include at least one area for improvement and one positive comment for this section.

Discussion of the Problem

Remember to include at least one area for improvement and one positive comment for this section.

Proposal Goals and Benchmarks

Remember to include at least one area for improvement and one positive comment for this section.

Methodology

Remember to include at least one area for improvement and one positive comment for this section.

Evaluation

Remember to include at least one area for improvement and one positive comment for this section.

Budget

Remember to include at least one area for improvement and one positive comment for this section.

Other Considerations

Remember to include at least one area for improvement and one positive comment for this section.

Important Information!

? Failure to provide adequate feedback will result in a 15% deduction on your grant proposal

grade. We are happy to preview your peer review before submission if you want to confirm that

your review is thorough and complete. Contact the course email account at least 48 hours

before the assignment is due with your review or questions.

? Failure to submit peer reviews by the deadline will result in a 30% deduction on your grant

proposal grade.

? Failure to complete the peer reviews will result in a score of zero for your grant proposal

Grant Proposal Overview

In recent years, it has been a fact that the doctor-patient relationship in emergency medicine in China has been abysmal. Because the emergency room is at the forefront of saving patients' lives, it brings a super high intensity workload and psychological burden to the medical staff. It is also the department that gathers emergency, dangerous and critically ill patients. Some patients and families expect too much from the healthcare system, thinking that medicine is all-powerful. Entering a hospital means that their lives and health are guaranteed. This proposal is intended to protect health care workers who are verbally harassed, physically touched and injured and endangered by unreasonable patients and families. It will also deter those who see the harassment of health care workers as right. This includes not only some patients and families, but also those who make a career out of finding fault with hospitals. This project will not change the entire country's medical harassment problem overnight; it will require a long investment of time, manpower and money. So this project will start with one hospital. This will be done by drawing lots from among donors from different places. At the end of the lottery, the hospital will be chosen from among those who have a history of medical malpractice in the area. The money raised for the project will be decentralized to the hospital and will be used to educate the medical staff about the law so that they understand their rights. It will also improve the quality and safety of medical care and create a new mechanism for handling medical disputes. The goal of this proposal is to reduce unnecessary harm to hospitals and health care workers, as well as to reduce those who make a career out of medical malpractice.

 

The money will be used for legal literacy so that medical workers understand that there is a protective net built for them in the legal system. They have the right to call the police, demand protection from security personnel, and go to court when they are confronted with aggression and physical assault. And the funds will be used to establish a comprehensive system of safe medical care in emergency medicine, including robust case histories, resuscitation records and medical documentation. And include a dead-end, high-definition surveillance system with audio and video recording alongside. The hospital will set up a special department to deal with disputes and recruit medical and legal professionals to strengthen the supervision of the handling of medical disputes.

The total cost is $2750. Notice that the dollars here will be converted to RMB. $500 to hire a legal consultant to speak at the hospital and to keep a video of the presentation for those who cannot attend. $1000 for the hospital. 1,500 will be used to upgrade the surveillance equipment. 750 will be used to build a new department. There is no need to build a new office, the money is mainly used to recruit staff for the dispute handling department and add equipment.

Option 1

Low Cost Option
Download this past answer in few clicks

18.99 USD

PURCHASE SOLUTION

Already member?


Option 2

Custom new solution created by our subject matter experts

GET A QUOTE