Writing an Excellent Project Plan - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Writing an Excellent Project Plan

Description:

Writing an Excellent Project Plan Explaining your research to everyone Jerry Hatfield National Soil Tilth Laboratory SQRO (Ret.) Some Ground Rules No question is too ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:142
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 36
Provided by: arsUsdaGo
Learn more at: https://www.ars.usda.gov
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Writing an Excellent Project Plan


1
Writing an Excellent Project Plan
  • Explaining your research to everyone
  • Jerry Hatfield
  • National Soil Tilth Laboratory
  • SQRO (Ret.)

2
Some Ground Rules
  • No question is too obviousAsk!
  • Easiest way in a large group is to send a
    question (using the question box in the lower
    right corner).
  • We will read out questions received (only Mike
    sees them) without saying who they are from
  • With this large group well hold questions to the
    end.
  • DO NOT put your phone on HOLD for any reason. If
    you must leave use Mute (hold can create noise
    problems for the rest of us).
  • If you want to see a larger image use Full Screen
    Mode under the View tab at the top of your
    screen. (Esc returns you to the frames mode)

3
What Causes the Problems
  • Lack of clarity in project plan
  • Lack of integration in the overall plan
  • Lack of details in the experimental plan
  • Lack of explanation of the role of project team
    members
  • Lack of explanation of the knowledge gaps and how
    project will fill them
  • Lack of confidence in the ability of the project
    team to accomplish the objectives

4
Your Plan is a Marketing Tooland the reviewers
are your customers
  • By page 5 reviewers should know
  • The subject of your research
  • Why it is important
  • What it will produce
  • How you are going to get there
  • The rest of the document will flesh out this
    but if the reviewers dont know it by page 5,
    they probably wont get it easily from the rest
    of the document.
  • this means

5
  • The project summary should present the overall
    thread of your work, the major gaps being
    addressed, how you will address them, and what
    you will producein no more than a dozen
    sentences.
  • The Objectives should be followed by one to two
    paragraphs that explain how they are integrated
    and how they address the overall goals of the
    work. A chart illustrating this and showing where
    individuals on the project team fit is most
    helpful.

6
Where are the problems? (Science, Data, Writing)
The problem is poor or inadequate writing!
Little difference
7
Dont hide your details and expect the panel to
guess your path!
8
Comment Sampling No Revision
studies will fill rather substantial knowledge
gaps. well written and comprehensive well
written project plan well organized, cogently
prioritized and comprehensive research plan
9
Comment Sampling Minor Revision
studies will fill rather substantial knowledge
gaps. well written and comprehensive well
written project plan well organized, cogently
prioritized and comprehensive research
plan well written, well organized, and easy to
follow.
10
Comment Sampling Moderate Revision
one of the better written excellent discussion
of technology large research project plan but
poorly organized. concerns that some of the
objectives can be completed by this team. work
and ability described as "adequate" missing
current information hypotheses and plan well
conceived, approaches appropriate
11
Comment Sampling Major Revision
a heroic course thatwill not achieve the stated
objectives serious flaws in experimental
designs General Lack of focus. Plan is so broad
that it leaves out important detailsnot clear
data will be relevant or interpretable. lacks
cohesion and clear direction writing style,
quality, and organization significantly
detract Short on details. Not well planned. Need
to take process seriously.
12
Comment Sampling Not Feasible
approaches highly flawed, lack detail, many
experiments duplicative poorly writtendifficult
to discern what the authors want to do.
proposed research contradicts intention of the
proposal. exaggerations, incomplete reviews,
and misleading comments, as well as poor grammar
and organization. lack of knowledgeincomplete
understanding fundamental misunderstanding Work
does not address stated objectives.
13
Causes of Low Scores
  • Presentation of the information, not necessarily
    the scientific questions or the project team
  • Can not see the logical path of science toward
    the goal
  • Not an integrated plan but a collection of parts,
    plan looks and reads like it was assembled by a
    committee but not read for its flow once
    assembled.

14
Attributes of a Good (Great) Plan
  • Explains the problem, the current state of
    knowledge, your expertise in the problem area,
    your approach to solving the problem, and the
    products from the research program
  • Convinces the review panel that you are the best
    team to conduct this research.
  • Presents your plan as a narrative from front to
    back
  • Showcases your ability as a project team to
    conduct this research and solve a problem

15
These are not competitive grants but think about
preparing this plan to demonstrate to NPS and AO
that your funding for this effort is a great
investment and the return you provide will
benefit ARS and the American Public
16
Document Outline
Title and Investigator(s).page 1 Signature
Page...........page 2 Table of
Contents..page 3 Project summary (250
words)...page 4 Objectives....................
.page 5 Need for research (1-2 p) Scientific
Background (5-7 p) Prior Accomplishments (2
p) Approach Procedures (6-15 p) Literature
Cited Milestone Table (1-3 p) Past
Accomplishments of Project Team Members Issues of
Concern statements Appendices (letters plus other
material)
15 - 30 pages
17
Project Summary
  • Marketing plan for your research plan that
    explains the research plan and its potential
    impact
  • Understandable by the non-technical reader

18
Objectives
  • Dont just state the objectives but explain the
    goals that are being addressed.
  • Link the objectives together by using a diagram
    that shows the project team and the products (A
    picture is worth a 1000 words).

19
Need for Research Scientific Background
  • Why is a solution to this problem important?
  • How does it fit into the NP action plan?
  • What are the current knowledge gaps?
  • What preliminary data exists from your program
    (graphs and tables help)?
  • This section doesnt have to be long but set the
    stage for this research

20
Need for Research Scientific Background (Hints)
  • Your literature review doesnt have to cover all
    of the information known on this topic.
  • Present related projects as more than a list from
    the CRIS search, show the linkages.
  • What the panel wants to see is what gaps exist in
    the current literature and how your project plan
    fills those gaps.
  • Most of the comments state that this is great
    literature review but it doesnt tell us why the
    problem is important.

21
Hypotheses
  • Clear, concise, and testable hypothesis
    statements.
  • Divide project plan into subobjectives each with
    testable hypothesis statements.
  • Question Does your hypothesis statement relate
    to your experimental plan?

22
Approach and Procedures
  • Adequate detail on experimental procedures
  • Data to be collected
  • Approach for the data analysis
  • Who is responsible for the conduct of the
    research?

23
Approach and Procedures (Hints)
  • If you are using a new technique show that your
    project team has the expertise to use this
    method.
  • If you have a vacancy describe how this SY will
    fit into the project plan and if the objective is
    totally the responsibility of the vacant SY then
    give scope of what this SY will do and have a
    6-month milestone that their job will be to
    develop an experimental plan.

24
Approach and Procedures (Hints)
  • Link the experiments back to the knowledge gaps
    and conclude by how these studies fill these
    gaps.
  • Lay the foundation for the research program by
    showing what you will be doing in the first set
    of experiments.
  • Link to the contingency section

25
Contingencies
  • This is not the whining section!
  • Show how you will use the results from the
    initial studies to determine your next steps in
    the project plan.
  • If you are using a new technology, state how you
    will evaluate its effectiveness against other
    methods.

26
Collaborations
  • Dont merely list the collaborators but explain
    what they bring to the project plan.
  • Use the collaborator letters to provide evidence
    of their involvement.
  • If you have a SCA with a group provide a copy of
    the agreement in the appendix with a summary in
    the Collaboration section.

27
Collaborations (Hints)
  • If there is a project within the location or area
    that is within the same NP show how these are
    linked or complement each other.
  • Dont overstate collaborations for
    window-dressing but show viable collaborations.

28
Project Management
  • How is the project team going to evaluate the
    progress of the project?
  • If you have collaborators how will the overall
    project team assess progress?

29
Human Physical Resources
  • Provide the confidence that you have the
    resources needed to conduct the research.
  • This is not the place to ask for more.
  • Human Resources
  • Vacancy- explain the vacancy and expected date it
    will be filled.
  • Training- explain any training needed on new
    methods and how this will be obtained (classes,
    time in other laboratories).
  • Physical Resources
  • Provide confidence that you have the resources
    required to answer the problems.

30
Milestone Table
  • Use this table as a summary of your project.
  • Include the products and milestones that you
    expect to deliver over the life-cycle.
  • Remember these are only the starting points and
    will be changed each year through the life-cycle
    as the project progresses.

31
Previous Accomplishments
  • Summary of each investigator in a related project
    objectives
  • Pertinent publications to the project objectives
  • Remember, the review team is probably aware of
    your research, but they still like to read about
    your assessment of your accomplishments.

32
Supporting Materials
  • Letters from collaborators
  • Other material that helps support your ability to
    conduct the research

33
Separating the Good from the Great
  • Prepare an integrated narrative that provides the
    detail and instills confidence about the project
    team approach to addressing the problem.
  • Shows that the project plan will fill important
    gaps needed for science and the National Program
    Action Plan.
  • Shows that outcomes will address problems.

34
Hints
  • Read your plan with a fresh set of eyes after you
    have assembled the plan.
  • The plan should read as an integrated effort to
    solve a problem.
  • Use the plan as a reflection of the project teams
    ability to conduct problem-solving science.
  • Proofread your plan!

35
Parting Thoughts
  • Dont expect anyone else other than the Project
    Team to add quality to the project plan
  • Be proud of your research accomplishments and
    your approach to address this problem
  • Producing a quality plan takes time. Start early
    and seek the input of colleagues.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com