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.