scientific-writer 2.2.1__py3-none-any.whl → 2.2.3__py3-none-any.whl

scientific_writer/.claude/skills/venue-templates/references/grants_requirements.md

@@ -0,0 +1,787 @@
+# Grant Proposal Requirements
+
+Comprehensive requirements and formatting guidelines for major federal and private foundation grant programs.
+
+**Last Updated**: 2024
+
+---
+
+## NSF (National Science Foundation)
+
+### Overview
+
+**Agency**: National Science Foundation  
+**Typical Award**: $100K-$500K per year, 3-5 years  
+**Success Rate**: 20-25% (varies by program)  
+**Review Criteria**: Intellectual Merit + Broader Impacts (equally weighted)
+
+---
+
+### NSF Standard Grant Proposal
+
+**Page Limits (NSF PAPPG - Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide)**:
+
+| Component | Page Limit | Font | Spacing |
+|-----------|-----------|------|---------|
+| **Project Summary** | 1 page | Any readable, 10pt+ | Any |
+| **Project Description** | 15 pages | Times Roman 11pt or similar | Single |
+| **References Cited** | No limit | Times Roman 11pt | Single |
+| **Biographical Sketch** | 3 pages per person | Times Roman 11pt | Single |
+| **Budget Justification** | 3-5 pages | Any readable | Any |
+| **Current & Pending Support** | No limit | Times Roman 11pt | Single |
+| **Facilities, Equipment** | 2 pages | Any readable | Any |
+| **Data Management Plan** | 2 pages | Any readable | Any |
+
+**Margins**: 1 inch (2.54 cm) on all sides (strictly enforced)
+
+---
+
+### NSF Project Summary (1 page)
+
+**Required Sections** (clearly labeled):
+
+1. **Overview** (1-2 paragraphs)
+   - Concise description of research activity
+   - Objectives and methods
+
+2. **Intellectual Merit** (1 paragraph)
+   - How project advances knowledge
+   - Innovation and transformative potential
+   - Qualifications of research team
+
+3. **Broader Impacts** (1 paragraph)
+   - Benefits to society
+   - Broadening participation
+   - Dissemination and outreach
+
+**Format**: Can be full-page text or sectioned  
+**Audience**: Non-specialists (broad scientific community)
+
+**Template**: `assets/grants/nsf_project_summary.tex`
+
+---
+
+### NSF Project Description (15 pages)
+
+**Typical Structure**:
+
+1. **Introduction/Background** (2-3 pages)
+   - Current state of knowledge
+   - Research gap
+   - Preliminary work/feasibility
+   - Team qualifications
+
+2. **Research Plan** (8-10 pages)
+   - Objectives and hypotheses
+   - Methods and approach
+   - Timeline and milestones
+   - Expected outcomes
+
+3. **Broader Impacts** (1-2 pages)
+   - Educational activities
+   - Broadening participation (underrepresented groups)
+   - Dissemination (publications, conferences, public outreach)
+   - Societal benefits
+
+4. **Results from Prior NSF Support** (1 page, if applicable)
+   - Required if PI has had NSF support in past 5 years
+   - Intellectual merit and broader impacts of prior work
+   - Publications from prior NSF grants
+
+**Key Requirements**:
+- Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts integrated throughout
+- Figures and tables allowed (count toward page limit)
+- Citations to references (use References Cited section)
+
+**Template**: `assets/grants/nsf_proposal_template.tex`
+
+---
+
+### NSF Biographical Sketch (3 pages)
+
+**Required Sections**:
+1. **Professional Preparation**: Institutions, degrees, fields
+2. **Appointments**: Current and previous positions
+3. **Products**: Up to 5 most relevant, up to 5 other significant products
+   - Can include publications, datasets, software, patents
+4. **Synergistic Activities**: Up to 5 examples of impact beyond research
+
+**Format**:
+- NSF template must be used (SciENcv or NSF-approved format)
+- No longer uses "Publications" but "Products"
+
+---
+
+### NSF Broader Impacts
+
+**NSF-Recognized Categories** (demonstrate ≥1):
+1. **Advance discovery while promoting teaching/learning**
+2. **Broaden participation** of underrepresented groups
+3. **Disseminate broadly** to enhance scientific/technological understanding
+4. **Benefits to society** (economic, health, environment, national security)
+5. **Develop scientific workforce** and infrastructure
+
+**Best Practices**:
+- Be specific with measurable outcomes
+- Explain how activities will be assessed
+- Integrate with research (don't treat as "add-on")
+- Budget for broader impacts activities
+
+**Examples**:
+- K-12 outreach programs
+- Curriculum development
+- Training underrepresented students
+- Public science communication
+- Open-source software development
+
+---
+
+### NSF Budget
+
+**Typical Categories**:
+- **Senior Personnel**: PI, co-PIs (% effort, salary)
+- **Other Personnel**: Postdocs, graduate students, undergrads
+- **Fringe Benefits**: Institutional rates
+- **Equipment**: Items >$5,000
+- **Travel**: Domestic and foreign
+- **Participant Support**: Workshops, conferences (separate category)
+- **Other Direct Costs**: Materials, publication, subawards
+- **Indirect Costs**: Institutional F&A rate
+
+**Budget Justification**: Explain need for each item
+
+---
+
+### NSF Data Management Plan (2 pages)
+
+**Required Content**:
+- Types of data produced
+- Standards for data format and metadata
+- Policies for access and sharing
+- Policies for re-use and redistribution
+- Plans for archiving and preservation
+
+**Acceptable Approaches**:
+- Deposit in domain-specific repository
+- Institutional repository
+- Data available upon request (with restrictions justification)
+
+---
+
+### NSF Review Process
+
+**Review Criteria** (equally weighted):
+
+1. **Intellectual Merit**:
+   - What is the potential to advance knowledge?
+   - How well-conceived and organized?
+   - Qualifications of PI and team?
+   - Availability of resources?
+
+2. **Broader Impacts**:
+   - What are the potential benefits to society?
+   - How well-suited to achieve broader impacts?
+
+**Panel Review**: Proposals reviewed by panel of experts  
+**Timeline**: Typically 6 months from deadline to award decision
+
+---
+
+### NSF LaTeX Templates
+
+- **Full Proposal**: `assets/grants/nsf_proposal_template.tex`
+- **Project Summary**: `assets/grants/nsf_project_summary.tex`
+- **Biographical Sketch**: Use NSF SciENcv or template
+
+**Resources**: 
+- NSF PAPPG: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg
+- NSF Fastlane: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/
+
+---
+
+## NIH (National Institutes of Health)
+
+### Overview
+
+**Agency**: National Institutes of Health  
+**Funding Mechanisms**: 
+- **R01**: Research Project Grant (most common)
+- **R21**: Exploratory/Developmental Research Grant
+- **K Awards**: Career Development Awards
+**Success Rate**: 10-20% (varies by institute and mechanism)
+
+---
+
+### NIH R01 Research Grant
+
+**Page Limits** (Research Strategy):
+
+| Component | Page Limit | Font | Spacing |
+|-----------|-----------|------|---------|
+| **Specific Aims** | 1 page | Arial 11pt minimum | Any |
+| **Research Strategy** | 12 pages | Arial 11pt minimum | 0.5 inch margins minimum |
+| - Significance | Part of 12 | | |
+| - Innovation | Part of 12 | | |
+| - Approach | Part of 12 | | |
+| **Bibliography** | No limit | Arial 11pt | |
+| **Biographical Sketch** | 5 pages per person | Arial 11pt | |
+
+**Margins**: 0.5 inch minimum (all sides)  
+**Paper Size**: Letter (8.5 × 11 inches)
+
+---
+
+### NIH Specific Aims Page (1 page)
+
+**THE MOST CRITICAL COMPONENT**
+
+**Structure** (recommended):
+
+1. **Opening paragraph** (2-3 sentences)
+   - Hook: Significance of problem
+   - Gap: What's not known
+
+2. **Long-term goal** (1 sentence)
+   - Overarching research vision
+
+3. **Objective** (1-2 sentences)
+   - What this proposal will accomplish
+   - Central hypothesis
+
+4. **Rationale** (2-3 sentences)
+   - Why you expect success
+   - Preliminary data supporting hypothesis
+
+5. **Specific Aims** (3 aims typical)
+   - **Aim 1**: [Title]. [1-2 sentence description. Working hypothesis. Expected outcome.]
+   - **Aim 2**: [Title]. [1-2 sentence description. Working hypothesis. Expected outcome.]
+   - **Aim 3**: [Title]. [1-2 sentence description. Working hypothesis. Expected outcome.]
+
+6. **Payoff paragraph** (2-3 sentences)
+   - Impact and significance
+   - Innovation
+   - Future directions
+
+**Best Practices**:
+- Crystal clear, compelling narrative
+- State hypothesis explicitly
+- Explain expected outcomes
+- Show innovation and impact
+
+**Template**: `assets/grants/nih_specific_aims.tex`
+
+---
+
+### NIH Research Strategy (12 pages)
+
+**Required Sections**:
+
+#### 1. Significance (typically 2-3 pages)
+- **Importance**: Critical barrier to progress
+- **Knowledge gap**: What's not known
+- **Impact**: How project advances field
+- **Rigor**: Scientific premise/prior work
+- **References**: Cite key literature
+
+#### 2. Innovation (typically 1-2 pages)
+- **Novelty**: New concepts, approaches, methods
+- **Challenge paradigms**: Shift thinking
+- **Refined/new methodologies**: Technical innovation
+- **Novel applications**: Existing tools in new ways
+
+#### 3. Approach (typically 7-9 pages)
+**For Each Aim**:
+- **Rationale**: Why this aim
+- **Experimental design**: Detailed methods
+- **Expected outcomes**: What results mean
+- **Potential problems & alternatives**: Mitigation strategies
+- **Rigor and reproducibility**: Controls, replication, statistics
+- **Timeline**: When each aim completed
+
+**Additional Approach Content**:
+- Preliminary data (critical for R01)
+- Power analyses for sample sizes
+- Statistical analysis plans
+- Rigor of prior research cited
+
+---
+
+### NIH Biographical Sketch (5 pages)
+
+**Sections** (NIH format):
+1. **Personal Statement** (4 sentences explaining why you're suited)
+2. **Positions, Honors, and Scientific Appointments**
+3. **Contributions to Science** (Up to 5 contributions, up to 4 pubs each)
+4. **Research Support** (current and completed grants, overlap checked)
+
+**Format**: Must use NIH template (fillable PDF or format page)
+
+---
+
+### NIH Review Criteria
+
+**Scored Criteria** (1-9 scale, 1=best):
+1. **Significance**: Importance, impact
+2. **Investigator(s)**: Qualifications, track record
+3. **Innovation**: Novel concepts, methods
+4. **Approach**: Feasibility, rigor, design
+5. **Environment**: Institutional support, resources
+
+**Additional Considerations** (not scored but noted):
+- Vertebrate animals
+- Biohazards
+- Human subjects protections
+- Inclusion of women, minorities, children
+- Budget appropriateness
+
+**Overall Impact Score**: 1-9 (synthesizes all criteria)
+
+---
+
+### NIH R21 (Exploratory Grant)
+
+**Key Differences from R01**:
+- **Research Strategy**: 6 pages (vs. 12 for R01)
+- **Duration**: 2 years maximum
+- **Budget**: $275K total costs over 2 years
+- **Preliminary data**: Not required (exploratory nature)
+- **Purpose**: High-risk, high-reward projects; new directions
+
+**When to Choose R21 vs. R01**:
+- R21: Early-stage, limited preliminary data, high-risk
+- R01: Established line of research, strong preliminary data
+
+---
+
+### NIH K Awards (Career Development)
+
+**Mechanisms**:
+- **K01**: Mentored Research Scientist Development Award
+- **K08**: Mentored Clinical Scientist Research Career Development Award
+- **K23**: Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career Development Award
+- **K99/R00**: Pathway to Independence Award (postdoc to faculty)
+
+**Key Components**:
+- **Career Development Plan**: Training goals, timeline
+- **Research Plan**: 6-12 pages (mechanism-dependent)
+- **Mentor(s)**: Letters of support, mentoring plan
+- **Institutional Commitment**: Environment, resources
+- **Protected Time**: 75% research effort typical
+
+---
+
+### NIH Budget
+
+**Modular vs. Detailed**:
+- **Modular**: ≤$250K direct costs per year (25K increments)
+- **Detailed**: >$250K direct costs per year
+
+**Modular Budget**: Only need budget justification for personnel, consortium, equipment >$25K
+
+**Budget Period**: Year-by-year (usually 5 years for R01)
+
+---
+
+### NIH LaTeX Templates
+
+- **R01 Full Proposal**: `assets/grants/nih_r01_template.tex`
+- **Specific Aims**: `assets/grants/nih_specific_aims.tex`
+- **Biographical Sketch**: Use NIH fillable PDF or format page
+
+**Resources**:
+- NIH Application Guide: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-application-guide.html
+- SF424 Forms: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-application-guide/forms-e/general-forms-e.pdf
+
+---
+
+## DOE (Department of Energy)
+
+### Overview
+
+**Agency**: U.S. Department of Energy  
+**Offices**:
+- **Office of Science**: Basic research (BES, BER, ASCR, NP, HEP, FES)
+- **ARPA-E**: High-risk, high-reward energy technologies
+- **EERE**: Energy efficiency and renewable energy
+
+**Typical Award**: $200K-$1M per year, 3 years  
+**Success Rate**: 10-30% (varies by program)
+
+---
+
+### DOE Office of Science Proposal
+
+**Page Limits** (typical, varies by FOA):
+
+| Component | Page Limit | Format |
+|-----------|-----------|--------|
+| **Project Narrative** | 10-20 pages | Times 11pt, 1" margins |
+| **References** | No limit | |
+| **Budget Justification** | 3-5 pages | |
+| **Biographical Sketches** | 2-3 pages each | |
+| **Current & Pending** | No limit | |
+| **Facilities & Resources** | No limit | |
+| **Data Management Plan** | 2 pages | |
+
+---
+
+### DOE Project Narrative Structure
+
+**Typical Sections**:
+
+1. **Background and Significance** (2-3 pages)
+   - Energy relevance
+   - Current state of knowledge
+   - Research need
+
+2. **Preliminary Work** (1-2 pages)
+   - Team's qualifications
+   - Relevant prior results
+
+3. **Research Plan** (10-15 pages)
+   - **Objectives**: Clear goals
+   - **Technical approach**: Detailed methods
+   - **Milestones and deliverables**: Specific, measurable
+   - **Timeline**: Gantt chart common
+   - **Team and management**: Roles, collaboration
+
+4. **Broader Impacts** (1-2 pages)
+   - Workforce development
+   - Technology transfer potential
+   - Publications and dissemination
+
+---
+
+### DOE-Specific Requirements
+
+**Energy Relevance**: Must clearly tie to DOE mission
+- Basic science: Fundamental understanding for energy applications
+- Applied: Energy efficiency, renewable energy, grid, storage
+
+**Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs)**: Often required to specify
+- **TRL 1-3**: Basic research, proof of concept
+- **TRL 4-6**: Component/subsystem validation
+- **TRL 7-9**: System demonstration, deployment
+
+**National Laboratory Collaboration**: Encouraged
+- Include lab scientists as co-PIs or collaborators
+- Letter of collaboration from lab
+
+**Cost Sharing**: Sometimes required (check FOA)
+- Can be in-kind (equipment, time)
+- Must be documented
+
+---
+
+### DOE Budget Considerations
+
+**Allowable Costs**:
+- Personnel (salaries, benefits)
+- Equipment
+- Travel (especially to DOE national labs)
+- Materials and supplies
+- Subcontracts
+- Indirect costs (negotiated F&A rate)
+
+**Unallowable**:
+- Construction
+- Entertainment
+- Some indirect costs (depends on institution type)
+
+---
+
+### DOE LaTeX Template
+
+**Template**: `assets/grants/doe_proposal_template.tex`
+
+**Resources**:
+- DOE Office of Science Funding: https://science.osti.gov/grants
+- EERE Funding: https://www.energy.gov/eere/funding/eere-funding-opportunities
+
+---
+
+## DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency)
+
+### Overview
+
+**Agency**: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DoD)  
+**Mission**: High-risk, high-reward research for national security  
+**Typical Award**: $500K-$5M per year, 2-4 years  
+**Success Rate**: 5-15% (highly competitive)
+
+---
+
+### DARPA BAA (Broad Agency Announcement) Response
+
+**Page Limits** (typical, varies by BAA):
+
+| Component | Page Limit | Format |
+|-----------|-----------|--------|
+| **Technical and Management Proposal** | 20-25 pages | Times 12pt, 1" margins |
+| **Cost Proposal** | Separate volume | |
+
+---
+
+### DARPA Technical Proposal Structure
+
+**Key Sections**:
+
+1. **Executive Summary** (1 page)
+   - Vision and impact
+   - Technical approach overview
+   - Team qualifications
+
+2. **Heilmeier Catechism** (1-2 pages)
+   DARPA requires answering these questions:
+   - **What are you trying to do?** Articulate objectives without jargon
+   - **How is it done today? Limitations?** Current practice and shortcomings
+   - **What is new in your approach?** Innovation
+   - **Who cares?** Impact if successful
+   - **If successful, what difference will it make?** Transformation
+   - **What are the risks?** Technical risks and mitigation
+   - **How much will it cost?** Budget overview
+   - **How long will it take?** Timeline
+   - **What are the mid-term and final exams?** Milestones for success
+
+3. **Technical Approach** (10-15 pages)
+   - Detailed technical plan
+   - Task breakdown
+   - Risk mitigation
+   - Innovation justification
+
+4. **Management Plan** (2-3 pages)
+   - Team organization
+   - Key personnel roles
+   - Collaboration approach
+   - Milestone schedule (Gantt chart)
+
+5. **Capabilities and Experience** (2-3 pages)
+   - Team qualifications
+   - Relevant facilities and equipment
+   - Similar past programs
+
+6. **Transition Plan** (1-2 pages)
+   - Path to DoD transition
+   - End users identified
+   - Technology transfer approach
+
+---
+
+### DARPA-Specific Considerations
+
+**Engagement with Program Manager (PM)**:
+- **Strongly encouraged** to contact PM before submission
+- Discuss idea alignment with program goals
+- PM can provide feedback on approach
+
+**Transformative Impact**:
+- Must demonstrate potential for "game-changing" impact
+- Not incremental improvements
+
+**Technical Risk**:
+- High-risk approaches acceptable (even encouraged)
+- Must show mitigation strategies
+
+**National Security Relevance**:
+- Clear connection to defense applications
+- Dual-use (civilian + military) often valuable
+
+**Metrics for Success**:
+- Quantifiable milestones
+- "Go/no-go" decision points
+
+---
+
+### DARPA Budget
+
+**Full Cost Accounting**: Detailed justification required
+- **Labor**: Hourly rates, hours per task
+- **Materials**: Itemized
+- **Equipment**: Justification for purchases
+- **Travel**: Specific trips with purpose
+- **Subcontracts**: Detailed subcontract budgets
+- **Indirect Costs**: Negotiated rates
+
+**Cost Realism**: Budget must be realistic for proposed work
+
+---
+
+### DARPA LaTeX Template
+
+**Template**: `assets/grants/darpa_baa_response.tex`
+
+**Resources**:
+- DARPA Opportunities: https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities
+- BAA Listings: SAM.gov (formerly FedBizOpps)
+
+---
+
+## Private Foundations
+
+### Gates Foundation
+
+**Focus Areas**: Global health, poverty alleviation, education  
+**Typical Award**: Varies widely ($100K to $10M+)
+
+**Proposal Requirements**:
+- **Letter of Inquiry** (2-3 pages): Initial screening
+- **Full Proposal** (if invited): 10-15 pages
+- **Theory of Change**: How intervention leads to impact
+- **Monitoring & Evaluation**: Metrics, data collection
+
+**Key Emphases**:
+- Scalability and sustainability
+- Impact in low-resource settings
+- Partnerships with local organizations
+- Data-driven decision making
+
+---
+
+### Wellcome Trust
+
+**Focus**: Biomedical research, global health  
+**Geographic**: UK and international  
+**Typical Award**: £100K to £5M
+
+**Proposal Format** (varies by scheme):
+- **Investigator Awards**: Track record and research vision
+- **Project Grants**: Specific research project
+- **Career Development**: Early/mid-career researchers
+
+**Requirements**:
+- Research plan
+- Track record
+- Value for money justification
+- Patient and public involvement
+
+---
+
+### Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)
+
+**Type**: Investigator appointments (not grants)  
+**Award**: ~$9M over 7 years (renewable)  
+**Focus**: Biomedical research, early-career scientists
+
+**Selection**:
+- Nomination by institution
+- Track record of innovation
+- Research vision for next 5-7 years
+- Scientific leadership potential
+
+---
+
+### Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI)
+
+**Focus**: Science, education, justice & opportunity  
+**Award Types**:
+- **Imaging**: Advanced imaging technologies
+- **Neurodegeneration Challenge**: AD, ALS, PD, FTD
+- **Single-Cell Biology**: Tools and resources
+
+**Emphasis**:
+- Open science (data sharing, open-source)
+- Collaboration across institutions
+- Technology development
+- Diversity and inclusion
+
+---
+
+## Quick Reference Table
+
+| Agency | Typical Award | Duration | Key Criteria | Template |
+|--------|--------------|----------|--------------|----------|
+| **NSF** | $100K-500K/yr | 3-5 yrs | Intellectual Merit + Broader Impacts | `nsf_proposal_template.tex` |
+| **NIH R01** | $250K-500K/yr | 5 yrs | Significance, Innovation, Approach | `nih_r01_template.tex` |
+| **NIH R21** | $275K total | 2 yrs | Exploratory, high-risk | `nih_r21_template.tex` |
+| **DOE** | $200K-1M/yr | 3 yrs | Energy relevance, TRLs | `doe_proposal_template.tex` |
+| **DARPA** | $500K-5M/yr | 2-4 yrs | Transformative, Heilmeier | `darpa_baa_response.tex` |
+
+---
+
+## General Best Practices
+
+### Writing Effective Proposals
+
+1. **Start early**: 2-3 months minimum
+2. **Read the call carefully**: Follow requirements exactly
+3. **Know your reviewers**: Write for expert audience
+4. **Tell a story**: Compelling narrative with clear logic
+5. **Be specific**: Concrete objectives, methods, outcomes
+6. **Show feasibility**: Preliminary data, expertise
+7. **Address weaknesses**: Acknowledge and mitigate risks
+
+### Common Mistakes to Avoid
+
+1. **Vague objectives**: "Understand X" → "Determine whether X causes Y"
+2. **Lack of innovation**: Incremental vs. transformative
+3. **Poor broader impacts** (NSF): Generic, unintegrated
+4. **Weak specific aims** (NIH): Most critical page!
+5. **Missing preliminary data**: Show feasibility
+6. **Unrealistic timeline**: Be honest about what's achievable
+7. **Formatting violations**: Auto-rejection possible
+8. **Typos and errors**: Suggests lack of care
+
+### Timeline for Proposal Development
+
+**3 months before deadline**:
+- Identify opportunity
+- Assemble team
+- Outline aims/objectives
+
+**2 months before**:
+- Draft aims/objectives
+- Preliminary budget
+- Contact program officer (if allowed)
+
+**1 month before**:
+- Full first draft
+- Internal review
+- Revise based on feedback
+
+**2 weeks before**:
+- Final revisions
+- Proofread carefully
+- Assemble all documents
+
+**1 week before**:
+- Institutional review/approval
+- Budget finalization
+- Submission system upload
+
+**2 days before**:
+- Final check
+- Submit (don't wait until deadline!)
+
+---
+
+## Resources
+
+### Grant Writing Guides
+- NSF PAPPG: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg
+- NIH Application Guide: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-application-guide.html
+- GrantForward (database): https://www.grantforward.com/
+- Pivot (database): https://pivot.proquest.com/
+
+### Institutional Resources
+- Office of Sponsored Research (OSR)
+- Grant writing workshops
+- Internal mock reviews
+- Budget/compliance offices
+
+---
+
+## Summary
+
+**Key Takeaways**:
+
+1. **Know the agency**: Different missions, different emphases
+2. **Follow the rules**: Page limits, fonts, margins strictly enforced
+3. **Tell a compelling story**: Clear problem, innovative solution, feasible plan
+4. **Demonstrate impact**: Intellectual merit (NSF/NIH) or mission relevance (DOE/DARPA)
+5. **Show feasibility**: Preliminary data, team expertise, resources
+6. **Budget realistically**: Justify all costs
+7. **Proofread carefully**: Typos undermine credibility
+8. **Submit early**: Technical glitches happen
+
+**Remember**: Grant writing is a skill developed over time. Seek feedback, revise, and persist!
+