December 13, 2024
Proposals come together in fits and starts, and sometimes the writing just does not flow. How do you get unstuck when this happens so that you can meet the submission deadline? Below are six suggestions for getting past writing blocks.
Go back to the solicitation. If you are struggling to write a grant proposal, the solicitation should be your first destination. The solicitation is not just where you learn how to apply. It is also where you can gain insight into the funder and the problem they are trying to solve. For example, many solicitations released by government agencies include a comprehensive treatment of the context of the proposed work they wish to fund. Reviewing the solicitation again and confirming the proposal guidelines can also spark ideas for how to respond to specific sections.
Solicitations from small foundations may not contain much background information. When this happens, the next strategy on our list may serve you better.
Do outside reading. By “outside reading,” we mean conducting desk research on sources beyond the solicitation and internal documents, such as past proposals and reports. If your project is tackling a societal problem, read articles from respected journals on the latest thinking about it. You may also find it helpful to look at the funder’s and competitors’ websites to see how they discuss the particular issue and their work to address it. Grants, projects, and programs always build on prior work, and external research can help you identify what has come before and how your project can capitalize on or augment it.
Funders reward applicants who demonstrate an understanding of the context in which the proposed work will take place, including awareness of the major stakeholders. At a minimum, familiarizing yourself with this background information can help you write the proposal’s background and context section and other sections, including descriptions of the proposed interventions.
Try mind mapping. If you’ve re-read the solicitation and conducted desk research, and still feel unsure how to proceed, another step you can take is to try mind-mapping. Mind mapping can be done digitally through a whiteboard app or the old-school way with a flip chart and markers. For some people, mind mapping checks several boxes. It can be used for brain dumping (putting down current thoughts), brainstorming (generating new ideas and associations), and strategizing (seeing relationships between different threads of thought and using these connections for project planning). Mind mapping can be used at the individual or group level, making it useful across different stages of the proposal process.
Make it simpler. If you have reached an impasse in your writing, you may be making things too complex. Either your writing needs to be simplified, or your project ideas may need to be pared down. When you are trying to write a sentence, paragraph, or section and the writing is not coming together, you may have added too many moving parts.
To get past the writing block, it can be helpful to shorten your sentences so each sentence is about a single topic. From working on proposals for many years, we’ve noticed that many writers use sentences that read like lists, such as “The proposed project is innovative, comprehensive, and cost-effective.” To simplify and strengthen your case, rewrite your sentences to add detail. You want to show, not tell, the reviewers about your project’s strengths. When you add details, the next sentence usually presents itself because additional details come to mind. In contrast, listing a bunch of adjectives can often feel like a dead end. In our example sentence, you could split the sentence into several parts: You could have a sentence about what makes the project innovative, you could follow this with a sentence showing how comprehensive the project is by naming its specific components, and you could end with a sentence explaining what makes your project cost-effective.
By breaking up your points into separate sentences or paragraphs, you give each topic its due while reducing the risk of losing the reader.
Get an outside perspective. If you have tried the four techniques above and are still having difficulty, it may be time to seek an outside perspective. Proposal teams often huddle together when they reach an impasse. They do this because they believe they know the solicitation and the proposed project better than anyone else and are, therefore, in the best position to determine a way forward. In some respects, this is true. If a team turns to someone outside the team for advice and that person has not read the solicitation and is unfamiliar with the team’s thinking, there’s a risk the advice will be irrelevant or non-compliant with the proposal’s guidelines. On the other hand, if the team can find someone who knows the subject matter and the donor — and is willing to take the time to read the solicitation and the proposal draft thoroughly — consulting someone outside the proposal process can be extremely valuable.
Because the team members have spent weeks on the proposal, they are invested in what they’ve written. This creates blind spots and makes it harder for them to identify the proposal’s weakest areas. Someone from outside the team can look at the proposal more critically. Whereas the proposal team might look at a proposal and ask, “How can we make our ideas work?”, an outsider can say, “This doesn’t look like a strong strategy for the following reasons—have you considered this other path?”
If your proposal is not coming together or your writing is not flowing, a final tip is to take a break. If a day-long break is not possible, even stepping away for a few hours can help you return to the process with a little more objectivity.
Writing a grant proposal is deadline-driven work. For this reason, it can be difficult for proposal team members to stop working on the proposal for more than a day or two. The strategies above are helpful in this regard because they allow team members to gain perspective on the proposal while continuing to contribute to the proposal effort.