SOME THOUGHTS ON HOW TO WRITE A WINNING PROPOSAL

(1) Select a new idea, either entirely new science or a new approach to answer 
an old problem. Clearly state in the proposal that this is a new idea. 
Proposals to do more of the same science with an old approach generally get
lower grades than something new. 

(2) Tie the objectives of the proposal to a major theme of modern astrophysics.
If the reviewers conclude that your proposal is just another study of "weather",
you are lost. 

(3) Describe your proposed science as a critical element of a larger 
scientific program involving observations at other wavelengths, similar 
targets, or the same targets in a monitoring program.

(4) Describe in detail how you will proceed from the science objectives to the 
observing program, to the data analysis, and then to the theoretical 
interpretation/modelling effort that will accomplish the scientific objectives 
listed in the proposal. In other words, complete the circle with no lose ends.

(5) If possible, assemble a strong team of collaborators who will bring
specific needed expertese to the program and state what each co-I will do. 

(6) Utilize the unique capabilities of the spacecraft/instrument/telescope. For 
example, proposals that require the high angular resolution or high spectral 
resolution of Chandra got higher grades.

(7) Bring in coordinated or ancillary observations at other wavelengths from 
other telescopes that add value to the requested observations. Already 
scheduled observations (especially coordinated observations) on other space 
or ground-based telescopes provide a strong argument for getting observing time.

(8) Previous or ongoing theoretical studies relevant to the interpretation of 
the requested data should be cited clearly in the proposal.

(9) Verify that the selected targets have not already been observed with the 
telescope or a similar instrument and that they are not already approved for 
future observing. 

(10) Clearly state why the requested targets are particularly interesting to 
observe.

(11) Avoid constrained observations (time critical, target of opportunity) if
at all possible, because each observatory can only schedule a limited number of
these programs. Thus you will be competing for a very limited number of slots. 

(12) Be very clear in your write-up. Quality figures showing previous data,
simulated data, or predictions of competing theories are critically important.
Use bullets and bold face type to emphasize your points. Confused reviewers
rarely accept proposals. 

(13) Two-column text is easier to read than single-column text.

(14) The reviewers may have to select the best among 100 proposals. So, select
an interesting title and put as much content into the abstract as space will
allow. Unfortunately, some reviewers may not have time to read beyond the
abstract or may not be paying complete attention to your brilliant proposal.