
Grant applications to support health research requires a KT mindset because, in most cases, they must speak to a diverse audience. Some people in that audience may have deep knowledge of your subject, but others won't. Your job is to get everyone excited about your research and what it can do for them.
Some health research grants are reviewed by academics with a background similar to yours. In such cases, it's expected that you'll jump into technical language and details without taking time to prepare the reader for that specialized content. It's important to align with the grant program's mandate and to arrange your content for easy navigation, but you can assume that your readers will find it easy to access your shared scientific language.
As you may have discovered through personal experience, other health research grants get reviewed by people without an academic background in your field. Reviewers could include, for example, academics from outside your field, government employees, business leaders, or staff at a philanthropic foundation. In these instances, readers are coming to your proposal with a limited understanding of your field and the way you want to contribute to it.
A great way to improve your grant writing for non-experts is to put yourself in the shoes of a reviewer who's not intimately familiar with your zone of expertise. So let's walk through a quick exercise together.
Imagine you've been asked to review the summary section of a proposal submitted to the National Science Foundation (NSF) by geologist Christopher Kim. What writing moves does Kim make that enable you to grasp his ideas and appreciate the value of his work even though you don't specialize in geology?
Proposal from geologist Christopher Kim (summary section)
Compare your thoughts with the short video analysis below.
Imagine you're applying for a government grant related to your current research.
Create a one- to two-paragraph version of a project summary, modeled on Kim's proposal. Use these headings to structure your writing: Project Rationale, Research Goals and Methodology, Intellectual Merit, and Impact.