research proposal meeting

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

The goal of a research proposal is twofold: to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. The design elements and procedures for conducting research are governed by standards of the predominant discipline in which the problem resides, therefore, the guidelines for research proposals are more exacting and less formal than a general project proposal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews. They must provide persuasive evidence that a need exists for the proposed study. In addition to providing a rationale, a proposal describes detailed methodology for conducting the research consistent with requirements of the professional or academic field and a statement on anticipated outcomes and benefits derived from the study's completion.

Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005.

How to Approach Writing a Research Proposal

Your professor may assign the task of writing a research proposal for the following reasons:

• Develop your skills in thinking about and designing a comprehensive research study;
• Learn how to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature to determine that the research problem has not been adequately addressed or has been answered ineffectively and, in so doing, become better at locating pertinent scholarship related to your topic;
• Improve your general research and writing skills;
• Practice identifying the logical steps that must be taken to accomplish one's research goals;
• Critically review, examine, and consider the use of different methods for gathering and analyzing data related to the research problem; and,
• Nurture a sense of inquisitiveness within yourself and to help see yourself as an active participant in the process of conducting scholarly research.

A proposal should contain all the key elements involved in designing a completed research study, with sufficient information that allows readers to assess the validity and usefulness of your proposed study. The only elements missing from a research proposal are the findings of the study and your analysis of those findings. Finally, an effective proposal is judged on the quality of your writing and, therefore, it is important that your proposal is coherent, clear, and compelling.

Regardless of the research problem you are investigating and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the following questions:

• What do you plan to accomplish? Be clear and succinct in defining the research problem and what it is you are proposing to investigate.
• Why do you want to do the research? In addition to detailing your research design, you also must conduct a thorough review of the literature and provide convincing evidence that it is a topic worthy of in-depth study. A successful research proposal must answer the "So What?" question.
• How are you going to conduct the research? Be sure that what you propose is doable. If you're having difficulty formulating a research problem to propose investigating, go here for strategies in developing a problem to study.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Failure to be concise . A research proposal must be focused and not be "all over the map" or diverge into unrelated tangents without a clear sense of purpose.
• Failure to cite landmark works in your literature review . Proposals should be grounded in foundational research that lays a foundation for understanding the development and scope of the the topic and its relevance.
• Failure to delimit the contextual scope of your research [e.g., time, place, people, etc.]. As with any research paper, your proposed study must inform the reader how and in what ways the study will frame the problem.
• Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research . This is critical. In many workplace settings, the research proposal is a formal document intended to argue for why a study should be funded.
• Sloppy or imprecise writing, or poor grammar . Although a research proposal does not represent a completed research study, there is still an expectation that it is well-written and follows the style and rules of good academic writing.
• Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues . Your proposal should focus on only a few key research questions in order to support the argument that the research needs to be conducted. Minor issues, even if valid, can be mentioned but they should not dominate the overall narrative.

Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal.  The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Sanford, Keith. Information for Students: Writing a Research Proposal. Baylor University; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences, Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Structure and Writing Style

Beginning the Proposal Process

As with writing most college-level academic papers, research proposals are generally organized the same way throughout most social science disciplines. The text of proposals generally vary in length between ten and thirty-five pages, followed by the list of references. However, before you begin, read the assignment carefully and, if anything seems unclear, ask your professor whether there are any specific requirements for organizing and writing the proposal.

A good place to begin is to ask yourself a series of questions:

• What do I want to study?
• Why is the topic important?
• How is it significant within the subject areas covered in my class?
• What problems will it help solve?
• How does it build upon [and hopefully go beyond] research already conducted on the topic?
• What exactly should I plan to do, and can I get it done in the time available?

In general, a compelling research proposal should document your knowledge of the topic and demonstrate your enthusiasm for conducting the study. Approach it with the intention of leaving your readers feeling like, "Wow, that's an exciting idea and I can’t wait to see how it turns out!"

Most proposals should include the following sections:

I.  Introduction

In the real world of higher education, a research proposal is most often written by scholars seeking grant funding for a research project or it's the first step in getting approval to write a doctoral dissertation. Even if this is just a course assignment, treat your introduction as the initial pitch of an idea based on a thorough examination of the significance of a research problem. After reading the introduction, your readers should not only have an understanding of what you want to do, but they should also be able to gain a sense of your passion for the topic and to be excited about the study's possible outcomes. Note that most proposals do not include an abstract [summary] before the introduction.

Think about your introduction as a narrative written in two to four paragraphs that succinctly answers the following four questions :

• What is the central research problem?
• What is the topic of study related to that research problem?
• What methods should be used to analyze the research problem?
• Answer the "So What?" question by explaining why this is important research, what is its significance, and why should someone reading the proposal care about the outcomes of the proposed study?

II.  Background and Significance

This is where you explain the scope and context of your proposal and describe in detail why it's important. It can be melded into your introduction or you can create a separate section to help with the organization and narrative flow of your proposal. Approach writing this section with the thought that you can’t assume your readers will know as much about the research problem as you do. Note that this section is not an essay going over everything you have learned about the topic; instead, you must choose what is most relevant in explaining the aims of your research.

To that end, while there are no prescribed rules for establishing the significance of your proposed study, you should attempt to address some or all of the following:

• State the research problem and give a more detailed explanation about the purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction. This is particularly important if the problem is complex or multifaceted .
• Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing; be sure to answer the "So What? question [i.e., why should anyone care?].
• Describe the major issues or problems examined by your research. This can be in the form of questions to be addressed. Be sure to note how your proposed study builds on previous assumptions about the research problem.
• Explain the methods you plan to use for conducting your research. Clearly identify the key sources you intend to use and explain how they will contribute to your analysis of the topic.
• Describe the boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a clear focus. Where appropriate, state not only what you plan to study, but what aspects of the research problem will be excluded from the study.
• If necessary, provide definitions of key concepts, theories, or terms.

III.  Literature Review

Connected to the background and significance of your study is a section of your proposal devoted to a more deliberate review and synthesis of prior studies related to the research problem under investigation . The purpose here is to place your project within the larger whole of what is currently being explored, while at the same time, demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. Think about what questions other researchers have asked, what methodological approaches they have used, and what is your understanding of their findings and, when stated, their recommendations. Also pay attention to any suggestions for further research.

Since a literature review is information dense, it is crucial that this section is intelligently structured to enable a reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your proposed study in relation to the arguments put forth by other researchers. A good strategy is to break the literature into "conceptual categories" [themes] rather than systematically or chronologically describing groups of materials one at a time. Note that conceptual categories generally reveal themselves after you have read most of the pertinent literature on your topic so adding new categories is an on-going process of discovery as you review more studies. How do you know you've covered the key conceptual categories underlying the research literature? Generally, you can have confidence that all of the significant conceptual categories have been identified if you start to see repetition in the conclusions or recommendations that are being made.

NOTE: Do not shy away from challenging the conclusions made in prior research as a basis for supporting the need for your proposal. Assess what you believe is missing and state how previous research has failed to adequately examine the issue that your study addresses. Highlighting the problematic conclusions strengthens your proposal. For more information on writing literature reviews, GO HERE .

To help frame your proposal's review of prior research, consider the "five C’s" of writing a literature review:

• Cite , so as to keep the primary focus on the literature pertinent to your research problem.
• Compare the various arguments, theories, methodologies, and findings expressed in the literature: what do the authors agree on? Who applies similar approaches to analyzing the research problem?
• Contrast the various arguments, themes, methodologies, approaches, and controversies expressed in the literature: describe what are the major areas of disagreement, controversy, or debate among scholars?
• Critique the literature: Which arguments are more persuasive, and why? Which approaches, findings, and methodologies seem most reliable, valid, or appropriate, and why? Pay attention to the verbs you use to describe what an author says/does [e.g., asserts, demonstrates, argues, etc.].
• Connect the literature to your own area of research and investigation: how does your own work draw upon, depart from, synthesize, or add a new perspective to what has been said in the literature?

IV.  Research Design and Methods

This section must be well-written and logically organized because you are not actually doing the research, yet, your reader must have confidence that you have a plan worth pursuing . The reader will never have a study outcome from which to evaluate whether your methodological choices were the correct ones. Thus, the objective here is to convince the reader that your overall research design and proposed methods of analysis will correctly address the problem and that the methods will provide the means to effectively interpret the potential results. Your design and methods should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

Describe the overall research design by building upon and drawing examples from your review of the literature. Consider not only methods that other researchers have used, but methods of data gathering that have not been used but perhaps could be. Be specific about the methodological approaches you plan to undertake to obtain information, the techniques you would use to analyze the data, and the tests of external validity to which you commit yourself [i.e., the trustworthiness by which you can generalize from your study to other people, places, events, and/or periods of time].

When describing the methods you will use, be sure to cover the following:

• Specify the research process you will undertake and the way you will interpret the results obtained in relation to the research problem. Don't just describe what you intend to achieve from applying the methods you choose, but state how you will spend your time while applying these methods [e.g., coding text from interviews to find statements about the need to change school curriculum; running a regression to determine if there is a relationship between campaign advertising on social media sites and election outcomes in Europe ].
• Keep in mind that the methodology is not just a list of tasks; it is a deliberate argument as to why techniques for gathering information add up to the best way to investigate the research problem. This is an important point because the mere listing of tasks to be performed does not demonstrate that, collectively, they effectively address the research problem. Be sure you clearly explain this.
• Anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers and pitfalls in carrying out your research design and explain how you plan to address them. No method applied to research in the social and behavioral sciences is perfect, so you need to describe where you believe challenges may exist in obtaining data or accessing information. It's always better to acknowledge this than to have it brought up by your professor!

V.  Preliminary Suppositions and Implications

Just because you don't have to actually conduct the study and analyze the results, doesn't mean you can skip talking about the analytical process and potential implications . The purpose of this section is to argue how and in what ways you believe your research will refine, revise, or extend existing knowledge in the subject area under investigation. Depending on the aims and objectives of your study, describe how the anticipated results will impact future scholarly research, theory, practice, forms of interventions, or policy making. Note that such discussions may have either substantive [a potential new policy], theoretical [a potential new understanding], or methodological [a potential new way of analyzing] significance.   When thinking about the potential implications of your study, ask the following questions:

• What might the results mean in regards to challenging the theoretical framework and underlying assumptions that support the study?
• What suggestions for subsequent research could arise from the potential outcomes of the study?
• What will the results mean to practitioners in the natural settings of their workplace, organization, or community?
• Will the results influence programs, methods, and/or forms of intervention?
• How might the results contribute to the solution of social, economic, or other types of problems?
• Will the results influence policy decisions?
• In what way do individuals or groups benefit should your study be pursued?
• What will be improved or changed as a result of the proposed research?
• How will the results of the study be implemented and what innovations or transformative insights could emerge from the process of implementation?

NOTE:   This section should not delve into idle speculation, opinion, or be formulated on the basis of unclear evidence . The purpose is to reflect upon gaps or understudied areas of the current literature and describe how your proposed research contributes to a new understanding of the research problem should the study be implemented as designed.

ANOTHER NOTE : This section is also where you describe any potential limitations to your proposed study. While it is impossible to highlight all potential limitations because the study has yet to be conducted, you still must tell the reader where and in what form impediments may arise and how you plan to address them.

VI.  Conclusion

The conclusion reiterates the importance or significance of your proposal and provides a brief summary of the entire study . This section should be only one or two paragraphs long, emphasizing why the research problem is worth investigating, why your research study is unique, and how it should advance existing knowledge.

Someone reading this section should come away with an understanding of:

• Why the study should be done;
• The specific purpose of the study and the research questions it attempts to answer;
• The decision for why the research design and methods used where chosen over other options;
• The potential implications emerging from your proposed study of the research problem; and
• A sense of how your study fits within the broader scholarship about the research problem.

VII.  Citations

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used . In a standard research proposal, this section can take two forms, so consult with your professor about which one is preferred.

• References -- a list of only the sources you actually used in creating your proposal.
• Bibliography -- a list of everything you used in creating your proposal, along with additional citations to any key sources relevant to understanding the research problem.

In either case, this section should testify to the fact that you did enough preparatory work to ensure the project will complement and not just duplicate the efforts of other researchers. It demonstrates to the reader that you have a thorough understanding of prior research on the topic.

Most proposal formats have you start a new page and use the heading "References" or "Bibliography" centered at the top of the page. Cited works should always use a standard format that follows the writing style advised by the discipline of your course [e.g., education=APA; history=Chicago] or that is preferred by your professor. This section normally does not count towards the total page length of your research proposal.

Develop a Research Proposal: Writing the Proposal. Office of Library Information Services. Baltimore County Public Schools; Heath, M. Teresa Pereira and Caroline Tynan. “Crafting a Research Proposal.” The Marketing Review 10 (Summer 2010): 147-168; Jones, Mark. “Writing a Research Proposal.” In MasterClass in Geography Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning . Graham Butt, editor. (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015), pp. 113-127; Juni, Muhamad Hanafiah. “Writing a Research Proposal.” International Journal of Public Health and Clinical Sciences 1 (September/October 2014): 229-240; Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005; Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Punch, Keith and Wayne McGowan. "Developing and Writing a Research Proposal." In From Postgraduate to Social Scientist: A Guide to Key Skills . Nigel Gilbert, ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006), 59-81; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences , Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

• << Previous: Writing a Reflective Paper
• Next: Generative AI and Writing >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 9:45 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

• Future Students
• Current Students
• Faculty/Staff

• Current Students Hub

Doctoral handbook

You are here

• Dissertation Proposal

On this page:

Proposal Overview and Format

Proposal committee, proposal hearing or meeting.

• Printing Credit for Use in School of Education Labs

Students are urged to begin thinking about a dissertation topic early in their degree program. Concentrated work on a dissertation proposal normally begins after successful completion of the Second-Year Review, which often includes a “mini” proposal, an extended literature review, or a theoretical essay, plus advancement to doctoral candidacy. In defining a dissertation topic, the student collaborates with their faculty advisor or dissertation advisor (if one is selected) in the choice of a topic for the dissertation.

The dissertation proposal is a comprehensive statement on the extent and nature of the student’s dissertation research interests. Students submit a draft of the proposal to their dissertation advisor between the end of the seventh and middle of the ninth quarters. The student must provide a written copy of the proposal to the faculty committee no later than two weeks prior to the date of the proposal hearing. Committee members could require an earlier deadline (e.g., four weeks before the hearing).

The major components of the proposal are as follows, with some variations across Areas and disciplines:

• A detailed statement of the problem that is to be studied and the context within which it is to be seen. This should include a justification of the importance of the problem on both theoretical and educational grounds.
• A thorough review of the literature pertinent to the research problem. This review should provide proof that the relevant literature in the field has been thoroughly researched. Good research is cumulative; it builds on the thoughts, findings, and mistakes of others.
• its general explanatory interest
• the overall theoretical framework within which this interest is to be pursued
• the model or hypotheses to be tested or the research questions to be answered
• a discussion of the conceptual and operational properties of the variables
• an overview of strategies for collecting appropriate evidence (sampling, instrumentation, data collection, data reduction, data analysis)
• a discussion of how the evidence is to be interpreted (This aspect of the proposal will be somewhat different in fields such as history and philosophy of education.)
• If applicable, students should complete a request for approval of research with human subjects, using the Human Subjects Review Form ( http://humansubjects.stanford.edu/ ). Except for pilot work, the University requires the approval of the Administrative Panel on Human Subjects in Behavioral Science Research before any data can be collected from human subjects.

Registration (i.e., enrollment) is required for any quarter during which a degree requirement is completed, including the dissertation proposal. Refer to the Registration or Enrollment for Milestone Completion section for more details.

As students progress through the program, their interests may change. There is no commitment on the part of the student’s advisor to automatically serve as the dissertation chair. Based on the student’s interests and the dissertation topic, many students approach other GSE professors to serve as the dissertation advisor, if appropriate.

A dissertation proposal committee is comprised of three academic council faculty members, one of whom will serve as the major dissertation advisor. Whether or not the student’s general program advisor serves on the dissertation proposal committee and later the reading committee will depend on the relevance of that faculty member’s expertise to the topic of the dissertation, and their availability. There is no requirement that a program advisor serve, although very often they do. Members of the dissertation proposal committee may be drawn from other area committees within the GSE, from other departments in the University, or from emeriti faculty. At least one person serving on the proposal committee must be from the student’s area committee (CTE, DAPS, SHIPS). All three members must be on the Academic Council; if the student desires the expertise of a non-Academic Council member, it may be possible to petition. After the hearing, a memorandum listing the changes to be made will be written and submitted with the signed proposal cover sheet and a copy of the proposal itself to the Doctoral Programs Officer.

Review and approval of the dissertation proposal occurs normally during the third year. The proposal hearing seeks to review the quality and feasibility of the proposal. The Second-Year Review and the Proposal Hearing are separate milestones and may not occur as part of the same hearing or meeting.

The student and the dissertation advisor are responsible for scheduling a formal meeting or hearing to review the proposal; the student and proposal committee convene for this evaluative period. Normally, all must be present at the meeting either in person or via conference phone call.

At the end of this meeting, the dissertation proposal committee members should sign the Cover Sheet for Dissertation Proposal and indicate their approval or rejection of the proposal. This signed form should be submitted to the Doctoral Programs Officer. If the student is required to make revisions, an addendum is required with the written approval of each member of the committee stating that the proposal has been revised to their satisfaction.

After submitting the Proposal Hearing material to the Doctoral Programs Officer, the student should make arrangements with three faculty members to serve on their Dissertation Reading Committee. The Doctoral Dissertation Reading Committee form should be completed and given to the Doctoral Programs Officer to enter in the University student records system. Note: The proposal hearing committee and the reading committee do not have to be the same three faculty members. Normally, the proposal hearing precedes the designation of a Dissertation Reading Committee, and faculty on either committee may differ (except for the primary dissertation advisor). However, some students may advance to Terminal Graduate Registration (TGR) status before completing their dissertation proposal hearing if they have established a dissertation reading committee. In these cases, it is acceptable for the student to form a reading committee prior to the dissertation proposal hearing. The reading committee then serves as the proposal committee.

The proposal and reading committee forms and related instructions are on the GSE website, under current students>forms.

Printing Credit for Use in GSE Labs

Upon completion of their doctoral dissertation proposal, GSE students are eligible for a $300 printing credit redeemable in any of the GSE computer labs where students are normally charged for print jobs. Only one $300 credit per student will be issued, but it is usable throughout the remainder of her or his doctoral program until the balance is exhausted. The print credit can be used only at the printers in Cubberley basement and CERAS, and cannot be used toward copying.

After submitting the signed dissertation proposal cover sheet to the Doctoral Programs Officer indicating approval (see above), students can submit a HELP SU ticket online at helpsu.stanford.edu to request the credit. When submitting the help ticket, the following should be selected from the drop-down menus for HELP SU:

Request Category :  Computer, Handhelds (PDAs), Printers, Servers Request Type :  Printer Operating System : (whatever system is used by the student, e.g., Windows XP.)

The help ticket will be routed to the GSE's IT Group for processing; they will in turn notify the student via email when the credit is available.

• Printer-friendly version

Handbook Contents

• Timetable for the Doctoral Degree
• Degree Requirements
• Registration or Enrollment for Milestone Completion
• The Graduate Study Program
• Student Virtual and Teleconference Participation in Hearings
• First Year (3rd Quarter) Review
• Second Year (6th Quarter) Review
• Committee Composition for First- and Second-Year Reviews
• Advancement to Candidacy
• Academic Program Revision
• Dissertation Content
• Dissertation Reading Committee
• University Oral Examination
• Submitting the Dissertation
• Registration and Student Statuses
• Graduate Financial Support
• GSE Courses
• Curriculum Studies and Teacher Education (CTE)
• Developmental and Psychological Sciences (DAPS)
• Learning Sciences and Technology Design (LSTD)
• Race, Inequality, and Language in Education (RILE)
• Social Sciences, Humanities, and Interdisciplinary Policy Studies in Education (SHIPS)
• Contact Information
• Stanford University Honor Code
• Stanford University Fundamental Standard
• Doctoral Programs Degree Progress Checklist
• GSE Open Access Policies

PhD students, please contact

MA POLS and MA/PP students, please contact

EDS, ICE/IEPA, Individually Designed, LDT, MA/JD, MA/MBA students, please contact

Stanford Graduate School of Education

482 Galvez Mall Stanford, CA 94305-3096 Tel: (650) 723-2109

• Contact Admissions
• GSE Leadership
• Site Feedback
• Web Accessibility
• Career Resources
• Faculty Open Positions
• Explore Courses
• Academic Calendar
• Office of the Registrar
• Cubberley Library
• StanfordWho
• StanfordYou

Improving lives through learning

• Stanford Home
• Maps & Directions
• Search Stanford
• Emergency Info
• Terms of Use
• Non-Discrimination
• Accessibility

© Stanford University , Stanford , California 94305 .

How To Write A Research Proposal

A Straightforward How-To Guide (With Examples)

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | August 2019 (Updated April 2023)

Writing up a strong research proposal for a dissertation or thesis is much like a marriage proposal. It’s a task that calls on you to win somebody over and persuade them that what you’re planning is a great idea. An idea they’re happy to say ‘yes’ to. This means that your dissertation proposal needs to be   persuasive ,   attractive   and well-planned. In this post, I’ll show you how to write a winning dissertation proposal, from scratch.

Before you start:

– Understand exactly what a research proposal is – Ask yourself these 4 questions

The 5 essential ingredients:

• The title/topic
• The introduction chapter
• The scope/delimitations
• Preliminary literature review
• Design/ methodology
• Practical considerations and risks 

What Is A Research Proposal?

The research proposal is literally that: a written document that communicates what you propose to research, in a concise format. It’s where you put all that stuff that’s spinning around in your head down on to paper, in a logical, convincing fashion.

Convincing   is the keyword here, as your research proposal needs to convince the assessor that your research is   clearly articulated   (i.e., a clear research question) ,   worth doing   (i.e., is unique and valuable enough to justify the effort), and   doable   within the restrictions you’ll face (time limits, budget, skill limits, etc.). If your proposal does not address these three criteria, your research won’t be approved, no matter how “exciting” the research idea might be.

PS – if you’re completely new to proposal writing, we’ve got a detailed walkthrough video covering two successful research proposals here . 

How do I know I’m ready?

Before starting the writing process, you need to   ask yourself 4 important questions .  If you can’t answer them succinctly and confidently, you’re not ready – you need to go back and think more deeply about your dissertation topic .

You should be able to answer the following 4 questions before starting your dissertation or thesis research proposal:

• WHAT is my main research question? (the topic)
• WHO cares and why is this important? (the justification)
• WHAT data would I need to answer this question, and how will I analyse it? (the research design)
• HOW will I manage the completion of this research, within the given timelines? (project and risk management)

If you can’t answer these questions clearly and concisely,   you’re not yet ready   to write your research proposal – revisit our   post on choosing a topic .

If you can, that’s great – it’s time to start writing up your dissertation proposal. Next, I’ll discuss what needs to go into your research proposal, and how to structure it all into an intuitive, convincing document with a linear narrative.

The 5 Essential Ingredients

Research proposals can vary in style between institutions and disciplines, but here I’ll share with you a   handy 5-section structure   you can use. These 5 sections directly address the core questions we spoke about earlier, ensuring that you present a convincing proposal. If your institution already provides a proposal template, there will likely be substantial overlap with this, so you’ll still get value from reading on.

For each section discussed below, make sure you use headers and sub-headers (ideally, numbered headers) to help the reader navigate through your document, and to support them when they need to revisit a previous section. Don’t just present an endless wall of text, paragraph after paragraph after paragraph…

Top Tip:   Use MS Word Styles to format headings. This will allow you to be clear about whether a sub-heading is level 2, 3, or 4. Additionally, you can view your document in ‘outline view’ which will show you only your headings. This makes it much easier to check your structure, shift things around and make decisions about where a section needs to sit. You can also generate a 100% accurate table of contents using Word’s automatic functionality.

Ingredient #1 – Topic/Title Header

Your research proposal’s title should be your main research question in its simplest form, possibly with a sub-heading providing basic details on the specifics of the study. For example:

“Compliance with equality legislation in the charity sector: a study of the ‘reasonable adjustments’ made in three London care homes”

As you can see, this title provides a clear indication of what the research is about, in broad terms. It paints a high-level picture for the first-time reader, which gives them a taste of what to expect.   Always aim for a clear, concise title . Don’t feel the need to capture every detail of your research in your title – your proposal will fill in the gaps.

Need a helping hand?

Ingredient #2 – Introduction

In this section of your research proposal, you’ll expand on what you’ve communicated in the title, by providing a few paragraphs which offer more detail about your research topic. Importantly, the focus here is the   topic   – what will you research and why is that worth researching? This is not the place to discuss methodology, practicalities, etc. – you’ll do that later.

You should cover the following:

• An overview of the   broad area   you’ll be researching – introduce the reader to key concepts and language
• An explanation of the   specific (narrower) area   you’ll be focusing, and why you’ll be focusing there
• Your research   aims   and   objectives
• Your   research question (s) and sub-questions (if applicable)

Importantly, you should aim to use short sentences and plain language – don’t babble on with extensive jargon, acronyms and complex language. Assume that the reader is an intelligent layman – not a subject area specialist (even if they are). Remember that the   best writing is writing that can be easily understood   and digested. Keep it simple.

Note that some universities may want some extra bits and pieces in your introduction section. For example, personal development objectives, a structural outline, etc. Check your brief to see if there are any other details they expect in your proposal, and make sure you find a place for these.

Ingredient #3 – Scope

Next, you’ll need to specify what the scope of your research will be – this is also known as the delimitations . In other words, you need to make it clear what you will be covering and, more importantly, what you won’t be covering in your research. Simply put, this is about ring fencing your research topic so that you have a laser-sharp focus.

All too often, students feel the need to go broad and try to address as many issues as possible, in the interest of producing comprehensive research. Whilst this is admirable, it’s a mistake. By tightly refining your scope, you’ll enable yourself to   go deep   with your research, which is what you need to earn good marks. If your scope is too broad, you’re likely going to land up with superficial research (which won’t earn marks), so don’t be afraid to narrow things down.

Ingredient #4 – Literature Review

In this section of your research proposal, you need to provide a (relatively) brief discussion of the existing literature. Naturally, this will not be as comprehensive as the literature review in your actual dissertation, but it will lay the foundation for that. In fact, if you put in the effort at this stage, you’ll make your life a lot easier when it’s time to write your actual literature review chapter.

There are a few things you need to achieve in this section:

• Demonstrate that you’ve done your reading and are   familiar with the current state of the research   in your topic area.
• Show that   there’s a clear gap   for your specific research – i.e., show that your topic is sufficiently unique and will add value to the existing research.
• Show how the existing research has shaped your thinking regarding   research design . For example, you might use scales or questionnaires from previous studies.

When you write up your literature review, keep these three objectives front of mind, especially number two (revealing the gap in the literature), so that your literature review has a   clear purpose and direction . Everything you write should be contributing towards one (or more) of these objectives in some way. If it doesn’t, you need to ask yourself whether it’s truly needed.

Top Tip:  Don’t fall into the trap of just describing the main pieces of literature, for example, “A says this, B says that, C also says that…” and so on. Merely describing the literature provides no value. Instead, you need to   synthesise   it, and use it to address the three objectives above.

Ingredient #5 – Research Methodology

Now that you’ve clearly explained both your intended research topic (in the introduction) and the existing research it will draw on (in the literature review section), it’s time to get practical and explain exactly how you’ll be carrying out your own research. In other words, your research methodology.

In this section, you’ll need to   answer two critical questions :

• How   will you design your research? I.e., what research methodology will you adopt, what will your sample be, how will you collect data, etc.
• Why   have you chosen this design? I.e., why does this approach suit your specific research aims, objectives and questions?

In other words, this is not just about explaining WHAT you’ll be doing, it’s also about explaining WHY. In fact, the   justification is the most important part , because that justification is how you demonstrate a good understanding of research design (which is what assessors want to see).

Some essential design choices you need to cover in your research proposal include:

• Your intended research philosophy (e.g., positivism, interpretivism or pragmatism )
• What methodological approach you’ll be taking (e.g., qualitative , quantitative or mixed )
• The details of your sample (e.g., sample size, who they are, who they represent, etc.)
• What data you plan to collect (i.e. data about what, in what form?)
• How you plan to collect it (e.g., surveys , interviews , focus groups, etc.)
• How you plan to analyse it (e.g., regression analysis, thematic analysis , etc.)
• Ethical adherence (i.e., does this research satisfy all ethical requirements of your institution, or does it need further approval?)

This list is not exhaustive – these are just some core attributes of research design. Check with your institution what level of detail they expect. The “ research onion ” by Saunders et al (2009) provides a good summary of the various design choices you ultimately need to make – you can   read more about that here .

Don’t forget the practicalities…

In addition to the technical aspects, you will need to address the   practical   side of the project. In other words, you need to explain   what resources you’ll need   (e.g., time, money, access to equipment or software, etc.) and how you intend to secure these resources. You need to show that your project is feasible, so any “make or break” type resources need to already be secured. The success or failure of your project cannot depend on some resource which you’re not yet sure you have access to.

Another part of the practicalities discussion is   project and risk management . In other words, you need to show that you have a clear project plan to tackle your research with. Some key questions to address:

• What are the timelines for each phase of your project?
• Are the time allocations reasonable?
• What happens if something takes longer than anticipated (risk management)?
• What happens if you don’t get the response rate you expect?

A good way to demonstrate that you’ve thought this through is to include a Gantt chart and a risk register (in the appendix if word count is a problem). With these two tools, you can show that you’ve got a clear, feasible plan, and you’ve thought about and accounted for the potential risks.

Tip – Be honest about the potential difficulties – but show that you are anticipating solutions and workarounds. This is much more impressive to an assessor than an unrealistically optimistic proposal which does not anticipate any challenges whatsoever.

Final Touches: Read And Simplify

The final step is to edit and proofread your proposal – very carefully. It sounds obvious, but all too often poor editing and proofreading ruin a good proposal. Nothing is more off-putting for an assessor than a poorly edited, typo-strewn document. It sends the message that you either do not pay attention to detail, or just don’t care. Neither of these are good messages. Put the effort into editing and proofreading your proposal (or pay someone to do it for you) – it will pay dividends.

When you’re editing, watch out for ‘academese’. Many students can speak simply, passionately and clearly about their dissertation topic – but become incomprehensible the moment they turn the laptop on. You are not required to write in any kind of special, formal, complex language when you write academic work. Sure, there may be technical terms, jargon specific to your discipline, shorthand terms and so on. But, apart from those,   keep your written language very close to natural spoken language   – just as you would speak in the classroom. Imagine that you are explaining your project plans to your classmates or a family member. Remember, write for the intelligent layman, not the subject matter experts. Plain-language, concise writing is what wins hearts and minds – and marks!

Let’s Recap: Research Proposal 101

And there you have it – how to write your dissertation or thesis research proposal, from the title page to the final proof. Here’s a quick recap of the key takeaways:

• The purpose of the research proposal is to   convince   – therefore, you need to make a clear, concise argument of why your research is both worth doing and doable.
• Make sure you can ask the critical what, who, and how questions of your research   before   you put pen to paper.
• Title – provides the first taste of your research, in broad terms
• Introduction – explains what you’ll be researching in more detail
• Scope – explains the boundaries of your research
• Literature review – explains how your research fits into the existing research and why it’s unique and valuable
• Research methodology – explains and justifies how you will carry out your own research

Hopefully, this post has helped you better understand how to write up a winning research proposal. If you enjoyed it, be sure to check out the rest of the Grad Coach Blog . If your university doesn’t provide any template for your proposal, you might want to try out our free research proposal template .

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Research Proposal Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

30 Comments

Thank you so much for the valuable insight that you have given, especially on the research proposal. That is what I have managed to cover. I still need to go back to the other parts as I got disturbed while still listening to Derek’s audio on you-tube. I am inspired. I will definitely continue with Grad-coach guidance on You-tube.

Thanks for the kind words :). All the best with your proposal.

First of all, thanks a lot for making such a wonderful presentation. The video was really useful and gave me a very clear insight of how a research proposal has to be written. I shall try implementing these ideas in my RP.

Once again, I thank you for this content.

I found reading your outline on writing research proposal very beneficial. I wish there was a way of submitting my draft proposal to you guys for critiquing before I submit to the institution.

Hi Bonginkosi

Thank you for the kind words. Yes, we do provide a review service. The best starting point is to have a chat with one of our coaches here: https://gradcoach.com/book/new/ .

Hello team GRADCOACH, may God bless you so much. I was totally green in research. Am so happy for your free superb tutorials and resources. Once again thank you so much Derek and his team.

You’re welcome, Erick. Good luck with your research proposal 🙂

thank you for the information. its precise and on point.

Really a remarkable piece of writing and great source of guidance for the researchers. GOD BLESS YOU for your guidance. Regards

Thanks so much for your guidance. It is easy and comprehensive the way you explain the steps for a winning research proposal.

Thank you guys so much for the rich post. I enjoyed and learn from every word in it. My problem now is how to get into your platform wherein I can always seek help on things related to my research work ? Secondly, I wish to find out if there is a way I can send my tentative proposal to you guys for examination before I take to my supervisor Once again thanks very much for the insights

Thanks for your kind words, Desire.

If you are based in a country where Grad Coach’s paid services are available, you can book a consultation by clicking the “Book” button in the top right.

Best of luck with your studies.

May God bless you team for the wonderful work you are doing,

If I have a topic, Can I submit it to you so that you can draft a proposal for me?? As I am expecting to go for masters degree in the near future.

Thanks for your comment. We definitely cannot draft a proposal for you, as that would constitute academic misconduct. The proposal needs to be your own work. We can coach you through the process, but it needs to be your own work and your own writing.

Best of luck with your research!

I found a lot of many essential concepts from your material. it is real a road map to write a research proposal. so thanks a lot. If there is any update material on your hand on MBA please forward to me.

GradCoach is a professional website that presents support and helps for MBA student like me through the useful online information on the page and with my 1-on-1 online coaching with the amazing and professional PhD Kerryen.

Thank you Kerryen so much for the support and help 🙂

I really recommend dealing with such a reliable services provider like Gradcoah and a coach like Kerryen.

Hi, Am happy for your service and effort to help students and researchers, Please, i have been given an assignment on research for strategic development, the task one is to formulate a research proposal to support the strategic development of a business area, my issue here is how to go about it, especially the topic or title and introduction. Please, i would like to know if you could help me and how much is the charge.

This content is practical, valuable, and just great!

Thank you very much!

Hi Derek, Thank you for the valuable presentation. It is very helpful especially for beginners like me. I am just starting my PhD.

This is quite instructive and research proposal made simple. Can I have a research proposal template?

Great! Thanks for rescuing me, because I had no former knowledge in this topic. But with this piece of information, I am now secured. Thank you once more.

I enjoyed listening to your video on how to write a proposal. I think I will be able to write a winning proposal with your advice. I wish you were to be my supervisor.

Dear Derek Jansen,

Thank you for your great content. I couldn’t learn these topics in MBA, but now I learned from GradCoach. Really appreciate your efforts….

From Afghanistan!

I have got very essential inputs for startup of my dissertation proposal. Well organized properly communicated with video presentation. Thank you for the presentation.

Wow, this is absolutely amazing guys. Thank you so much for the fruitful presentation, you’ve made my research much easier.

this helps me a lot. thank you all so much for impacting in us. may god richly bless you all

How I wish I’d learn about Grad Coach earlier. I’ve been stumbling around writing and rewriting! Now I have concise clear directions on how to put this thing together. Thank you!

Fantastic!! Thank You for this very concise yet comprehensive guidance.

Even if I am poor in English I would like to thank you very much.

Thank you very much, this is very insightful.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Indian J Anaesth
• v.60(9); 2016 Sep

How to write a research proposal?

Department of Anaesthesiology, Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Devika Rani Duggappa

Writing the proposal of a research work in the present era is a challenging task due to the constantly evolving trends in the qualitative research design and the need to incorporate medical advances into the methodology. The proposal is a detailed plan or ‘blueprint’ for the intended study, and once it is completed, the research project should flow smoothly. Even today, many of the proposals at post-graduate evaluation committees and application proposals for funding are substandard. A search was conducted with keywords such as research proposal, writing proposal and qualitative using search engines, namely, PubMed and Google Scholar, and an attempt has been made to provide broad guidelines for writing a scientifically appropriate research proposal.

INTRODUCTION

A clean, well-thought-out proposal forms the backbone for the research itself and hence becomes the most important step in the process of conduct of research.[ 1 ] The objective of preparing a research proposal would be to obtain approvals from various committees including ethics committee [details under ‘Research methodology II’ section [ Table 1 ] in this issue of IJA) and to request for grants. However, there are very few universally accepted guidelines for preparation of a good quality research proposal. A search was performed with keywords such as research proposal, funding, qualitative and writing proposals using search engines, namely, PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus.

Five ‘C’s while writing a literature review

BASIC REQUIREMENTS OF A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

A proposal needs to show how your work fits into what is already known about the topic and what new paradigm will it add to the literature, while specifying the question that the research will answer, establishing its significance, and the implications of the answer.[ 2 ] The proposal must be capable of convincing the evaluation committee about the credibility, achievability, practicality and reproducibility (repeatability) of the research design.[ 3 ] Four categories of audience with different expectations may be present in the evaluation committees, namely academic colleagues, policy-makers, practitioners and lay audiences who evaluate the research proposal. Tips for preparation of a good research proposal include; ‘be practical, be persuasive, make broader links, aim for crystal clarity and plan before you write’. A researcher must be balanced, with a realistic understanding of what can be achieved. Being persuasive implies that researcher must be able to convince other researchers, research funding agencies, educational institutions and supervisors that the research is worth getting approval. The aim of the researcher should be clearly stated in simple language that describes the research in a way that non-specialists can comprehend, without use of jargons. The proposal must not only demonstrate that it is based on an intelligent understanding of the existing literature but also show that the writer has thought about the time needed to conduct each stage of the research.[ 4 , 5 ]

CONTENTS OF A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

The contents or formats of a research proposal vary depending on the requirements of evaluation committee and are generally provided by the evaluation committee or the institution.

In general, a cover page should contain the (i) title of the proposal, (ii) name and affiliation of the researcher (principal investigator) and co-investigators, (iii) institutional affiliation (degree of the investigator and the name of institution where the study will be performed), details of contact such as phone numbers, E-mail id's and lines for signatures of investigators.

The main contents of the proposal may be presented under the following headings: (i) introduction, (ii) review of literature, (iii) aims and objectives, (iv) research design and methods, (v) ethical considerations, (vi) budget, (vii) appendices and (viii) citations.[ 4 ]

Introduction

It is also sometimes termed as ‘need for study’ or ‘abstract’. Introduction is an initial pitch of an idea; it sets the scene and puts the research in context.[ 6 ] The introduction should be designed to create interest in the reader about the topic and proposal. It should convey to the reader, what you want to do, what necessitates the study and your passion for the topic.[ 7 ] Some questions that can be used to assess the significance of the study are: (i) Who has an interest in the domain of inquiry? (ii) What do we already know about the topic? (iii) What has not been answered adequately in previous research and practice? (iv) How will this research add to knowledge, practice and policy in this area? Some of the evaluation committees, expect the last two questions, elaborated under a separate heading of ‘background and significance’.[ 8 ] Introduction should also contain the hypothesis behind the research design. If hypothesis cannot be constructed, the line of inquiry to be used in the research must be indicated.

Review of literature

It refers to all sources of scientific evidence pertaining to the topic in interest. In the present era of digitalisation and easy accessibility, there is an enormous amount of relevant data available, making it a challenge for the researcher to include all of it in his/her review.[ 9 ] It is crucial to structure this section intelligently so that the reader can grasp the argument related to your study in relation to that of other researchers, while still demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. It is preferable to summarise each article in a paragraph, highlighting the details pertinent to the topic of interest. The progression of review can move from the more general to the more focused studies, or a historical progression can be used to develop the story, without making it exhaustive.[ 1 ] Literature should include supporting data, disagreements and controversies. Five ‘C's may be kept in mind while writing a literature review[ 10 ] [ Table 1 ].

Aims and objectives

The research purpose (or goal or aim) gives a broad indication of what the researcher wishes to achieve in the research. The hypothesis to be tested can be the aim of the study. The objectives related to parameters or tools used to achieve the aim are generally categorised as primary and secondary objectives.

Research design and method

The objective here is to convince the reader that the overall research design and methods of analysis will correctly address the research problem and to impress upon the reader that the methodology/sources chosen are appropriate for the specific topic. It should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

In this section, the methods and sources used to conduct the research must be discussed, including specific references to sites, databases, key texts or authors that will be indispensable to the project. There should be specific mention about the methodological approaches to be undertaken to gather information, about the techniques to be used to analyse it and about the tests of external validity to which researcher is committed.[ 10 , 11 ]

The components of this section include the following:[ 4 ]

Population and sample

Population refers to all the elements (individuals, objects or substances) that meet certain criteria for inclusion in a given universe,[ 12 ] and sample refers to subset of population which meets the inclusion criteria for enrolment into the study. The inclusion and exclusion criteria should be clearly defined. The details pertaining to sample size are discussed in the article “Sample size calculation: Basic priniciples” published in this issue of IJA.

Data collection

The researcher is expected to give a detailed account of the methodology adopted for collection of data, which include the time frame required for the research. The methodology should be tested for its validity and ensure that, in pursuit of achieving the results, the participant's life is not jeopardised. The author should anticipate and acknowledge any potential barrier and pitfall in carrying out the research design and explain plans to address them, thereby avoiding lacunae due to incomplete data collection. If the researcher is planning to acquire data through interviews or questionnaires, copy of the questions used for the same should be attached as an annexure with the proposal.

Rigor (soundness of the research)

This addresses the strength of the research with respect to its neutrality, consistency and applicability. Rigor must be reflected throughout the proposal.

It refers to the robustness of a research method against bias. The author should convey the measures taken to avoid bias, viz. blinding and randomisation, in an elaborate way, thus ensuring that the result obtained from the adopted method is purely as chance and not influenced by other confounding variables.

Consistency

Consistency considers whether the findings will be consistent if the inquiry was replicated with the same participants and in a similar context. This can be achieved by adopting standard and universally accepted methods and scales.

Applicability

Applicability refers to the degree to which the findings can be applied to different contexts and groups.[ 13 ]

Data analysis

This section deals with the reduction and reconstruction of data and its analysis including sample size calculation. The researcher is expected to explain the steps adopted for coding and sorting the data obtained. Various tests to be used to analyse the data for its robustness, significance should be clearly stated. Author should also mention the names of statistician and suitable software which will be used in due course of data analysis and their contribution to data analysis and sample calculation.[ 9 ]

Ethical considerations

Medical research introduces special moral and ethical problems that are not usually encountered by other researchers during data collection, and hence, the researcher should take special care in ensuring that ethical standards are met. Ethical considerations refer to the protection of the participants' rights (right to self-determination, right to privacy, right to autonomy and confidentiality, right to fair treatment and right to protection from discomfort and harm), obtaining informed consent and the institutional review process (ethical approval). The researcher needs to provide adequate information on each of these aspects.

Informed consent needs to be obtained from the participants (details discussed in further chapters), as well as the research site and the relevant authorities.

When the researcher prepares a research budget, he/she should predict and cost all aspects of the research and then add an additional allowance for unpredictable disasters, delays and rising costs. All items in the budget should be justified.

Appendices are documents that support the proposal and application. The appendices will be specific for each proposal but documents that are usually required include informed consent form, supporting documents, questionnaires, measurement tools and patient information of the study in layman's language.

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used in composing your proposal. Although the words ‘references and bibliography’ are different, they are used interchangeably. It refers to all references cited in the research proposal.

Successful, qualitative research proposals should communicate the researcher's knowledge of the field and method and convey the emergent nature of the qualitative design. The proposal should follow a discernible logic from the introduction to presentation of the appendices.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Proposal Development Resources

Project management tools for proposal development.

Adapt the tools and templates below to get a proposal to submission stage as efficiently as possible. These project management tools help support the development of large, multiple-PI, multidisciplinary proposals at the University of Washington but can be applied effectively to any proposal development effort.

• Funding Opportunity Evaluation Matrix
• Proposal Development Timeline
• Proposal Development Checklist
• Budget Justification Guidelines
• CV-Biosketch Tracker
• Data Management Planning Tool
• Subawardee Documents Tracker
• Version Control Guidelines
• Agenda: PI/Admin Planning Meeting
• Agenda: Proposal Team Kick-Off Meeting
• Calendars: Sample  and  Template
• Basic Workplans
• Detailed Workplan Mapping Each RFP/FOA Element to a Person and Deadline
• Leadership and Management Plan
• Review Cycles Tracker
• Subawardee Documents Request Letter
• UW Boilerplate

Proposal Development Best Practices

Utilize the above tools and templates in the following practices to get the most value out of them.

Review Proposal Development Timeline

Review this ideal timeline and familiarize yourself with the tools and documents it specifies. Twelve weeks is the ideal minimum time needed to develop any grant, and multi-institutional grants require even more time. Utilize the Proposal Development Checklist  to get yourself started.

Evaluate the Funding Opportunity

You can start with an analytical tool to help you determine if you should even pursue the grant proposal. The Opportunity Evaluation Matrix provides a set of strategic criteria to be used in making a decision about whether to pursue a funding opportunity.

“Success” however, should not be measured solely on the likelihood of receiving funding. Developing an interdisciplinary proposal is a unique opportunity for innovation and an exchange of ideas that will provide the seed for future successful collaborations.

Plan PI/Admin Planning Meeting

Complex, collaborative grant proposals require a more intense level of project management to prepare. Once the decision is made to go forward the next step should be a meeting between the PI and the lead admin who will be ordering and preparing much of the grant proposal content. Use the PI/Admin Planning Meeting Agenda to guide this discussion. The key items to cover in this initial meeting are the: 1) RFP/FOA required components, 2) Work plan, 3) Roles and Responsibilities,  4) Review cycles. Once completed, these communication documents are best kept in a folder that can be shared by the entire proposal development team. Tools such as Dropbox or Google Drive can provide team document management environments.

Map RFP/FOA Elements to Deadlines

This complex planning tool is very effective at combining many different requirements and deadlines into a single document. The project PI and/or Admin should carefully comb through the RFA/RFP and develop a list of all required proposal elements that will be part of the complete package submitted to the sponsor. These elements should then be mapped to deadlines. This tool can be very time consuming to construct, but becomes a valuable reference. In its most basic form, this document records the relevant page numbers from the RFP/FOA as well as agency-specific proposal guides and policy statements. Other useful information that can be recorded on this document include: section page limits, section team leader name, section due date and a space for status updates and notes. Prior to submission, this document will also serve as a checklist to ensure all required proposal elements are complete.

Build Work Plan

The calendar and work plan highlight different aspects setting and tracking deadlines.

• Use the Calendar ( sample  and template ) to track months at a glance and ensure each month’s holidays and all your team member’s “out of office” dates are taken into account when setting up your workplan.
• Use the workplan templates to assign deadlines to tasks, tasks to people and to track progress updates.

Use the workplan as a touchstone in weekly meetings and ensure everyone on the proposal team has access to the document.

Establish Accountability: Roles and Responsibilities Matrix

Draft an Accountability Matrix   before the proposal kick-off meeting so that it can serve as a conversation starter for the group. This document has been useful even in teams that have previously worked together in clarifying assumptions as to which tasks will be completed by which team member and identifying unfilled roles on the team, but will be especially useful in large, interdisciplinary teams working across departments and schools. Revise the document as appropriate. In some cases multiple roles may be filled by one team member, in others, tasks from a single role may be divided among two team members. Once complete, this document should be made available for reference in the proposal Dropbox or other shared folder.

Set Up Review Cycles

The Review Cycles Tracker  will help you delineate the number of anticipated proposal drafts, the due dates for each, and the names of individuals who have agreed to review those drafts. Setting these dates early will allow reviewers to plan accordingly, and allow them time to provide meaningful feedback. In our experience, draft review deadlines were far more likely to be met when reviewers were given dates ahead of time.

Set Up Proposal Kick-off Meeting

The Proposal Kick-off Meeting should involve anyone expected to play a major role in the proposal development process including the lead PI, Co-PIs, Co-Investigators as well as the department or PI’s administrative and budget development specialists. The meeting agenda  includes suggested topics to cover at the kick-off meeting including a portion of time dedicated to reviewing and revising the timelines and tracking documents.

Schedule Weekly Team Check-In Meetings

A standing weekly meeting dedicated to status updates on the progress of non-technical aspects of the proposal, and review of the timeline or calendar can go a long way toward keeping the proposal development process on track. It can also reduce time spent exchanging emails and phone calls, as team members will often keep a list of items for discussion during this time. Depending on the complexity of the proposal, a 30-minute teleconference can often be sufficient for this purpose. Discussions may include progress updates on:

• Technical Proposal
• Budget Development.  Use the Budget Justification Primer to assist in writing a budget narrative.
• Status of Subrecipient documents.  Use the Subawardee Documents Request and Subawardee Documents Tracker to manage your collection efforts
• Status of Letters of Support
• Status of CV/Biosketch documents.  Use the CV-Biosketch Tracker to assist in managing the collection of these required documents.
• Review of progress on all elements of the RFP/FOA.  View Tips below for samples of frequently required documentation.

Collaborate through Shared Drives

Having access to a shared folder space when coordinating the development of a large proposal allows for efficient distribution of the documents associated with the proposal. This will eliminate various versions of proposal documents being emailed back-and-forth and will keep the most current versions of all documents in one place that all appropriate team members have access to any time. There is no ideal tool, but you should figure out a way for proposal teams to share proposal sections, sponsor information, and project management documents. UW IT offers a couple of different tools/solutions to help in storing and editing shared documents. Read more about using the UW Google Drive and OneDrive for Business on the UW IT Connect website . Also, refer to this tutorial  on how to share files using Google Drive.

A best practice for setting up shared drives on which you will store your proposal documents is to establish the following folders: Technical Proposal (Abstract, Executive Summary, Research Strategy), Budget (Budget spreadsheet, Budget narrative), Supplemental Documents (Appendixes, Past Performance References and Biosketches), Subcontract Documents (Subcontract budget, Scope of Work, etc.), Sponsor Documents (FOA, FAQs, modifications, documents from the prime applicant, etc.) and Project Management: (Timelines, Roles & Responsibilities, Contact list, Primers). Each folder should have an Archive subfolder for old versions; never delete an old version — always move to the Archive folder).  Refer to the Version Control Primer for ideas about how to maintain document version integrity when there are multiple people working on a document.

Tips on Using the Templates and Trackers

Laurie Stephan , Office of Research, Laurie Stephan

University of Washington Office of Research

Or support offices.

• Human Subjects Division (HSD)
• Office of Animal Welfare (OAW)
• Office of Research (OR)
• Office of Research Information Services (ORIS)
• Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP)

OR Research Units

• Applied Physics Laboratory (APL-UW)
• WA National Primate Research Center (WaNPRC)

Research Partner Offices

• Corporate and Foundation Relations (CFR)
• Enivronmental Health and Safety (EH&S)
• Grant and Contract Accounting (GCA)
• Institute of Translational Health Sciences (ITHS)
• Management Accounting and Analysis (MAA)
• Post Award Fiscal Compliance (PAFC)

Collaboration

• Centers and Institutes
• Collaborative Proposal Development Resources
• Research Fact Sheet
• Research Annual Report
• Stats and Rankings
• Honors and Awards
• Office of Research

© 2024 University of Washington | Seattle, WA

• Utility Menu

GA4 tracking code

• CARAT (Opportunities Database)
• URAF Application Instructions
• URAF Calendar
• Preparing for the First Meeting

Your first meeting with a potential research mentor is an opportunity for you to learn more about a faculty members research interests, ongoing projects, any collaborators or graduate students or other faculty they work with, and what expertise and guidance they may give you in a potential research project. For the potential faculty mentor, the first meeting is a time for them to learn more about you, your motivations, your intellectual interests, and how they can be most helpful to you. Before you head into your first meeting with a potential faculty mentor, consider the following:

Prepare ahead of time Read up on the faculty member's most currently published papers or summaries of their work and reflect why the work is interesting, what you’d like to learn, and what ideas you also might have to contribute to the work. Sketch out a short agenda (for yourself) outlining the important points you’d like to make or questions you’d like to ask.

Potential Questions to Ask :

• Can you tell me more about your project on ...?
• How can I learn more about this topic? Are there papers or courses I should take to prepare myself?
• How do students typically get involved in research in your field?
• What would independent research look like in this field?
• Have you mentored undergraduates on independent research projects before? If so, how did they prepare for starting an independent research project under your guidance?
• What would a research assistantship for you entail? What are your expectations for a research assistant (time commitment, relevant skills)?
• What are your expectations of a thesis writer? (How often do thesis writers check in with you?)
• Are there any opportunities for me to get involved in research under your guidance or with your graduate student mentees or postdocs?

During the meeting Take notes and ask questions. Don’t be afraid of concepts that may come up on in conversation that are unfamiliar to you. Show your interest and curiosity for what they do, which will provide context for you to describe your interests in working with them. 

Post-meeting Review the notes you took during your first meeting. If you were seeking a faculty mentor for an independent research project, think about their research and expertise, their communication style and how they might be helpful. Keep in mind that a potential faculty mentor’s interests may not directly align to your own. if you feel that they have given you substantial information to consider and if you enjoyed the conversation and feel comfortable seeking their advice, they may a make good mentor for your research. If you are seeking additional expertise or other guidance, it is also okay to have additional mentors or advisors in the wings. Follow up with a thank you email, acknowledge that you have read papers that they have recommendeded, and ask what next steps there may be if you are interested working more closely going forward.

• Getting Started
• Identifying and Contacting Faculty Mentors
• Setting Expectations for Working Together
• Maintaining Mentee/Mentor Relationships

Research Proposal: A step-by-step guide with template

Making sure your proposal is perfect will drastically improve your chances of landing a successful research position. Follow these steps.

There’s no doubt you have the most cutting-edge research idea to date, backed up by a solid methodology and a credible explanation proving its relevance! There are thousands of research ideas that could change the world with many new ideologies.

The truth is, none of this would matter without support. It can be daunting, challenging, and uncertain to secure funding for a research project. Even more so when it isn’t well-thought-out, outlined, and includes every detail.

An effective solution for presenting your project, or requesting funding, is to provide a research proposal to potential investors or financiers on your behalf.

It’s crucial to understand that making sure your proposal is perfect will drastically improve your chances of landing a successful research position. Your research proposal could result in the failure to study the research problem entirely if it is inadequately constructed or incomplete.

It is for this reason that we have created an excellent guide that covers everything you need to know about writing a research proposal, and includes helpful tips for presenting your proposal professionally and improving its likelihood of acceptance!

What Is a Research Proposal?

Generally, a research proposal is a well-crafted, formal document that provides a thorough explanation of what you plan to investigate. This includes a rationale for why it is worth investigating, as well as a method for investigating it.

Research proposal writing in the contemporary academic environment is a challenging undertaking given the constant shift in research methodology and a commitment to incorporating scientific breakthroughs.

An outline of the plan or roadmap for the study is the proposal, and once the proposal is complete, everything should be smooth sailing. It is still common for post-graduate evaluation panels and funding applications to submit substandard proposals.

By its very nature, the research proposal serves as a tool for convincing the supervisor, committee, or university that the proposed research fits within the scope of the program and is feasible when considering the time and resources available.

A research proposal should convince the person who is going to sanction your research, or put another way, you need to persuade them that your research idea is the best.

Obviously, if it does not convince them that it is reasonable and adequate, you will need to revise and submit it again. As a result, you will lose significant time, causing your research to be delayed or cut short, which is not good.

A good research proposal should have the following structure

A dissertation or thesis research proposal may take on a variety of forms depending on the university, but  most generally a research proposal will include the following elements:

• Titles or title pages that give a description of the research
• Detailed explanation of the proposed research and its background
• Outline of the research project
• An overview of key research studies in the field
• Description the proposed research design (approach)

So, if you include all these elements, you will have a general outline. Let’s take a closer look at how to write them and what to include in each element so that the research proposal is as robust as the idea itself.

A step-by-step guide to writing a research proposal

#1 introduction.

Researchers who wish to obtain grant funding for a project often write a proposal when seeking funding for a research-based postgraduate degree program, or in order to obtain approval for completing a thesis or PhD. Even though this is only a brief introduction, we should be considering it the beginning of an insightful discussion about the significance of a topic that deserves attention.

Your readers should understand what you are trying to accomplish after they read your introduction. Additionally, they should be able to perceive your zeal for the subject matter and a genuine interest in the possible outcome of the research.

As your introduction, consider answering these questions in three to four paragraphs:

• In what way does the study address its primary issue?
• Does that subject matter fall under the domain of that field of study?
• In order to investigate that problem, what method should be used?
• What is the importance of this study?
• How does it impact academia and society overall?
• What are the potential implications of the proposed research for someone reviewing the proposal?

It is not necessary to include an abstract or summary for the introduction to most academic departments and funding sources. Nevertheless, you should confirm your institution’s requirements.

#2 Background and importance

An explanation of the rationale for a research proposal and its significance is provided in this section. It is preferable to separate this part from the introduction so that the narrative flows seamlessly.

This section should be approached by presuming readers are time-pressed but want a general overview of the whole study and the research question.

Please keep in mind that this isn’t an exhaustive essay that contains every detail of your proposed research, rather a concise document that will spark interest in your proposal.

While you should try to take into account the following factors when framing the significance of your proposed study, there are no rigid rules.

• Provide a detailed explanation of the purpose and problem of the study. Multidimensional or interdisciplinary research problems often require this.
• Outline the purpose of your proposed research and describe the advantages of carrying out the study.
• Outline the major issues or problems to be discussed. These might come in the form of questions or comments.
• Be sure to highlight how your research contributes to existing theories that relate to the problem of the study.
• Describe how your study will be conducted, including the source of data and the method of analysis.
• To provide a sense of direction for your study, define the scope of your proposal.
• Defining key concepts or terms, if necessary, is recommended.

The steps to a perfect research proposal all get more specific as we move forward to enhance the concept of the research. In this case, it will become important to make sure that your supervisor or your funder has a clear understanding of every aspect of your research study.

#3 Reviewing prior literature and studies

The aim of this paragraph is to establish the context and significance of your study, including a review of the current literature pertinent to it.

This part aims to properly situate your proposed study within the bigger scheme of things of what is being investigated, while, at the same time, showing the innovation and originality of your proposed work.

When writing a literature review, it is imperative that your format is effective because it often contains extensive information that allows you to demonstrate your main research claims compared to other scholars.

Separating the literature according to major categories or conceptual frameworks is an excellent way to do this. This is a more effective method than listing each study one by one in chronological order.

In order to arrange the review of existing relevant studies in an efficient manner, a literature review is often written using the following five criteria:

• Be sure to cite your previous studies to ensure the focus remains on the research question. For more information, please refer to our guide on how to write a research paper .
• Study the literature’s methods, results, hypotheses, and conclusions. Recognize the authors’ differing perspectives.
• Compare and contrast the various themes, arguments, methodologies, and perspectives discussed in the literature. Explain the most prominent points of disagreement.
• Evaluate the literature. Identify persuasive arguments offered by scholars. Choose the most reliable, valid, and suitable methodologies.
• Consider how the literature relates to your area of research and your topic. Examine whether your proposal for investigation reflects existing literature, deviates from existing literature, synthesizes or adds to it in some way.

#4 Research questions and objectives

The next step is to develop your research objectives once you have determined your research focus.

When your readers read your proposal, what do you want them to learn? Try to write your objectives in one sentence, if you can. Put time and thought into framing them properly.

By setting an objective for your research, you’ll stay on track and avoid getting sidetracked.

Any study proposal should address the following questions irrespective of the topic or problem:

• What are you hoping to accomplish from the study? When describing the study topic and your research question, be concise and to the point.
• What is the purpose of the research? A compelling argument must also be offered to support your choice of topic.
• What research methods will you use? It is essential to outline a clear, logical strategy for completing your study and make sure that it is doable.

Some authors include this section in the introduction, where it is generally placed at the end of the section.

#5 Research Design and Methods

It is important to write this part correctly and organize logically even though you are not starting the research yet.  This must leave readers with a sense of assurance that the topic is worthwhile.

To achieve this, you must convince your reader that your research design and procedures will adequately address the study’s problems. Additionally, it seeks to ensure that the employed methods are capable of interpreting the likely study results efficiently.

You should design your research in a way that is directly related to your objectives.

Exemplifying your study design using examples from your literature review, you are setting up your study design effectively. You should follow other researchers’ good practices.

Pay attention to the methods you will use to collect data, the analyses you will perform, as well as your methods of measuring the validity of your results.

If you describe the methods you will use, make sure you include the following points:

• Develop a plan for conducting your research, as well as how you intend to interpret the findings based on the study’s objectives.
• When describing your objectives with the selected techniques, it is important to also elaborate on your plans.
• This section does not only present a list of events. Once you have chosen the strategy, make sure to explain why it is a good way to analyse your study question. Provide clear explanations.
• Last but not least, plan ahead to overcome any challenges you might encounter during the implementation of your research design.

In the event that you closely follow the best practices outlined in relevant studies as well as justify your selection, you will be prepared to address any questions or concerns you may encounter.

We have an amazing article that will give you everything you need to know about research design .

#6 Knowledge Contribution and Relevance

In this section, you describe your theory about how your study will contribute to, expand, or alter knowledge about the topic of your study.

You should discuss the implications of your research on future studies, applications, concepts, decisions, and procedures. It is common to address the study findings from a conceptual, analytical, or scientific perspective.

If you are framing your proposal of research, these guide questions may help you:

• How could the results be interpreted in the context of contesting the premises of the study?
• Could the expected study results lead to proposals for further research?
• Is your proposed research going to benefit people in any way?
• Is the outcome going to affect individuals in their work setting?
• In what ways will the suggested study impact or enhance the quality of life?
• Are the study’s results going to have an impact on intervention forms, techniques, or policies?
• What potential commercial, societal, or other benefits could be derived from the outcomes?
• Policy decisions will be influenced by the outcomes?
• Upon implementation, could they bring about new insights or breakthroughs?

Throughout this section, you will identify unsolved questions or research gaps in the existing literature. If the study is conducted as proposed, it is important to indicate how the research will be instrumental in understanding the nature of the research problem.

#7 Adherence to the Ethical Principles

In terms of scientific writing style, no particular style is generally acknowledged as more or less effective. The purpose is simply to provide relevant content that is formatted in a standardized way to enhance communication.

There are a variety of publication styles among different scholarly disciplines. It is therefore essential to follow the protocol according to the institution or organization that you are targeting.

All scholarly research and writing is, however, guided by codes of ethical conduct. The purpose of ethical guidelines, if they are followed, is to accomplish three things:

1) Preserve intellectual property right;

2) Ensure the rights and welfare of research participants;

3) Maintain the accuracy of scientific knowledge.

Scholars and writers who follow these ideals adhere to long-standing standards within their professional groups.

An additional ethical principle of the APA stresses the importance of maintaining scientific validity. An observation is at the heart of the standard scientific method, and it is verifiable and repeatable by others.

It is expected that scholars will not falsify or fabricate data in research writing. Researchers must also refrain from altering their studies’ outcomes to support a particular theory or to exclude inconclusive data from their report in an effort to create a convincing one.

#8 The budget

The need for detailed budgetary planning is not required by all universities when studying historical material or academic literature, though some do require it. In the case of a research grant application, you will likely have to include a comprehensive budget that breaks down the costs of each major component.

Ensure that the funding program or organization will cover the required costs, and include only the necessary items. For each of the items, you should include the following.

• To complete the study in its entirety, how much money would you require?
• Discuss the rationale for such a budget item for the purpose of completing research.
• The source of the amount – describe how it was determined.

When doing a study, you cannot buy ingredients the way you normally would. With so many items not having a price tag, how can you make a budget? Take the following into consideration:

• Does your project require access to any software programs or solutions? Do you need to install or train a technology tool?
• How much time will you be spending on your research study? Are you required to take time off from work to do your research?
• Are you going to need to travel to certain locations to meet with respondents or to collect data? At what cost?
• Will you be seeking research assistants for the study you propose? In what capacity and for what compensation? What other aspects are you planning to outsource?

It is possible to calculate a budget while also being able to estimate how much more money you will need in the event of an emergency.

#9 Timeline

A realistic and concise research schedule is also important to keep in mind. You should be able to finish your plan of study within the allotted time period, such as your degree program or the academic calendar.

You should include a timeline that includes a series of objectives you must complete to meet all the requirements for your scholarly research. The process starts with preliminary research and ends with final editing. A completion date for every step is required.

In addition, one should state the development that has been made. It is also recommended to include other relevant research events, for instance paper or poster presentations . In addition, a researcher must update the timeline regularly, as necessary, since this is not a static document.

#10 A Concluding Statement

Presenting a few of the anticipated results of your research proposal is an effective way to conclude your proposal.

The final stage of the process requires you to reveal the conclusion and rationale you anticipate reaching. Considering the research you have done so far, your reader knows that these are anticipated results, which are likely to evolve once the whole study is completed.

In any case, you must let the supervisors or sponsors know what implications may be drawn. It will be easier for them to assess the reliability and relevance of your research.

It will also demonstrate your meticulousness since you will have anticipated and taken into consideration the potential consequences of your research.

The Appendix section is required by some funding sources and academic institutions. This is extra information that is not in the main argument of the proposal, but appears to enhance the points made.

For example, data in the form of tables, consent forms, clinical/research guidelines, and procedures for data collection may be included in this document.

Research Proposal Template

Now that you know all about each element that composes an ideal research proposal, here is an extra help: a ready to use research proposal example. Just hit the button below, make a copy of the document and start working!

Avoid these common mistakes

In an era when rejection rates for prestigious journals can reach as high as 90 percent, you must avoid the following common mistakes when submitting a proposal:

• Proposals that are too long. Stay to the point when you write research proposals. Make your document concise and specific. Be sure not to diverge into off-topic discussions.
• Taking up too much research time. Many students struggle to delineate the context of their studies, regardless of the topic, time, or location. In order to explain the methodology of the study clearly to the reader, the proposal must clearly state what the study will focus on.
• Leaving out significant works from a literature review. Though everything in the proposal should be kept at a minimum, key research studies must need to be included. To understand the scope and growth of the issue, proposals should be based on significant studies.
• Major topics are too rarely discussed, and too much attention is paid to minor details. To persuasively argue for a study, a proposal should focus on just a few key research questions. Minor details should be noted, but should not overshadow the thesis.
• The proposal does not have a compelling and well-supported argument. To prove that a study should be approved or funded, the research proposal must outline its purpose.
• A typographical error, bad grammar or sloppy writing style. Even though a research proposal outlines a part of a larger project, it must conform to academic writing standards and guidelines.

A final note

We have come to the end of our research proposal guide. We really hope that you have found all the information you need. Wishing you success with the research study.

We at Mind the Graph create high quality illustrative graphics for research papers and posters to beautify your work. Check us out here .

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Unlock Your Creativity

Create infographics, presentations and other scientifically-accurate designs without hassle — absolutely free for 7 days!

About Fabricio Pamplona

Fabricio Pamplona is the founder of Mind the Graph - a tool used by over 400K users in 60 countries. He has a Ph.D. and solid scientific background in Psychopharmacology and experience as a Guest Researcher at the Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry (Germany) and Researcher in D'Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR, Brazil). Fabricio holds over 2500 citations in Google Scholar. He has 10 years of experience in small innovative businesses, with relevant experience in product design and innovation management. Connect with him on LinkedIn - Fabricio Pamplona .

Content tags

Proposal Meeting

Following successful completion of the qualifying exam and selection of a Ph.D. committee, the student will prepare a written research proposal.

Following successful completion of the qualifying exam and selection of a Ph.D. committee, the student will prepare a written research proposal, including hypothesis, objectives, and methods, for presentation to and approval by the Ph.D. advisory committee.  A proposal meeting form should be completed in advance of the committee meeting.

A copy of the proposal should be delivered to each member of the committee at least one week before the scheduled meeting.  The committee will suggest modifications to be considered by the student and the faculty adviser.  At the conclusion of the proposal presentation and approval meeting, each committee member must rate the student’s dissertation proposal.  If a new draft of the research proposal is required, it must be completed within one month of the proposal meeting.  Copies of the revision should be distributed to committee members for their concurrence.  An assessment of the proposal meeting must be completed and signed by each committee member.  Assessment forms are available from the Graduate Program Coordinator. 

• Degrees & Programs
• College Directory

Information for

• Faculty & Staff
• Visitors & Public

• Privacy Policy

Home » How To Write A Research Proposal – Step-by-Step [Template]

How To Write A Research Proposal – Step-by-Step [Template]

Table of Contents

How To Write a Research Proposal

Writing a Research proposal involves several steps to ensure a well-structured and comprehensive document. Here is an explanation of each step:

1. Title and Abstract

• Choose a concise and descriptive title that reflects the essence of your research.
• Write an abstract summarizing your research question, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes. It should provide a brief overview of your proposal.

2. Introduction:

• Provide an introduction to your research topic, highlighting its significance and relevance.
• Clearly state the research problem or question you aim to address.
• Discuss the background and context of the study, including previous research in the field.

3. Research Objectives

• Outline the specific objectives or aims of your research. These objectives should be clear, achievable, and aligned with the research problem.

4. Literature Review:

• Conduct a comprehensive review of relevant literature and studies related to your research topic.
• Summarize key findings, identify gaps, and highlight how your research will contribute to the existing knowledge.

5. Methodology:

• Describe the research design and methodology you plan to employ to address your research objectives.
• Explain the data collection methods, instruments, and analysis techniques you will use.
• Justify why the chosen methods are appropriate and suitable for your research.

6. Timeline:

• Create a timeline or schedule that outlines the major milestones and activities of your research project.
• Break down the research process into smaller tasks and estimate the time required for each task.

7. Resources:

• Identify the resources needed for your research, such as access to specific databases, equipment, or funding.
• Explain how you will acquire or utilize these resources to carry out your research effectively.

8. Ethical Considerations:

• Discuss any ethical issues that may arise during your research and explain how you plan to address them.
• If your research involves human subjects, explain how you will ensure their informed consent and privacy.

9. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

• Clearly state the expected outcomes or results of your research.
• Highlight the potential impact and significance of your research in advancing knowledge or addressing practical issues.

10. References:

• Provide a list of all the references cited in your proposal, following a consistent citation style (e.g., APA, MLA).

11. Appendices:

• Include any additional supporting materials, such as survey questionnaires, interview guides, or data analysis plans.

Research Proposal Format

The format of a research proposal may vary depending on the specific requirements of the institution or funding agency. However, the following is a commonly used format for a research proposal:

1. Title Page:

• Include the title of your research proposal, your name, your affiliation or institution, and the date.

2. Abstract:

• Provide a brief summary of your research proposal, highlighting the research problem, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes.

3. Introduction:

• Introduce the research topic and provide background information.
• State the research problem or question you aim to address.
• Explain the significance and relevance of the research.
• Review relevant literature and studies related to your research topic.
• Summarize key findings and identify gaps in the existing knowledge.
• Explain how your research will contribute to filling those gaps.

5. Research Objectives:

• Clearly state the specific objectives or aims of your research.
• Ensure that the objectives are clear, focused, and aligned with the research problem.

6. Methodology:

• Describe the research design and methodology you plan to use.
• Explain the data collection methods, instruments, and analysis techniques.
• Justify why the chosen methods are appropriate for your research.

7. Timeline:

8. Resources:

• Explain how you will acquire or utilize these resources effectively.

9. Ethical Considerations:

• If applicable, explain how you will ensure informed consent and protect the privacy of research participants.

10. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

11. References:

12. Appendices:

Research Proposal Template

Here’s a template for a research proposal:

1. Introduction:

2. Literature Review:

3. Research Objectives:

4. Methodology:

5. Timeline:

6. Resources:

7. Ethical Considerations:

8. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

9. References:

10. Appendices:

Research Proposal Sample

Title: The Impact of Online Education on Student Learning Outcomes: A Comparative Study

1. Introduction

Online education has gained significant prominence in recent years, especially due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This research proposal aims to investigate the impact of online education on student learning outcomes by comparing them with traditional face-to-face instruction. The study will explore various aspects of online education, such as instructional methods, student engagement, and academic performance, to provide insights into the effectiveness of online learning.

2. Objectives

The main objectives of this research are as follows:

• To compare student learning outcomes between online and traditional face-to-face education.
• To examine the factors influencing student engagement in online learning environments.
• To assess the effectiveness of different instructional methods employed in online education.
• To identify challenges and opportunities associated with online education and suggest recommendations for improvement.

3. Methodology

3.1 Study Design

This research will utilize a mixed-methods approach to gather both quantitative and qualitative data. The study will include the following components:

3.2 Participants

The research will involve undergraduate students from two universities, one offering online education and the other providing face-to-face instruction. A total of 500 students (250 from each university) will be selected randomly to participate in the study.

3.3 Data Collection

The research will employ the following data collection methods:

• Quantitative: Pre- and post-assessments will be conducted to measure students’ learning outcomes. Data on student demographics and academic performance will also be collected from university records.
• Qualitative: Focus group discussions and individual interviews will be conducted with students to gather their perceptions and experiences regarding online education.

3.4 Data Analysis

Quantitative data will be analyzed using statistical software, employing descriptive statistics, t-tests, and regression analysis. Qualitative data will be transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically to identify recurring patterns and themes.

4. Ethical Considerations

The study will adhere to ethical guidelines, ensuring the privacy and confidentiality of participants. Informed consent will be obtained, and participants will have the right to withdraw from the study at any time.

5. Significance and Expected Outcomes

This research will contribute to the existing literature by providing empirical evidence on the impact of online education on student learning outcomes. The findings will help educational institutions and policymakers make informed decisions about incorporating online learning methods and improving the quality of online education. Moreover, the study will identify potential challenges and opportunities related to online education and offer recommendations for enhancing student engagement and overall learning outcomes.

6. Timeline

The proposed research will be conducted over a period of 12 months, including data collection, analysis, and report writing.

The estimated budget for this research includes expenses related to data collection, software licenses, participant compensation, and research assistance. A detailed budget breakdown will be provided in the final research plan.

8. Conclusion

This research proposal aims to investigate the impact of online education on student learning outcomes through a comparative study with traditional face-to-face instruction. By exploring various dimensions of online education, this research will provide valuable insights into the effectiveness and challenges associated with online learning. The findings will contribute to the ongoing discourse on educational practices and help shape future strategies for maximizing student learning outcomes in online education settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How To Write A Proposal – Step By Step Guide...

Grant Proposal – Example, Template and Guide

How To Write A Business Proposal – Step-by-Step...

Business Proposal – Templates, Examples and Guide

Proposal – Types, Examples, and Writing Guide

How to choose an Appropriate Method for Research?

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

1.4: Research Proposals

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 128984

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Learning Objectives

• Perform biodiversity research through making and translating your observations of the natural world into research questions, hypotheses, and experimental design that are grounded in scientific literature.
• Communicate the research process to your peers in a clear, effective, and engaging manner.

Written Proposal

Writing about research is a primary method scientists use to communicate their work. Thus, this course will involve developing a written research proposal. We will use several drafts to refine the research proposal. The first draft can utilize the template available in Appendix 6. Subsequent drafts should become more refined and start to take the format of a scientific paper. The proposal should include an introductory section providing background on the topic of interest, drawing from several primary research articles. This section also develops the argument for why the research question is worth studying. The research question and hypothesis should also be included in the introduction.

The second section should include the proposed methodology. Describe how the hypothesis will be tested. It should outline the experiments and what will be needed to perform them. Ideas can be supported by referring to previously published research. The third section will address anticipated results. Consider the expected findings and the implications of those findings for the original research question and hypothesis. Consider what it would mean if the results turned out a different way. Finally, be sure to include both in-text citations and a full reference list at the end. The proposal should have good narrative flow and be proofread for proper spelling and grammar. See the rubric in the Appendix 3 for evaluation guidelines.

Oral Presentation

Scientists also frequently share their research findings via presentations, such as at meetings with other scientists. Developing an oral presentation of the research proposal provides an opportunity to practice communicating science to our peers. The presentation should be ~10 minutes and delivered via a slideshow. The presentation should include the same content as the written portion, but the distinction here the audience will be engaged in a different way. The best presentations tell a good story, so think about how to translate the proposal into a story – typically start with background information so the audience members have some understanding of the context. Then use the background information strategically to build up to the identified research gap and the corresponding research question. The question then leads naturally into the hypothesis or hypotheses to be tested. The final part of the presentation will be the experimental plan – how will the hypothesis be tested? Try to envision all possible outcomes from the experiment and how that will support or refute the hypothesis and inform on the interpretation of the results.

There will be opportunities for questions from peers at the end. It is important to try to ask questions at the end of presentations in order to practice giving this kind of feedback. This is a very common way in which scientists provide feedback to each other on their work. Attending departmental seminars or conferences will enable witnessing this first hand. See the rubric in the Appendix 3 for evaluation guidelines.

Proposal Workshop I

Proposing research ideas is a key element of working in the biodiversity science field. Thus this first workshop will be focused on sharing and expanding upon initial ideas for a research proposal. It will take a lab meeting format with a round table discussion where each student has the opportunity to share their research proposal ideas. Peers will then ask follow-up questions to help support idea development. Incidentally, this also serves as an opportunity to practice communicating science to peers. It takes practice to clearly articulate ideas. Following the workshop, begin exploring some literature related to the topic of interest and start putting ideas down on paper – they will not be polished yet, but it will help to develop the initial draft of the research proposal. See the Appendix 6 for a proposal first draft template.

Proposal Workshop II

This workshop will continue to develop the research question, hypothesis, and experimental design. We will discuss developing ideas in pairs with both the course instructor and classmates. We will work to develop ideas into excellent proposal material by digging into the following questions.

Research Question

• What is your research question?
• Is your question clearly stated and focused? If not, how might you tailor it?
• Why are you interested in this question? What makes you curious about it? What have you learned from previous studies that lead you to want to ask this question?

Hypotheses/predictions

• What are your hypotheses/predictions?
• Are they stated clearly? If not, what needs to be adjusted?
• Are they aligned with the question you are asking?
• Why are you interested in this hypothesis?

Experimental Plan

• What is your experimental plan?
• Does the design fit with your hypothesis?
• Are there things that still need to be considered? If so, what are they?

Proposal Workshop III

This workshop is an opportunity to polish. Use this time to solicit final feedback from peers, test out design ideas for the final presentation, or practice delivering the presentation in front of an audience.

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

What are the Sections of a Research Proposal?

Research proposals that are written by graduate students or academic researchers typically follow a similar format consisting of headings and sections that explain the purpose of the research, specify the scope and scale of the study, and argue for its importance in contributing to the scientific literature. Knowing how to write a research proposal checklist  is crucial to getting your dissertation or thesis project accepted.

Although the research proposal sections may vary depending on whether it is a grant,  doctoral dissertation , conference paper, or professional project, there are certainly some sections in common. This article will cover sections you will often see in research proposals, explain their purpose, and provide a sample research proposal template.

What are the sections of a research proposal?

Let’s take a look at each section of a research proposal:

• Overall purpose
• Background literature
• Research question
• Definitions of terms and nomenclature
• Research methodology
• Problems and limitations
• Required resources and budget
• Ethical considerations
• Proposed timetable

What is the purpose of each research proposal section?

The research proposal sections and headings above resemble a fully edited and published academic journal article, which you probably can recognize if you are a new PhD or master’s graduate student who is just starting out reading peer-reviewed academic journal articles. 

However, the purpose of each heading in a research proposal is quite different from that of a final article. 

Purpose : To explain briefly, in a few words, what the research will be about.

What you should do:  Give your research proposal a concise and accurate title. Include the name of your faculty mentor (and his/her academic department).

Note : Title pages for research proposals are generally standardized or specified and provide or summarize basic administrative information‌, such as the university or research institution. Titles should be concise and brief enough to inform the reader of the purpose and nature of the research.

Related Article:  How to choose the best title for your research manuscript

Purpose:  To provide an overview of the study, which you will expand on in detail in later sections of the research proposal.

What you should do:  Provide a brief overview of your project. Include the goals of your research proposal and clearly specify the research questions you want to address. Explain the hypotheses you want to test.

Note : A good summary should emphasize the problems the applicant intends to solve, identify the solution to the problems, and specify the objectives and design‌ ‌of‌ ‌the‌ ‌research. It should also describe the applicant’s qualifications and budget requirements.

Check out a webinar on how to write an effective research introduction

Overall purpose.

Purpose:  To state the overall goal of the work in a clear, concise manner.

What you should do : Summarize your problem for someone who is scientifically knowledgeable but potentially uninformed regarding your specific research topic.

Note : The aim or purpose of a research proposal should be results-oriented as opposed to process-oriented. For example, the result of a research study may be “To determine the enzyme involved in X” while the process is “to perform a protein electrophoresis study on mice expressing Y gene.” There should be at least three objectives per proposal. 

Background Literature Review

Purpose : To demonstrate the relationship between the goals of the proposed study and what has already been established in the relevant field of study.

What you should do : Selectively and critically analyze the literature. Explain other researchers’ work so that your professor or project manager has a clear understanding of how you will address past research and progress the literature.

Note : One of the most effective ways to support your research’s purpose and importance is to address gaps in the literature, controversies in your research field, and current trends in research. This will put into context how your dissertation or study will contribute to general scientific knowledge. Learn  how to write a literature review  before writing this section.

Research Question or Hypothesis

Purpose : To state precisely what the study will investigate or falsify.

What you should do : Clearly distinguish the dependent and independent variables and be certain the reader understands them. Make sure you use your terms consistently. Whenever possible, use the same nomenclature.

Note : A research question presents the relationship between two or more variables in the form of a question, whereas a hypothesis is a declarative statement of the relationship between two or more variables. Knowing  where to put the research question in a science paper  is also crucial to writing a strong Introduction section.

Definition of Terms

Purpose : To define the meanings of the key terms used in the research.

What you should do:  Align your term and nomenclature usage throughout your entire research proposal. Clearly define abbreviations and make sure they are understandable to scientists from other disciplines.

Note : Different scientific fields of study often use different terms for the same thing. Further, there are language consistency issues that should be considered. In organic chemistry, there are international standards for naming compounds, but common names are still regularly used, e.g., acetic acid versus ethanoic acid.

Research Methodology

Purpose:  To break down the steps of your research proposal.

What you should do:   Explain how you will achieve‌ ‌your research goals ‌specified‌ ‌earlier using terms that a general reader can understand. Explain your approach, design, and methods.

Note : Your research proposal should explain the broad scope of your research to other researchers‌ ‌in‌ ‌your‌ ‌field. This section represents the most important part of a research proposal and is therefore ‌the‌ ‌primary‌ ‌concern‌ ‌of‌ ‌reviewers. Knowing  how to explain research methodology for reproducibility  is important to explaining your methodology to dissertation or thesis advisors and committees. 

Problems and Limitations

Purpose:  To demonstrate awareness of any study limitations, potential problems, and barriers to answering the research question, and how to deal with them

What you should do:  Thoroughly head off any criticisms before they can torpedo your research proposal. Explain that any limitations or potential conflicts will only delay your research or alter/narrow its scope; they will not fundamentally degrade the importance of your research.

Note : Any research proposal or scientific study will have limitations in its scope and execution. Sometimes it may be a key procedure that is problematic or a material you cannot readily obtain. Discussing limitations is key to demonstrating you are an adept and experienced researcher worth approving.

Related Article:  How to present study limitations and alternatives

Required resources and budget.

Purpose:  To list what resources your research may require and what costs and timelines may affect your completion.

What you should do:  Think as a businessperson. Breakdown what resources are available at your institution or university as well as the required resources you still need. These can be materials, machinery, lab equipment, and computers. Resources can also be human: expertise to perform a procedure and other kinds of collaboration. 

Note : This section underscores why your funding institution or academic committee should fund your university, laboratory team, or yourself for this particular research. 

Ethical Considerations

Purpose:  To state how participants will be advised of

the overall nature and purpose of the study and how informed consent will

be obtained.

What you should do:  Consult with your academic institution, PhD advisor, and laboratory colleagues. Do not gloss over this part since it has legal consequences.

Note : Often, these types of legal disclaimers are well established and readily available in template format from your research institution or university. Just obtain the proper clearance and permission and have the legal authority at your institution check it over.

Read about how  conflicts of interest  should be disclosed in research proposals

Proposed timeline.

Purpose:  To give a projected timeline for planning, completing, verifying, and reporting your research.

What you should do:  Approach this part with a project management style. In an organized fashion, set out a specific timeline for how long each part of your research will take. Identify bottlenecks and specify them.

Note:  Savvy time management is something that comes with lots of research experience. Ask your professor or colleagues if you have questions about how long certain procedures will take.

Purpose:  To provide detailed bibliographic and reference citations.

What you should do:  Use an online citation machine ( APA citation machine , MLA citation machine , Chicago citation machine , Vancouver citation machine ) that can instantly organize your references in any format. Make sure you do this as you go, not saving it for the last when you have lost track.

Note:  The bibliographic format used varies according to the research discipline. Consistency is the main consideration; whichever style is chosen should be followed carefully throughout the entire paper. 

Related Article:  How many references to include in a research proposal?

Purpose : To include any extra materials or information.

What you should do:  Add letters of endorsement or collaboration and reprints of relevant articles if they are not available electronically. In addition to the above, you may want to include data tables, surveys, questionnaires, data collection procedures, clinical protocols, and informed consent documents.

Notes : Many writers tend to attach supporting documents to support their research proposal. But remember, more is not always better. Be sure to only include information that strengthens your case, not simply make it longer.

Note : Savvy time management is something that comes with lots of research experience. Ask your professor or colleagues if you have questions about how long certain procedures will take.

The Bottom Line

Whether your research is academic (PhD or master’s graduate student) or professional (competing for government or private funding), how you organize your research proposal sections is one of the first things evaluators will notice. Many academic reviewers will simply scan and check for key section headings. If any headings are missing or strangely written, they may instantly give the reviewer a bad impression of your proposal. 

One tip before submitting or even writing your research proposal is to search for the best journal to publish your research in and follow the guidelines in the Guide for Authors section, as well as read as many articles from that journal as possible to gain an understanding of the appropriate style and formatting.

Preparing Your Research Proposal for Publication

So make sure to use some of our resources, such as our  FREE APA citation generator  and  research proposal checklist , or contact us to ask about  professional proofreading services , including academic editing and manuscript editing for academic documents.

And check our guide on the  editing process  to learn more about how language editing for manuscripts can enhance your writing and increase your chances of publication.

Research Proposal Meeting

The Research Proposal Meeting is held about 1.5 to 2 years following your admission into the Ph.D. programme. It is usually conducted after you pass your comprehensive exam. You will have to document your your proposal in about 10 pages and then make a presentation for exactly 20 minutes. In this document you should highlight the following:

• Introduce your work
• Provide a comprehensive literature survey so that you can identify gaps in the research.
• Highlight and discuss this gap.
• Frame objectives with an aim to fill the gap you identified.
• Frame methods and experiments to do what it takes to address the objectives
• Show preliminary results that shows that your methods show promise of leading to adressing the gaps in the literature.
• Discuss, what you have done so far and what is remaining.
• Provide a time-line through a gantt chart describing milestones such as, first seminar, first paper, conference, second paper, etc.

To write your proposal use the template. This folder contains two .tex files. One of them is the source code for the actual RPM document. The other one will generate a standalone gantt chart. What you need to modify in the .tex files is clearly indicated.

Got any suggestions?

We want to hear from you! Send us a message and help improve Slidesgo

Top searches

Trending searches

15 templates

49 templates

11 templates

39 templates

150 templates

ottoman empire

21 templates

Research Proposal Meeting

It seems that you like this template, research proposal meeting presentation, free google slides theme and powerpoint template.

Download the "Research Proposal Meeting" presentation for PowerPoint or Google Slides. Gone are the days of dreary, unproductive meetings. Check out this sophisticated solution that offers you an innovative approach to planning and implementing meetings! Detailed yet simplified, this template ensures everyone is on the same page, contributing to a productive and efficient meeting. Enhancing understanding and leaving room for innovative ideas, this tool has everything you need for an effective meeting of focused discussions and beneficial outcomes.

Features of this template

• 100% editable and easy to modify
• Different slides to impress your audience
• Contains easy-to-edit graphics such as graphs, maps, tables, timelines and mockups
• Includes 500+ icons and Flaticon’s extension for customizing your slides
• Designed to be used in Google Slides and Microsoft PowerPoint
• Includes information about fonts, colors, and credits of the resources used

How can I use the template?

Am I free to use the templates?

How to attribute?

Attribution required If you are a free user, you must attribute Slidesgo by keeping the slide where the credits appear. How to attribute?

Related posts on our blog.

How to Add, Duplicate, Move, Delete or Hide Slides in Google Slides

How to Change Layouts in PowerPoint

How to Change the Slide Size in Google Slides

Related presentations.

Premium template

Unlock this template and gain unlimited access

Register for free and start editing online

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

• Student information
• Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

At the Oct. 8 meeting of the Faculty Senate, Provost Persis Drell announced the formation of a university task force charged with recommending a new framework for the study of race and the impacts of race on society at Stanford, with a report due on May 1, 2021.

The Faculty Senate and Provost Persis Drell announced Thursday a task force charged with recommending a new framework for the study of race and the impacts of race on society at Stanford. The senate also approved a proposal urging instructors to support civic engagement on Election Day. (Image credit: Andrew Brodhead)

The senate also heard a report on a school focused on sustainability and climate change presented by Kathryn “Kam” Moler, vice provost and dean of research , and Stephan Graham, dean of the School of Earth, Energy and Environmental Sciences .

In addition, Sarah Church, vice provost for undergraduate education, announced that eight faculty members have been named or reappointed Bass University Fellows for five-year terms starting in the 2020-21 academic year in recognition of their exceptional contributions to undergraduate education. See full story here .

The senate also approved a proposal from the Associated Students of Stanford University (ASSU) urging instructors to support civic engagement on Election Day through such measures as canceling classes, recording lectures for later viewing and adjusting assignments to the extent possible.

Provost announces task force

During the meeting, Drell announced the formation, jointly with Debra Satz, dean of the School of Humanities and Sciences, of the Framework Task Force to Recommend New Infrastructure for the Study of Race and the Impact of Race on Society at Stanford.

“American society has fallen short of its promise of equal consideration and standing for all of its citizens,” Drell said at the beginning of her presentation. “Unsettling racial and ethnic disparities persist. We believe that Stanford has a dual responsibility. First, to produce knowledge and understanding that addresses the persistence of racial inequality, and secondly to educate our students for participation in a diverse and multicultural world.”

Through the IDEAL (Inclusion, Diversity, Equity and Access in a Learning Environment) initiative, and the racial justice initiatives announced this summer , Stanford hopes to increase both institutional support and the number of scholars focused on racial disparities in America.

She said Stanford has many programs and institutes devoted to the study of race and society, including the Program in African and African American Studies , the Center for African Studies , the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity  and the Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute .

“But as we look to the future, it’s very important to ask if Stanford currently has the institutional organization to really optimize our strengths, especially in this time of growing national concern about racial justice and inequality,” she said.

“Are we as an institution organized so that these resources have both a generative influence on each other and maximum effect on research that feeds into public policy, new scholarship and teaching – and indeed contributes to our country’s civic life?”

Drell said the new task force will explore what infrastructure would accomplish those goals, and what infrastructure would support Stanford achieving leadership in those arenas.

The task force is charged with exploring how Stanford might better coordinate and support its current strengths in the study of race and the impact of race on society, and build on them to create a bigger research footprint, a stronger teaching program and a more robust community outreach. The task force will address the following:

• Consider what university structures would best facilitate the research, teaching and outreach ambitions. Articulate specific university goals in this area, and develop the university organization and structures best suited to achieving those goals.
• Create a list of possible structures, with the benefits and trade-offs of each. Look at what others have done; what has worked well and what has not – at Stanford and at other universities.
• In laying out the various organizational options, consider how multiple units involved in a larger structure would relate to one another, and how those units would relate to existing departments in the School of Humanities and Sciences , as well as other schools and institutes across campus.
• Consider what structures could be established today without significant resources, and describe possible ways to build or expand upon the new structure with increased resources, with the ultimate goal of inspiring philanthropists.
• Consider the advantages and possible drawbacks of transforming the Program in African and African American Studies and how that would fit into the overall framework that the task force is proposing.

Drell asked the task force to consult broadly and deeply, soliciting input from all stakeholders, especially the many student groups who have expressed deep interest in this topic. The 18-member task force will be chaired by Claude Steele , the Lucie Stern Professor in the Social Sciences, Emeritus, and Matthew Snipp , vice provost for faculty diversity and engagement and the Burnet C. and Mildred Finley Wohlford Professor in the School of Humanities and Sciences.

The announcement of the new faculty task force, including the membership of the group, is posted on the provost’s website here , along with a link to the  charge document .

Climate and sustainability

In their presentation, Moler and Graham updated the senators on the proposed school focused on climate and sustainability that was announced last May, with the two of them charged with leading the project.

“One of the things that Steve Graham and I are really hoping to get from your input today is what needs to be part of the open-ended, inclusive, facilitated design process for the school,” Moler said. “It’s important to the design process for all those affected to have ample opportunity to participate,” she added.

In describing the rationale for choosing a school rather than a college for an institution focused on sustainability and climate, Moler there are certain kinds of academic superpowers given to schools and certain kinds given to institutes. She said a community engaged in sustainability research and education needs both.

She said institutes foster interdisciplinary intellectual communities and engage internal and external stakeholders, while a school admits students, hires and promotes faculty, builds and owns curricula and grants degrees.

Moler said the School of Medicine was a particularly good example of an institution that combines the superpowers of institutes and of a school.

“The School of Medicine is also a really good example because it’s focused on human health, just like you could argue that the sustainability school would be focused on planetary health or the health of the human planetary system. But it doesn’t just do applied work, it also does quite a bit of the basic foundational work that creates the knowledge that creates truly transformational applications and solutions.”

Graham said a school focused on climate and sustainability is “truly a bold step” for Stanford, but noted that the school doesn’t need to be created from scratch.

“When we think about the School of Earth, Energy and Environmental Sciences (SE3) in relation to the school we’re starting to build, it makes sense to take advantage of a foundation that has already been laid,” he said.

“SE3 has some incredible attributes which we want to keep with the practice and study of sustainability permeating everything it does,” Graham said. “But as presently constituted, SE3 alone is insufficient to realize Stanford’s vision for sustainability.”

Graham and Moler are now focused on the task of building that new structure on the foundation that already exists. Using a construction analogy, they talked about identifying elements they want to preserve, deciding what needs to be added and debating the best floor plan that allows the free flow of ideas between all the intellectual rooms. He said they also want to make sure that there are many points of entry for our neighbors in other schools.

“Together, we have the opportunity to create a school for the 21st century that is expansive and transformative as the challenges it seeks to understand and to address,” Graham said.

Moler said the school focused on climate and sustainability has been proposed to include departments, degree programs, cross-cutting challenge areas, a residential educational neighborhood, an academic district and external partnerships.

She said the Blueprint Advisory Committee – which she created with Graham – will specify options for the initial configuration of the elements with sufficient detail – and advice on pros and cons – for decision-makers to act. They anticipate opportunities for community input after the initial report from the advisory committee.

“We plan to catalyze a rapid change to embrace traditional and emerging disciplines to maximize Stanford’s scholarship and impact on planetary sustainability,” she said. “We want to optimize and attract more resources to campus to increase our impact and deepen our scholarship. We want to make things better for everyone.”

For more information on Moler and Graham’s plans and activities, read the Stanford Report story here .

ASSU proposal approved

Following a presentation by two Stanford students, the senate approved an ASSU proposal urging instructors “to support civic engagement and reflection” on Election Day through a variety of measures, such as canceling classes on Election Day; recording lectures given on Election Day for later viewing; and, to the extent possible, adjusting assignments so as to accommodate this civic engagement.

The proposal approved by the senate also instructs senate committees to work with the University Registrar to make a recommendation to the Faculty Senate to make the dates of all national elections academic holidays.

The proposal was presented by Jonathan Lipman, a member of the Undergraduate Senate of the ASSU , and Sean Casey, co-director of Stanford Votes , a nonpartisan, university-wide, student-run organization dedicated to increasing voter turnout among Stanford students.

In their presentation, Lipman and Casey said reducing the demands on student time on Election Day would facilitate voting; increase civic awareness, deliberation, reflection, engagement and activities; and signal the value Stanford places on civic participation.

Also at the meeting, Tessier-Lavigne drew the senate’s attention to news announced Oct. 7: Stanford will rename campus features named after David Starr Jordan and take actions to provide the public with a more complete view of his complex history, which includes not only his seminal leadership as the university’s founding president but also his parallel leadership in promoting eugenics. Read the Stanford Report story here .

The minutes of the senate meeting, including the Q&A that followed presentations, will be available on the Faculty Senate website . The next senate meeting will be held Oct. 22.

Report on the 4th Board Meeting of the International Human Phenome Consortium

• Brief Communication
• Published: 26 May 2024

Cite this article

• Mei Tian   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1587-2114 1 , 2 ,
• Han Liu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9164-2783 1 , 2 ,
• Shiwen Peng 1 ,
• Zhong Yang 2 , 3 ,
• Weishuo Tao 1 ,
• Huiting Che 1 ,
• Xuanxuan Gao 1 ,
• Li Jin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9201-2321 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 &

the Secretariat of International Human Phenome Consortium

Explore all metrics

Phenome has become a consensus as the next innovation source of biomedicine. As the global network dedicated to large-scale research efforts on human phenome and promoting the Human Phenome Project, the Board of International Human Phenome Consortium (IHPC) plays an essential role to guide the strategy and implementation of international human phenome project and to ensure coordination across the IHPC members. The 4th International Human Phenome Consortium Board Meeting was held virtually on December 13, 2022. During the meeting, the keynote speeches highlighted the latest advancements in phenomics. The construction and discoveries of the first human phenome Atlas had shown promising potential in limb development, disease prevention, and early diagnosis. Combining genome-phenome sequencing, analysis, and wellness coaching enhanced individual wellness. Phenomics trajectories from healthy to diseased states and recovery provided insight into the metabolic risk spaces associated with COVID-19. Board members from Ghana, Malaysia, India, and Russia presented their own plans and research progress. The IHPC Board deliberated on the “Framework Guidelines for Human Phenome-related Measurements” and “Proposal of the PhenoBank Initiative”. The meeting also featured a presentation of the annual report of the IHPC Journal Phenomics . Laboratory coordination, interoperable databases, and standardized platforms were productively discussed, which would enable concerted research efforts of the Human Phenome Project.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Jin L (2022) Welcome to the Phenomics Journal. Phenomics 1(1):1–2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43657-022-00059-w

Article   Google Scholar  

Li J, Glover JD, Zhang H et al (2022) Limb development genes underlie variation in human fingerprint patterns. Cell 185(1):95–112.e18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.12.008

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Price ND, Magis AT, Earls JC et al (2017) A wellness study of 108 individuals using personal, dense, dynamic data clouds. Nat Biotechnol 35(8):747–756. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3870

Ruffieux H, Hanson AL, Lodge S et al (2023) A patient-centric modeling framework captures recovery from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nat Immunol 24(2):349–358. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-022-01380-2

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all speakers, delegates, and hosts: Drs. Mei Tian, Jeremy Nicholson, Leroy Hood, Li Jin, Peter Atadja, Mitali Mukerji, Hoh Boon-Peng, Marina Sekacheva, Jingchun Luo, Yuan Qi, and Chen Ding. We acknowledge the support of IHPC board members.

Shanghai Soft Science Research Project (21692101800, 21692102400, 22692102000), Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology International Partnership Project (20490780100).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Human Phenome Institute, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200438, China

Mei Tian, Han Liu, Shiwen Peng, Weishuo Tao, Huiting Che, Xuanxuan Gao & Li Jin

International Human Phenome Institutes (Shanghai), Shanghai, 200433, China

Mei Tian, Han Liu, Zhong Yang & Li Jin

School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200438, China

Zhong Yang & Li Jin

Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

LJ (Co-founder of the IHPC) and MT (Secretary General of the IHPC) oversaw this project. HL and SP wrote the manuscript. ZY, WT, HC, and XG contributed to the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Mei Tian or Li Jin .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interests.

Li Jin and Mei Tian is the Editorial Board Member of Phenomics, and they were not involved in reviewing this paper.

Ethics Approval

Consent to participate, rights and permissions.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Tian, M., Liu, H., Peng, S. et al. Report on the 4th Board Meeting of the International Human Phenome Consortium. Phenomics (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43657-023-00139-5

Download citation

Received : 11 September 2023

Revised : 16 October 2023

Accepted : 23 October 2023

Published : 26 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43657-023-00139-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Human Phenomics
• Human Phenome
• International Human Phenome Consortium (IHPC)
• Board Meeting
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Kohl's shareholders reject proposal from anti-'woke' activist investor

A proposal from an anti-'woke' activist investor was soundly defeated by Kohl's Corp. shareholders at the retailer's annual meeting on Wednesday.

Less than 6% of votes cast by Kohl's shareholders were in favor of a proposal from the National Center for Public Policy Research to establish a committee to review the company's charitable giving and "the effect of those actions on the company's financial sustainability."

More: Anti-'woke' activist investor group targets Kohl's with proposal to shareholders

Get daily updates on the Packers during the season.

The voting shareholders represent roughly 81% of the outstanding shares of Kohl's Corp. For additional context, more shareholders voted against the executive compensation, the company's recommendation for an independent auditing firm and the long-term compensation plan.

The virtual meeting lasted less than 10 minutes, and there was no debate on topics like executive compensation or the proposal.

The only item on the agenda that had more support than the opposition of the proposal was the election of Kohl's Board of Directors, which received on average 96% of the vote.

The National Center for Public Policy Research has made roughly 60 similar proposals with companies around the country, but those proposals have not found much support among shareholders.

Stefan Padfield, deputy director for the Free Enterprise Project at the National Center for Public Policy Research, made a pitch to shareholders Wednesday before the vote was closed encouraging them to vote in favor of the proposal.

In the leadup to the shareholder meeting, Kohl's board recommended shareholder vote against the proposal, saying the proposal is “unnecessary, duplicative, and not an effective use of company resources."

In the proxy proposal leading up to the shareholder meeting, the National Center for Public Policy Research criticized a $100,000 contribution by Kohl's to The Trevor Project, a suicide prevention and crisis intervention organizations that focuses primarily on LGBTQ+ youth, and provides information and a 24/7 hotline for those who are in need of help.

More: Fact Check: Has Kohl’s Corp. donated to Black Lives Matter? Short answer: no

In his argument to shareholders, Padfield said The Trevor Project "openly pushes, what is euphemistically referred to as 'gender affirming care,' but which actually includes socially, medically and legally attempting to transition youth from male to female and female to male by such means as, for example, puberty blockers."

"This donation is but one example of the risks Kohl's embraces by its radical partnerships and donations," Padfield said. "In its opposition to our proposal, Kohl's states that it has everything under control by way of multiple existing committees ... but the status quo is how we got here, so something needs to change."

The National Center for Public Policy Research also singled out Kohl's' contributions to minority and LGBTQ anti-suicide organizations.

The Washington, D.C.-based group criticizes Kohl’s Diversity and Inclusion Task Force, particularly what it called a $1 million contribution “to the BLM movement and related causes since 2020.” 

But in actuality, the company gave to five local nonprofit organizations and not to Black Lives Matter .

Hours before the vote, Padfield provided additional comment to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, anticipating the vote would not go the way for the National Center for Public Policy Research.

"There is a reckoning coming for corporations that have embraced radical leftism, as well as the institutional shareholders and proxy advisers who are aligned with them and currently dominate the shareholder voting ecosystem," Padfield said.

More: Here's what to know about the anti-'woke' proposal before the Kohl's shareholder meeting

Bradley Foundation is a funder of National Center for Public Policy Research

The National Center for Public Policy Research started in 1981. The Free Enterprise Project launched in 2007 is described as the “original and premier opponent of the woke takeover of American corporate life and defender of true capitalism.” 

It's website, the organization says it receives 350,000 donations a year from 60,000 active donors.  

In 2021 the group received nearly $13.1 million in donations and grants, and in 2022 it received more than $12.2 million, according to filings with the Internal Revenue Service.  

Because the National Center for Public Policy Research is a nonprofit, the donors are anonymous.  However organizations that donate to the organization do report their contributions. 

For example, the conservative and Milwaukee-based Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation started donating to the organization in  2019 when it gave $220,000  to support the Free Enterprise Project, according to IRS filings. 

In 2020 and 2021, the Bradley Foundation gave  $250,000  and  $500,000 , respectively, to the organization.  In 2022, the Bradley Foundation gave  $1 million , and in 2023  donated $250,000.

This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Kohl's shareholders reject proposal from anti-'woke' activist investor

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

• Government reform
• Civil service reform
• Election guidance for civil servants
• Cabinet Office
• Civil Service

General election guidance 2024: guidance for civil servants (HTML)

Updated 23 May 2024

© Crown copyright 2024

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected] .

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/election-guidance-for-civil-servants/general-election-guidance-2024-guidance-for-civil-servants-html

1. General elections have a number of implications for the work of departments and civil servants. These arise from the special character of government business during an election campaign, and from the need to maintain, and be seen to maintain, the impartiality of the Civil Service, and to avoid any criticism of an inappropriate use of official resources. This guidance takes effect from 00:01 on 25 May 2024 at which point the ‘election period’ begins. The Prime Minister will write separately to Ministers advising them of the need to adhere to this guidance and to uphold the impartiality of the Civil Service. 

2. This guidance applies to all UK civil servants, and the board members and staff of Non-Departmental Public Bodies (NDPBs) and other arms’ length bodies.  

General Principles 

3. During the election period, the Government retains its responsibility to govern, and Ministers remain in charge of their departments. Essential business (which includes routine business necessary to ensure the continued smooth functioning of government and public services) must be allowed to continue. However, it is customary for Ministers to observe discretion in initiating any new action of a continuing or long term character. Decisions on matters of policy on which a new government might be expected to want the opportunity to take a different view from the present government should be postponed until after the election, provided that such postponement would not be detrimental to the national interest or wasteful of public money.   

4. Advice on handling such issues is set out in this guidance. This guidance will not cover every eventuality, but the principles should be applied to the particular circumstances.  

5. The principles underlying the conduct of civil servants in a general election are an extension of those that apply at all times, as set out in the Civil Service Code

• The basic principle for civil servants is not to undertake any activity that could call into question their political impartiality or that could give rise to criticism that public resources are being used for party political purposes. This principle applies to all staff working in departments.  
• Departmental and NDPB activity should not be seen to compete with the election campaign for public attention. The principles and conventions set out in this guidance also apply to public bodies.  
• It is also a requirement of the Ministerial Code that Ministers must not use government resources for party political purposes and must uphold the political impartiality of the Civil Service.  

Election queries 

6. For any detailed queries on this guidance, or other questions, officials should in the first instance seek guidance from their line management chain, and, where necessary, escalate to their Permanent Secretary who may consult the Cabinet Secretary, or the Propriety and Ethics Team in the Cabinet Office. 

7. The Propriety and Ethics Team handle general queries relating to conduct during the election period, provide advice on the handling of enquiries and any necessary co-ordination where enquiries raise issues that affect a number of departments (through their Permanent Secretary). 

8. In dealing with queries, the Propriety and Ethics Team will function most effectively if it is in touch with relevant developments in departments. 

Departments should therefore: 

• draw to their attention, for advice or information, any approach or exchange that raises issues that are likely to be of interest to other departments; and 
• seek advice before a Minister makes a significant Ministerial statement during the election period. 

Section A: Enquiries, Briefing, Requests for Information and attending events 

1. This note gives guidance on: 

• the handling by departments and agencies of requests for information and other enquiries during a general election campaign; 
• briefing of Ministers during the election period;  
• the handling of constituency letters received from Members of Parliament before dissolution, and of similar letters from parliamentary candidates during the campaign; and 
• the handling of FOI requests. 

2. At a general election, the government of the day is expected to defend its policies to the electorate. By convention, the governing party is entitled to check with departments that statements made on its behalf are factually correct and consistent with government policy. As at all times, however, government departments and their staff must not engage in, or appear to engage in, party politics or be used for party ends. They should provide consistent factual information on request to candidates of all parties, as well as to organisations and members of the public, and should in all instances avoid becoming involved or appearing to become involved, in a partisan way, in election issues. 

Requests for Factual Information 

3. Departments and agencies should provide any parliamentary candidate, organisation or member of the public with information in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Local and regional offices should deal similarly with straightforward enquiries, referring doubtful cases through their line management chain and, where necessary to their Permanent Secretary for decision. 

4. Other requests for information will range from enquiries about existing government policy that are essentially factual in nature, to requests for justification and comment on existing government policy. All requests for information held by departments must be dealt with in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The handling of press enquiries is covered in Section I.  

5. Where the enquiry concerns the day-to-day management of a non-ministerial department or executive agency and the chief executive would normally reply, he or she should do so in the usual way, taking special care to avoid becoming involved in any matters of political controversy. 

6. Enquiries concerning policies newly announced in a party manifesto or for a comparison of the policies of different parties are for the political party concerned. Civil servants should not provide any assistance on these matters. See also paragraph 14.  

7. Officials should draft replies, whether for official or Ministerial signature, with particular care to avoid party political controversy, especially criticism of the policies of other parties. Ministers may decide to amend draft replies to include a party political context. Where this is the case, Ministers should be advised to issue the letter on party notepaper. The guiding principle is whether the use of departmental resources, including headed paper, would be a proper use of public funds for governmental as opposed to party political purposes, and could be defended as such. 

Speed of Response 

8. The circumstances of a general election demand the greatest speed in dealing with enquiries. In particular, the aim should be to answer enquiries from parliamentary candidates or from any of the political parties’ headquarters within 24 hours. All candidates should be treated equally. 

9. Where a request will take longer to deal with, the requester should be advised of this as he/she may wish to submit a refined request. 

FOI requests 

10. Requests that would normally be covered by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) must be handled in accordance with the requirements of the Act and the deadlines set therein. Where the application of the public interest balance requires more time, that is permitted under the Act but there is no general power to defer a decision.   

11. Where a request needs to be considered under FOIA it will not normally be possible to get back to the parliamentary candidate, or others, within 24 hours and he or she should be advised of this as they may wish to submit a request more in line with paragraph 8 above. 

Role of Ministers in FOIA decisions 

12. Ministers have a number of statutory functions in relation to requests for information. They are the qualified person for the purpose of using section 36 of the FOI Act for their departments. During the general election period, Ministers will be expected to carry out these functions.  

13. Where there is any doubt, requests should be referred to the FOI Policy team in the Cabinet Office. 

Briefing and Support for Ministers 

14. Ministers continue to be in charge of departments. It is reasonable for departments to continue to provide support for any necessary governmental functions, and receive any policy advice or factual briefing necessary to resolve issues that cannot be deferred until after the election. 

15. Departments can check statements for factual accuracy and consistency with established government policy. Officials should not, however, be asked to devise new arguments or cost policies for use in the election campaign. Departments should not undertake costings or analysis of Opposition policies during the election period.  

Officials attending public or stakeholder events 

16. Officials should decline invitations to events where they may be asked to respond on questions about future government policy or on matters of public controversy. 

Constituency Correspondence 

17. During the election period, replies to constituency letters received from Members of Parliament before the dissolution, or to similar letters from parliamentary candidates, should take into account the fact that if they become public knowledge they will do so in the more politically-charged atmosphere of an election and are more likely to become the subject of political comment. Outstanding correspondence should be cleared quickly. Letters may be sent to former MPs at the House of Commons after dissolution, to be picked up or forwarded. Departments and agencies whose staff routinely deal directly with MPs’ enquiries should ensure that their regional and local offices get early guidance on dealing with questions from parliamentary candidates. Such guidance should reflect the following points: 

a. Once Parliament is dissolved, a Member of Parliament’s constitutional right to represent his or her constituents’ grievances to government disappears, and all candidates for the election are on an equal footing. This doctrine should be applied in a reasonable way. In general, replies should be sent by Ministers to constituency letters that were written by MPs before dissolution. Where there is a pressing need for Ministers to reply to letters on constituency matters written after the dissolution by former Members, this should be handled in a way that avoids any preferential treatment or the appearance of preferential treatment between letters from the governing party and those from other candidates. It will normally be appropriate to send a Private Secretary reply to letters on constituency matters from prospective parliamentary candidates who were not Members before the dissolution. 

b. The main consideration must be to ensure that the citizen’s interests are not prejudiced. But it is possible that a personal case may become politically controversial during the election period. Departments should therefore make particular efforts to ensure, so far as possible, that letters are factual, straightforward and give no room for misrepresentation. 

c. Replies to constituency correspondence to be sent after polling day should, where there has been a change of MP, normally be sent direct to the constituent concerned. It should be left to the constituent to decide whether or not to copy the letter to any new MP. Where there is no change in MP, correspondence should be returned to the MP in the normal way.

Section B: Special Advisers 

1. Special Advisers must agree with the Cabinet Office the termination of their contracts  on or before 30 May (except for a small number of Special Advisers who may remain in post, where the express agreement of their appointing Minister and the Prime Minister to continue in post has been given).     

2. An exception to this is where a Special Adviser has been publicly identified as a candidate or prospective candidate for election to the UK Parliament, in which case they must instead resign at the start of the short campaign period ahead of the election. 

3. Special Advisers who leave government for any reason will no longer have preferential access to papers and officials. Any request for advice from a former Special Adviser will be treated in the same way as requests from other members of the public.  

4. On leaving government, Special Advisers should return all departmental property e.g. mobile phones, remote access and other IT equipment. Special Advisers may leave a voicemail message or out of office reply on departmental IT with forwarding contact details.  

5. Special Advisers receive severance pay when their appointment is terminated, but not where they resign. Severance pay for Special Advisers is taxable as normal income and will be paid as a lump sum. The amount an individual is entitled to will be determined by their length of service as set out in the Model Contract for Special Advisers. Special Advisers are required to agree that if they are reappointed, they will repay any amount above that which they would have been paid in salary had they remained in post. Any excess severance will be reclaimed automatically through payroll on reappointment.  

6. If the Prime Minister agrees exceptionally that a Special Adviser should remain in post during the election period, their appointment will be automatically terminated the day after polling day. In those cases, Special Advisers may continue to give advice on government business to their Ministers as before. They must continue to adhere to the requirements of the Code of Conduct for Special Advisers and may not take any public part in the campaign. Section A is also relevant in relation to the commissioning of briefing. 

7. Different arrangements can be made for Special Advisers on, or about to begin, maternity leave when a UK general election is called. These arrangements are set out in the Maternity Policy for Special Advisers, and Special Adviser HR are best placed to advise on specific circumstances.

8. If there is no change of government following the election, a Special Adviser may be reappointed. The Prime Minister’s approval will be required before any commitments are made, and a new contract issued, including for any advisers who have stayed in post.

Section C: Contacts with the Opposition Party 

1. The Prime Minister has authorised pre-election contact between the main opposition parties and Permanent Secretaries from 11 January 2024. These contacts are strictly confidential and are designed to allow Opposition spokespeople to inform themselves of factual questions of departmental organisation and to inform civil servants of any organisational or policy changes likely in the event of a change of government.  

2. Separate guidance on handling such contacts is set out in the Cabinet Manual.

Section D: Contact with Select Committees 

1. House of Commons Select Committees set up by Standing Order continue in existence, technically, until that Standing Order is amended or rescinded. In practice, when Parliament is dissolved pending a general election, membership of committees lapses and work on their inquiries ceases.  

2. House of Lords Select Committees are not set up by Standing Orders and technically cease to exist at the end of each session. 

3. The point of contact for departments continues to be the Committee Clerk who remains in post to process the basic administrative work of the committee (and prepare for the re-establishment of the Committee in the next Parliament).  

4. Departments should continue to work, on a contingency basis, on any outstanding evidence requested by the outgoing committee and on any outstanding government responses to committee reports. It will be for any newly-appointed Ministers to approve the content of any response. It will be for the newly-appointed committee to decide whether to continue with its predecessor committee’s inquiries and for the incoming administration to review the terms of draft responses before submitting to the newly appointed committee. 

5. It is for the newly-appointed committee to decide whether to publish government responses to its predecessor reports. There may be some delay before the committee is reconstituted, and an incoming government may well wish to publish such responses itself by means of a Command Paper. In this event, the department should consult the Clerk of the Committee before publication of the report response.

Section E: Political Activities of Civil Servants 

1. Permanent Secretaries will wish to remind staff of the general rules governing national political activities. These are set out in the Civil Service Management Code and departmental staff handbooks. 

2. For this purpose, the Civil Service is divided into three groups: 

a. the “politically free” – industrial and non-office grades; 

b. the “politically restricted” – members of the Senior Civil Service, civil servants in Grades 6 and 7 (or equivalent) and members of the Fast Stream Development Programme; and

c. civil servants outside the “politically free” and “politically restricted” groups  

3. Civil servants on secondment to outside organisations (or who are on any form of paid or unpaid leave) remain civil servants and the rules relating to political activity continue to apply to them. Departments should seek to contact individuals on secondment outside the civil service to remind them of this. Individuals seconded into the Civil Service are also covered by these rules for the duration of their appointment. 

Civil Servants Standing for Parliament  

4. All civil servants are disqualified from election to Parliament (House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975) and must resign from the Civil Service before standing for election. Individuals must resign from the Civil Service on their formal adoption as a prospective parliamentary candidate, and must complete their last day of service before their adoption papers are completed. If the adoption process does not reasonably allow for the individual to give full notice, departments and agencies may at their discretion pay an amount equivalent to the period of notice that would normally be given. 

Other Political Activity 

5. “Politically restricted” civil servants are prohibited from any participation in national political activities.  

6. All other civil servants may engage in national political activities with the permission of the department, which may be subject to certain conditions.  

7. Where, on a case by case basis, permission is given by departments, civil servants must still act in accordance with the requirements of the Civil Service Code, including ensuring that they meet the Code’s values and standards of behaviour about impartiality and political impartiality. Notwithstanding any permission to engage in national political activities, they must ensure that their actions (and the perception of those actions) are compatible with the requirements to: 

• serve the government, whatever its political persuasion, to the best of their ability in a way which maintains political impartiality and is in line with the requirements of the Code, no matter what their own political beliefs are; and 
• act in a way which deserves and retains the confidence of ministers, while at the same time ensuring that they will be able to establish the same relationship with those whom they may be required to serve in some future government. 

Reinstatement 

8. Departments and agencies must reinstate former civil servants who have resigned from “politically free” posts to stand for election and whose candidature has proved unsuccessful, provided they apply within a week of declaration day.  

9. Departments and agencies have discretion to reinstate all other former civil servants who have resigned to stand for election and whose candidature has proved unsuccessful. Former civil servants in this category seeking reinstatement should apply within a week of declaration day if they are not elected. Departments are encouraged to consider all applications sympathetically and on their merits. For some individuals, it may not be possible to post them back to their former area of employment because, for instance, of the sensitivity of their work and/or because their previous job is no longer vacant. In these cases, every effort should be made to post these staff to other areas rather than reject their applications.

Section F: Cabinet and Official Documents 

1. In order to enable Ministers to fulfil their continuing responsibilities as members of the Government during the election period, departments should retain the Cabinet documents issued to them. Cabinet documents refers to all papers, minutes and supplementary materials relating to Cabinet and its committees. This is applicable to meetings of and correspondence to Cabinet and its committees. 

2. If there is no change of government after the election, Ministers who leave office or who move to another Ministerial position must surrender any Cabinet or Cabinet committee papers or minutes (including electronic copies) and they should be retained in the department in line with guidance issued by the Cabinet Office.  Ministers who leave office or move to another Ministerial position should also not remove or destroy papers that are the responsibility of their former department: that is, those papers that are not personal, party or constituency papers. 

3. If a new government is formed, all Cabinet and Cabinet committee documents issued to Ministers should be destroyed. Clearly no instructions can be given to this effect until the result of the election is known, but Permanent Secretaries may wish to alert the relevant Private Secretaries.  

4. The conventions regarding the access by Ministers and Special Advisers to papers of a previous Administration are explained in more detail in the Cabinet Manual. Further guidance to departments will be issued by the Cabinet Office once the outcome of the election is known.  

5. More detailed guidance on managing records in the event of a change of administration will be held by your Departmental Records Officer. The Head of Public Records and Archives in the Cabinet Office can also provide further advice and written guidance can be found here: 

Guidance management of private office information and records

Section G: Government Decisions 

1. During an election campaign the Government retains its responsibility to govern and Ministers remain in charge of their departments. Essential business (including routine business necessary to ensure the continued smooth functioning of government and public services) must be carried on. Cabinet committees are not expected to meet during the election period, nor are they expected to consider issues by correspondence. However there may be exceptional circumstances under which a collective decision of Ministers is required. If something requires collective agreement and cannot wait until after the General Election, the Cabinet Secretary should be consulted.  

2. However, it is customary for Ministers to observe discretion in initiating any action of a continuing or long term character. Decisions on matters of policy, and other issues such as large and/or contentious commercial contracts, on which a new government might be expected to want the opportunity to take a different view from the present government, should be postponed until after the election, provided that such postponement would not be detrimental to the national interest or wasteful of public money. 

Statutory Instruments 

3. The principles outlined above apply to making statutory instruments. 

Departmental lawyers can advise in more detail, in conjunction with the Statutory Instrument Hub.  

4. The general principle that Ministers should observe discretion in initiating any new action of a continuing or long-term character applies to the making of commencement orders, which during the election period should be exceptional.  As is usual practice, statutory instruments are required to go through the Parliamentary Business and Legislation Committee process before they can be laid.

Section H: Public and Senior Civil Service Appointments

1. All appointments requiring approval by the Prime Minister, and other Civil Service and public appointments likely to prove sensitive (including those where Ministers have delegated decisions to officials or other authorities) should be frozen until after the election, except in exceptional circumstances (further detail below). This includes appointments where a candidate has already accepted a written offer (and the appointment has been announced before the election period), but where the individual is not due to take up post until after the election. The individual concerned should be told that the appointment will be subject to confirmation by the new Administration after the election. 

2. It is recognised that this may result in the cancellation (or delay) of an appointment by the new Administration, and that the relevant department could be vulnerable to legal action by a disappointed candidate. To reduce the risk of this, departments might wish to: 

• recommend to their Secretary of State the advisability of bringing forward or delaying key stages in the process, where an appointment would otherwise likely take effect just before or after an election; 
• issue a conditional offer letter, making it clear that the formal offer of the appointment will need to be confirmed by a new Administration. 

3. In cases where an appointment is due to end between dissolution and election day, and no announcement has been made concerning the new appointment, it will normally be possible for the post to be left vacant or the current term extended until incoming Ministers have been able to take a decision either about reappointment of the existing appointee or the appointment of a new person. This situation is also likely to apply to any appointments made by Letters Patent, or otherwise requiring royal approval, since it would not be appropriate to invite His Majesty to make a conditional appointment. 

4. In exceptional cases where it is not possible to apply these temporary arrangements and there is an essential need to make an appointment during the election period, departments may wish to advise their Ministers about consulting the Opposition before a final decision is taken. Departments should consult the Public Appointments Policy Team in the Cabinet Office. 

5. In the case of public and Senior Civil Service appointments, departments should delay the launch of any open competition during an election period, to give any incoming Administration the option of deciding whether to follow the existing approach.  

6. In those cases where an appointment is required to be made, it is acceptable, in the case of sensitive Senior Civil Service positions, to allow temporary promotion.  

Section I: Communication Activities during a General Election

1. The general principle governing communication activities during a general election is to do everything possible to avoid competition with parliamentary candidates for the attention of the public, and not to undertake any activity that could call into question civil servants’ political impartiality or that could give rise to criticism that public resources are being used for party political purposes. Special care must be taken during the course of an election since material produced with complete impartiality, which would be accepted as objective in ordinary times, may generate criticism during an election period when feelings are running high. All communication activity should be conducted in line with Government Communication Service (GCS) guidance on propriety and propriety in digital and social media .  

2. Departmental communications staff may properly continue to discharge their normal function during the election period, to the extent of providing factual explanation of current government policy, statements and decisions. They must be particularly careful not to become involved in a partisan way in election issues.  

3. During the election period, access to departmental briefing systems will be restricted to permanent civil servants who will produce briefing, and answer requests for information, in line with the principles set out in Section A of the election guidance. Any updating of lines to take should be confined to matters of fact and explanations of existing government policy in order to avoid criticism of serving, or appearing to serve, a party political purpose.  

News Media  

4. In response to questions departments should, where possible, provide factual information by reference to published material, including that on websites. Specific requests for unpublished material should be handled in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act. 

5. Routine factual press notices may continue to be issued – for example statistics that are issued on a regular basis or reports of publicly-owned bodies, independent committees etc., which a department is required to publish. 

6. There would normally be no objection to issuing routine factual publications, for example health and safety advice, but these should be decided on a case by case basis, in consultation with the Director or Head of Communications, who should take account of the subject matter and the intended audience. A similar approach should apply to blogs and social media. 

7. Press releases and other material normally sent to Members of Parliament should cease at the point at which this guidance comes into effect. 

8. Statements that refer to the future intentions of the Government should not be handled by a department and should be treated as party political statements. Where a Minister considers it necessary to hold a governmental press conference to make clear the Government’s existing policies on a particular subject prior to the election, then his or her department should provide facilities and give guidance. Ultimately, each case must be judged on its merits, including consideration of whether an announcement needs to be made, in consultation with the Director or Head of Communications.  

9. The Propriety and Ethics Team in the Cabinet Office must be consulted before a Minister makes an official Ministerial statement during the election period. 

10. Statements or comments referring to the policies, commitments or perceived intentions of Opposition parties should not be handled by departments. 

Press Articles, Interviews, and Broadcasts and Webcasts by Ministers  

11. During the election period, arrangements for newspaper articles, interviews and broadcasts by Ministers, including online, will normally be made on the political network. Care should be taken by communications staff in arranging any press interviews for Ministers during this period because of the possibility that such interviews would have a strong political content. They should not arrange broadcasts through official channels unless they are satisfied there is a need to do so and that the Minister is speaking in a government, not party, capacity. 

Paid Media 

12. Advertising, including partnership and influencer marketing. New campaigns will in general be postponed and live campaigns will be paused (across all advertising and marketing channels). A very small number of campaigns (for example, relating to essential recruitment, or public health, such as blood and organ donation or health and safety) may be approved by the Permanent Secretary, in consultation with GCS and the Propriety and Ethics Team.

a. International activity. Where marketing is delivered outside the UK and targeting non-UK citizens, the campaign can continue during the election period, subject to Permanent Secretary approval and as long as consideration has been given to the potential for the campaign to garner interest within the UK and to reach UK diaspora. If continuing the campaign is likely to generate domestic interest, it should be paused.

b. Official radio ‘fillers’ will be reviewed and withdrawn unless essential.

13. Films, videos and photographs from departmental libraries or sources should not be made available for use by political parties.  

14. Printed material should not normally be given any fresh distribution in the United Kingdom during the election period, in order to avoid any competition with the flow of election material. The effect on departments that distribute posters and leaflets to the public is as follows: 

a. Posters. The normal display of existing posters on official premises may continue but efforts should not be made to seek display elsewhere. Specific requests by employers, trade unions etc for particular posters may, however, be met in the ordinary way. 

b. Leaflets. Small numbers of copies of leaflets may be issued on request to members of the public and to parliamentary candidates, in consultation with the Director or Head of Communications, who should take account of the subject matter and the intended audience. Bulk supplies should not be issued to any individuals or organisations without appropriate approval. 

c. Export promotion stories and case studies for overseas use may continue to be sought  in the UK but it must be made clear on each occasion that this information is needed for use abroad, and permission must be sought from the Permanent Secretary before proceeding. 

d. The use of public buildings for communication purposes is covered in Section L. 

15. Exhibitions. Official exhibitions on a contentious policy or proposal should not be kept open or opened during the election period. Official exhibitions that form part of a privately sponsored exhibition do not have to be withdrawn unless they are contentious, in which case they should be withdrawn. 

Social Media and Digital Channels 

16. Official websites and social media channels will be scrutinised closely by news media and political parties during the election period. All content must be managed in accordance with GCS propriety guidance.

Publishing content online  

17. Content Design: planning, writing and managing content guidance   should be consulted when publishing any online content.

18. Material that has already been published in accordance with the rules on propriety and that is part of the public domain record can stand. It may also be updated for factual accuracy, for example a change of address. However, while it can be referred to in handling media enquiries and signposting in response to enquiries from the public, nothing should be done to draw further attention to it. 

19. Updating the public with essential factual information may continue (e.g. transport delays) but social media and blogs that comment on government policies and proposals should not be updated for the duration of the election period.  

20. Ministers’ biographies and details of their responsibilities can remain on sites, no additions should be made. Social media profiles should not be updated during this period. 

21. Site maintenance and planned functional and technical development for existing sites can continue, but this should not involve new campaigns or extending existing campaigns.  

22. News sections of websites and blogs must comply with the advice on press releases. News tickers and other mechanisms should be discontinued for the election period. 

23. In the event of an emergency, digital channels can be used as part of Crisis Communication  activity in the normal way. 

Further Guidance 

24. In any case of doubt about the application of this guidance in a particular case, communications staff should consult their Director or Head of Communications in the first instance, then, if necessary, the Chief Executive, Government Communication Service, Chief Operating Officer, Government Communication Service, or the departmental Permanent Secretary who will liaise with the Propriety and Ethics Team in the Cabinet Office.

Section J: Guidance on Consultations during an election period 

1. In general, new public consultations should not be launched during the election period. If there are exceptional circumstances where launching a consultation is considered essential (for example, safeguarding public health), permission should be sought from the Propriety and Ethics Team in the Cabinet Office. 

2. If a consultation is on-going at the time this guidance comes into effect, it should continue as normal. However, departments should not take any steps during an election period that will compete with parliamentary candidates for the public’s attention. This effectively means a ban on publicity for those consultations that are still in process. 

3. As these restrictions may be detrimental to a consultation, departments are advised to decide on steps to make up for that deficiency while strictly observing the guidance. That can be done, for example, by: 

a. prolonging the consultation period; and 

b. putting out extra publicity for the consultation after the election in order to revive interest (following consultation with any new Minister). 

4. Some consultations, for instance those aimed solely at professional groups, and that carry no publicity, will not have the impact of those where a very public and wide-ranging consultation is required. Departments need, therefore, to take into account the circumstances of each consultation. Some may need no remedial action – but this is a practical rather than propriety question so long as departments observe the broader guidance here. 

5. During the election period, departments may continue to receive and analyse responses with a view to putting proposals to the incoming government but they should not make any statement or generate publicity during this period.   

Section K: Statistical Activities during a General Election 

1. This note gives guidance on the conduct of statistical activities across government during a general election period.  [footnote 1]

2. The same principles apply to social research and other government analytical services.  

3. Under the terms of the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007, the UK Statistics Authority, headed by the National Statistician, is responsible for promoting and safeguarding the integrity of official statistics. It should be consulted in any cases of doubt about the application of this guidance.  

Key Principles 

4. Statistical activities should continue to be conducted in accordance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics and the UK Government’s Prerelease Access to Official Statistics Order 2008, taking great care, in each case, to avoid competition with parliamentary candidates for the attention of the public. 

Statistical publications, releases, etc. 

5. The greatest care must continue to be taken to ensure that information is presented impartially and objectively. 

6. Regular pre-announced statistical releases (e.g. press notices, bulletins, publications or electronic releases) will continue to be issued and published. Any other ad hoc statistical releases should be released only in exceptional circumstances and with the approval of the National Statistician, consulting with the Propriety and Ethics Team in the Cabinet Office where appropriate. Where a pre-announcement has specified that the information would be released during a specified period (e.g. a week, or longer time period), but did not specify a precise day, releases should not be published within the election period. The same applies to social research publications

Requests for information 

7. Any requests for unpublished statistics, including from election candidates, should be handled in an even-handed manner, in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act. Guidance on handling FOI requests can be found in Section A.  

Commentary and Briefing 

8. Special care must be taken in producing commentary for inclusion in announcements of statistical publications issued during the election period. Commentary that would be accepted as impartial and objective analysis or interpretation at ordinary times, may attract criticism during an election. Commentary by civil servants should be restricted to the most basic factual clarification during this period. Ultimately the content of the announcement is left to the discretion of the departmental Head of Profession, seeking advice from the National Statistician as appropriate. 

9. Pre-election arrangements for statistics, whereby pre-release access for briefing purposes is given to Ministers or chief executives (and their appropriate briefing officials) who have policy responsibility for a subject area covered by a particular release, should continue, in accordance with the principles embodied in the UK Government’s Pre-release Access to Official Statistics Order 2008.  

10. In general, during this period, civil servants involved in the production of official statistics will not provide face to face briefing to Ministers. Only if there is a vital operational need for information, (e.g. an out of the ordinary occurrence of market-sensitive results with significant implications for the economy, or some new management figures with major implications for the running of public services), should such briefing be provided. Any such briefing should be approved by the National Statistician.  

11. Requests for advice on the interpretation or analysis of statistics should be handled with care, and in accordance with the guidance in paragraphs 6 and 7.  

12. Requests for factual guidance on methodology should continue to be met. 

13. Requests for small numbers of copies of leaflets, background papers or free publications that were available before the election period may continue to be met but no bulk issues to individuals or organisations should be made without appropriate approval. Regular mailings of statistical bulletins to customers on existing mailing lists may continue. 

Censuses, Surveys and other forms of quantitative or qualitative research enquiry  

14. Regular, continuous and on-going censuses and surveys of individuals, households, businesses or other organisations may continue. Ad hoc surveys and other forms of research that are directly related to and in support of a continuing statistical series may also continue. Ad hoc surveys and other forms of research that may give rise to controversy or be related to an election issue should be postponed or abandoned. 

Consultations 

15. Statistical consultations that are on-going at the point at which Parliament dissolves should continue as normal, but any publicity for such consultations should cease. New public consultations, even if preannounced, should not be launched but should be delayed until after the result of the election is officially declared.  

Further Advice 

16. If officials working on statistics in any area across government are unsure about any matters relating to their work during the election period, they should seek the advice of their Head of Profession in the first instance. Heads of Profession should consult the National Statistician in any cases of doubt. Queries relating to social research, or other analytical services should similarly be referred to the relevant Head of Profession or departmental lead and Permanent Secretary’s office in the first instance. Further advice can be sought from the Propriety and Ethics Team in the Cabinet Office.

Section L: Use of Government Property 

1. Neither Ministers, nor any other parliamentary candidates, should involve government establishments in the general election campaign by visiting them for electioneering purposes. 

2. In the case of NHS property, decisions are for the relevant NHS Trust but should visits be permitted to, for example, hospitals, the Department of Health and Social Care advise that there should be no disruption to services and the same facilities should be offered to other candidates. In any case, it is advised that election meetings should not be permitted on NHS premises. NHS England publishes its own information to NHS organisations about the pre-election period.

3. Decisions on the use of other public sector and related property must be taken by those legally responsible for the premises concerned – for example, for schools, the Governors or the Local Education Authority or Trust Board, and so on. If those concerned consult departments, they should be told that the decision is left to them but that they will be expected to treat the candidates of all parties in an even-handed way, and that there should be no disruption to services. The Department for Education will provide advice to schools on the use of school premises and resources.  

4. It is important that those legally responsible for spending public funds or the use of public property ensure that there is no misuse, or the perception of misuse, for party political purposes. Decision-makers must respect the Seven Principles of Public Life when considering the use of public funds or property during the election period. The principles include an expectation that public office holders take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit and maintain their accountability to the public for their decisions and actions.

Section M: International Business 

1. This guidance specifically addresses the principles that will apply to international business.  

2. International business will continue as normal during the period of the general election.  

International meetings 

3. Decisions on Ministerial attendance and representation at international meetings will continue to be taken on a case by case basis by the lead UK Minister. For example, Ministers will be entitled to attend international summits (such as meetings of the G20).  

4. When Ministers speak at international  meetings, they are fully entitled to pursue existing UK Government policies. All Ministers, whether from the UK Government or the Devolved Administrations, should avoid exploiting international engagements for electoral purposes. Ministers should observe discretion on new initiatives and before stating new positions or making new commitments (see Section G for further advice on Government decision-making).

5. Where a Minister is unable to attend an international meeting that has been assessed as of significant interest to the UK, the UK may be represented by a senior official. In this case, where an item is likely to be pressed to a decision (a legislative decision, or some other form of commitment, e.g. a resolution, conclusions), officials should engage in negotiations and vote in line with the cleared UK position and in line with a detailed brief cleared by the lead UK Minister. Officials should engage actively where there will be a general discussion or orientation debate, but should seek to avoid taking high profile decisions on issues of domestic political sensitivity. If decisions fall to be taken at an international summit that risk being controversial between the UK political parties, departments should consult their Permanent Secretary about the line to follow who may in turn wish to consult the Cabinet Secretary. 

Changes to International Negotiating Positions

6. There may be an unavoidable need for changes to a cleared UK position that require the collective agreement of Ministers. This may arise, for example, through the need for officials to have sufficiently clear negotiating instructions or as a result of the agreed UK position coming under pressure in the closing stages of negotiation. If collective agreement is required, the Cabinet Secretary should be consulted (see Section G). The Cabinet Secretariat can advise departments where they are unsure whether an issue requires further collective agreement. 

7. Departments should note that the reduced availability of Ministers during the election period means that it will be necessary to allow as much time as possible for Ministers to consider an issue. 

Relations with the Press 

8. Departmental Communication staff may properly continue to discharge, during the election period, their normal function only to the extent of providing factual explanation of current government policy, statements and decisions. They must be particularly careful not to become involved in a partisan way in election issues. 

9. Ministers attending international meetings will no doubt wish to brief the press afterwards in the normal manner. But where officials attend meetings in place of Ministers, they should be particularly circumspect in responding to the press on any decision or discussion in the meeting that could be regarded as touching on matters of domestic political sensitivity. If departments wish to issue press notices following international meetings on the discussions or decisions that took place, they should be essentially factual. Any comment, especially on items of domestic sensitivity, should be made by Ministers. In doing so, consideration will need to be given as to whether such comment should be handled by the department or the party. This must be agreed in advance with the Permanent Secretary.  

International Appointments 

10. The UK should not normally make nominations or put forward candidates for senior international appointments until after the election. It remains possible to make nominations or put forward candidates for other positions. Departments should consult their Permanent Secretary and the Propriety and Ethics Team in Cabinet Office on appointments that risk being controversial between the UK political parties.

Section N: The Devolved Administrations

1. The general election does not affect the devolved administrations in the same way. The devolved legislatures are elected separately to the House of Commons. Devolved Ministers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will continue to carry out their devolved functions in those countries as usual.

2. Under the Civil Service Code, which also applies to all civil servants, civil servants in the devolved administrations serve Ministers elected through elections in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and do not report to the UK Government. Accordingly, this guidance does not apply to them. They will continue to support their Ministers in their work. 

3. However, the devolved administrations acknowledge that their activities could have a bearing on the general election campaign. While the devolved administrations will continue largely as normal, they are aware of the need to avoid any action that is, or could be construed as being, party political or likely to have a direct bearing on the general election. Staff in the devolved administrations will continue to refer requests for information about reserved issues from MPs, parliamentary candidates and political parties to the relevant UK department. Requests for information about devolved issues will be handled in accordance with relevant FOI legislation, taking account of the need for prompt responses in the context of an election period. 

4. Officials in the devolved administrations are subject to the rules in Section E as regards their personal political activities, in the same way as UK Government officials. 

5. Discussions with the devolved administrations during the election period should be conducted in this context. For more general details on how best to work with the devolved administrations see the Cabinet Office guidance: Devolution guidance for civil servants

Section O: Public Bodies 

1. The general principles and conventions set out in this guidance apply to the board members and staff of all NDPBs and similar public bodies. Some NDPBs and ALBs employ civil servants.  

2. NDPBs and other public sector bodies must be, and be seen to be, politically impartial. They should avoid becoming involved in party political controversy. Decisions on individual matters are for the bodies concerned in consultation with their sponsor department who will wish to consider whether proposed activities could reflect adversely on the work or reputation of the NDPB or public body in question.

This includes departments and their agencies and other relevant public bodies including all public bodies deemed to be producers of official statistics by dint of an Order in Parliament.  ↩

Is this page useful?

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .