Program summary one is more convincing than program summary two because it is has stated that: it has been offering interesting, incredible, and well-attended programs to kids, teenagers, and families; the teens who will take part in the program will be taught acting techniques by a few of the brilliant people who are qualified to instruct various courses; and the program will be the one that will bring the arts back. I would suggest program summary two to include other additional skills taught in the program and state whether it has ever again conducted this type of program (J. Visdos & Evans, 2016). Below I will use the rules for composing an influential grant proposal that are discussed in Karsh and Fox reading to identify the ones that were either followed or not.
Program summary one
Rule 1: Make an outline: The program has not followed this rule because it has failed to provide the exact age of the thirty adolescents required by the program when targeting the population.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Rule 2: Write as you speak (or as you should speak): The program has followed the rule because it is not overly formal, pretentious, or ponderous and casual hence the grant maker is not left in confusion.
Rule 3: Double- (and triple-) think your choice of words: The proposal has followed this rule because it does not use any slang. Slangs are not used in a grant proposal (Karsh & Fox, 2014).
Rule 4: Don't exaggerate: The program hasn't followed this rule because it has used the word cutting-edge that convey the extraordinary attributes of this program in the statement "The teens who participate in this cutting-edge program are going to be taught acting skills by some of the most wonderful individuals in the field of acting who are qualified to teach different techniques."
Rule 5: Buy a grammar book and Use It When in Doubt (and Even When You're Not in Doubt): The proposal has followed this rule since it doesn't have any grammar errors. It suggests that the grant seeker is highly educated and cared enough to rewrite and proofread the proposal (Ludlow, 2014).
Rule 6: . . . and a dictionary and thesaurus while you're at it: The proposal has followed this rule because he has used the spelling checker in the computer. It is also evident that the grant seeker may have gone to the extent of asking friends and colleagues to edit and read the proposals and double-check using a dictionary.
Rule 7: Stick to the active voice: The proposal has followed this rule since the grant maker has used active voice all through the proposal hence preventing him/herself from being tripped up or tripping up the reader.
Rule 8: Keep your voice out of it: The program has not followed this rule because it has used values judgments in the statement, "Since many school districts across the country are making unnecessary and awful cuts to arts programs, this program is one that will bring the arts back to the Chicago community."
Rule 9: Limit the (yawn) adjectives: The proposal has followed this rule because the grant seeker does not overuse adjectives because the reader will see them as the conclusion of the program instead of reported realities and descriptive words smacks of desperation.
Rule 10: It's not personal: The proposal has followed this rule because it doesn't make use of words such as I, we, and our.
Rule 11: Brevity isn't always the soul of wit: The proposal has not followed this rule because of the usage of the abbreviation ABC, and it has not stated what it stands for. Acronyms and abbreviations aren't used in proposals because they are bound to confuse the funder.
Rule 12: Prove It: The proposal has followed this rule because he has provided a backup of information and proved what he/she says is true in the statement, "Teens usually need a great deal of support, and our program will offer many adults who are qualified to help them with whatever issues they might be having. We are sure that the teens will have better behavior after the program, and we know they will like acting with their peers."
Program summary two
Rule 1: Make an outline: The program hasn't used subheads that make an outline merrier as they ensure that an individual doesn't omit important information, although it isn't a requirement. The program as all sort of information about the organization, target population, and programs; hence the program has followed this rule
Rule 2: Write as you speak (or as you should speak): The program is not ponderous, pretentious, casual, and formal hence the grant maker is not left in confusion.
Rule 3: Double- (and triple-) think your choice of words: The rule has been followed because there are no slang words used in the program.
Rule 4: Don't exaggerate: The grant seeker has not followed this rule because he/she has not used any word that conveys the extraordinary attributes of this program.
Rule 5: Buy a grammar book and use it when in doubt (and even when you're not in doubt): The program has not followed this rule because, as it is evident, the word through is used wrongly in the statement "The program will operate Monday through Friday 3-6 pm from August 30th through June 1st." And the word " post test " lacks a hyphen.
Rule 6: . . . and a dictionary and thesaurus while you're at it: The program has not followed this rule because it is evident from the above rule that there are grammar errors. It proves that the grant seeker didn't bother to ask his/her friends and colleagues to edit and read the proposal and double-check using a dictionary.
Rule 7: Stick to the active voice: This rule has been followed because the grant seeker sticks to active voice throughout the proposal.
Rule 8: Keep your voice out of it: The program has followed this rule because it has not used a sense of humor, controversial ideas, value judgments, and political views in the grant proposal.
Rule 9: Limit the (yawn) adjectives: The rule has been followed in this program because the grant seeker doesn't overuse adjectives because the reader will see them as the conclusion of the program instead of reported realities and descriptive words smacks of desperation.
Rule 10: It's not personal: This rule has been followed by the grant seeker because, in the proposal, he avoids words such as I , we, and our .
Rule 11: Brevity isn't always the soul of wit: The grant seeker has not followed this rule because of the usage of the abbreviation ABC, and it has not stated what it stands for. Acronyms and abbreviations aren't used in proposals because they are bound to confuse the funder (George & Rogers, 2018).
Rule 12: Prove it: This rule is observed because it provides a backup of information and proves what is said is true in the statement "All activities will occur at the ABC Center for Families Main Building. Staff will include Performing Arts professionals, a Program Manager, and two licensed Social Workers who will be assisting adolescents with increasing their self-esteem, social skills, and respect for others."
References
George, B., & Rogers, J. (2018). The Changing Landscape of Global Businesses: Principles and Practices (pp. 47-103). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
J. Visdos, R., & Evans, S. (2016). Need Funding? Get Started! Tips for Successful Grant Writing (2nd ed., pp. 15-18). Techniques magazine.
Karsh, E., & Fox, A. (2014). The only grant-writing book you'll ever need (4th ed., pp. 50-448). Basic books.
Ludlow, B. (2014). Secrets of Successful Grant Writing to Support Rural Special Education Programs. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 33(2), 29-37. https://doi .org/10.1177/875687051403300205A'W
