Prompt Purpose
Create a polished, funder-aligned grant narrative draft — needs statement, aims, methods, evaluation, timeline, team, dissemination, and budget rationale — that reflects Bowdoin College context and the sponsor’s guidelines.
What you'll need
Recommended models
- Best overall: the newest flagship model — the latest Claude (Sonnet or Opus) or the latest GPT, near the top of the LibreChat model list. Strongest writing quality and instruction-following.
- When it must reason carefully: a Thinking / reasoning model (a GPT “Thinking” variant or the newest Claude Opus) for crosswalking review criteria, evaluation plans, and budget logic across a long proposal.
- For long, cited research: a deep-research model when you want the model to synthesize an extensive RFP and background literature into a cited narrative.
Materials
- Funder’s full solicitation/RFP and review criteria
- Draft notes, prior proposals, literature/background sources
- Project summary/abstract and specific aims
- Methods/approach details, timeline, milestones
- Evaluation plan and metrics
- Budget and budget justification notes
- Biosketches/CVs and facilities/resources description
- Institutional information about Bowdoin College (mission, resources, DEI statements)
- Letters of support/partnership details (MOUs, roles)
Instructions
Copy the prompt below and paste it into the chat window in LibreChat. Replace the bold items inside the double curly brackets ( {{ }} ) to fit your situation. You can also paste it into + Create Prompt to save it as a reusable prompt. Attach any supporting materials you want the model to reference, then choose a model (see Recommended models above) and send.
Prompt
You are a grant-writing assistant experienced with higher education proposals and sponsor compliance. Draft a compelling, funder-aligned narrative for a Bowdoin College proposal using the inputs below. Follow the funder’s structure and page limits, use clear and persuasive language, and ensure all claims are specific and evidence-based.
Context and requirements:
- Institution: Bowdoin College
- Funder/program: {{Funder name and program title}}
- Opportunity link or PDF: {{Paste URL or indicate "uploaded"}}
- Deadline: {{Date}}
- Max narrative length: {{e.g., 5 pages or 2,000 words}}
- Required sections per RFP: {{e.g., Need; Objectives/Aims; Project Design/Methods; Evaluation; Timeline; Personnel; Dissemination; Broader Impacts/DEI; Budget Justification}}
- Review criteria and scoring: {{Paste or summarize criteria}}
- Formatting constraints (font, margins, headings): {{List}}
Project inputs:
- Working title: {{Project title}}
- Problem/need statement: {{Summary of the challenge and why it matters}}
- Target population/beneficiaries: {{Who, where, how many}}
- Goals and measurable objectives/aims: {{List 2–5 measurable aims}}
- Rationale/evidence base: {{Key citations, data, or prior work}}
- Activities/methods: {{Major activities, methodologies, partners}}
- Evaluation plan/metrics: {{Outcomes, indicators, data sources, analysis}}
- Timeline and milestones: {{High-level schedule}}
- Team and roles: {{PI/Co-PIs/Staff/Students/Partners and responsibilities}}
- Facilities and resources: {{Labs, libraries, equipment, community sites}}
- Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility: {{Planned strategies and commitments}}
- Risk management and feasibility: {{Key risks and mitigations}}
- Budget notes (high level): {{Major cost categories and rationale}}
- Sustainability/long-term plan: {{How work persists post-award}}
- Prior related funding or results: {{Brief}}
- Supporting materials: {{Upload or link drafts, RFP, CVs, letters}}
Tasks:
1) Outline and structure:
- Produce a section-by-section outline that mirrors the funder’s required headings.
- Map each review criterion to where it is addressed in the outline.
2) Draft narrative (within limits):
- Write a polished first draft for each required section using the inputs above.
- Use clear topic sentences, subheads, and signposting that match the RFP terminology.
- Quantify claims; include brief, parenthetical citations where relevant (e.g., author, year).
- Ensure aims align with methods, evaluation, and budget logic.
3) Evaluation, timeline, and budget rationale:
- Provide an evaluation plan table with outcomes, indicators, data sources, collection frequency, and responsibility.
- Provide a timeline (milestones by month/quarter) aligned to objectives.
- Draft a concise budget justification narrative aligned to activities and staffing.
4) DEI/accessibility and risk mitigation:
- Integrate concrete DEI and accessibility strategies tied to activities and evaluation.
- Identify key risks and feasible mitigations.
5) Compliance and polish:
- Verify page/word count, section order, and formatting cues per RFP.
- Flag missing information as bracketed prompts for the PI to complete.
- Provide a 250-word abstract and a 1–2 sentence elevator pitch.
Output format:
- Section 1: Proposal outline with criterion crosswalk (bullet list).
- Section 2: Full narrative draft (clearly labeled sections).
- Section 3: Evaluation plan table (plain text).
- Section 4: Timeline (plain text Gantt-style).
- Section 5: Budget justification (bullets).
- Section 6: Compliance checklist and flagged gaps.
- Section 7: Abstract and elevator pitch.
Style and tone:
- Professional, concrete, outcomes-focused; avoid hype; active voice; align to Bowdoin’s mission and the funder’s priorities.
Now generate the outline and narrative based on the inputs provided above. Where information is missing, insert clear placeholders like {{Insert data on baseline outcomes}} or concise questions like {{Which partner will lead community recruitment?}}.
Make it your own
- Specify the type of sponsor (federal, foundation, corporate, state) to adjust tone, evidence depth, and risk posture.
- Name Bowdoin partners (centers, labs, community orgs) and campus resources to ground feasibility and facilities.
- Include student involvement (research assistants, course-based research) to highlight undergraduate impact.
- Add discipline-specific methods (humanities archives, wet-lab protocols, field sites, computation) to refine the approach.
- Provide prior data or publications to strengthen significance and competitiveness for resubmissions.