Diagrams & Visuals - Lesson 2.3: Proposal Writing

1. Evidence-Based Proposal Foundation Flow

This diagram shows how all Module 1 & 2 foundation work integrates into proposal development. Each lesson from 1.1-2.2 directly strengthens specific proposal components, creating genuine competitive advantage that generic proposals cannot match.

graph TB
    subgraph Module1["MODULE 1: FOUNDATION BUILDING"]
        A1["Problem Tree Analysis<br/>(Evidence-based problem<br/>understanding)"]
        A2["Stakeholder Mapping<br/>(Authentic partnerships<br/>documented)"]
        A3["Affinity Analysis<br/>(Community priorities<br/>synthesized)"]
        A4["Theory of Change<br/>(Community-validated<br/>change logic)"]
    end

    subgraph Module2["MODULE 2: OPERATIONALIZATION"]
        B1["Logical Framework<br/>(Systematic measurement<br/>structure)"]
        B2["Activity Design<br/>(Detailed implementation<br/>plans)"]
    end

    subgraph Proposal["COMPELLING PROPOSAL COMPONENTS"]
        C1["Problem Statement<br/>(Evidence-based,<br/>community-grounded)"]
        C2["Solution Approach<br/>(Theory of Change-based<br/>logic)"]
        C3["Implementation Plan<br/>(Detailed, culturally<br/>appropriate)"]
        C4["Partnership Documentation<br/>(Authentic collaboration<br/>evidence)"]
        C5["M&E Framework<br/>(Community-informed<br/>indicators)"]
        C6["Budget Justification<br/>(Cost-effective,<br/>community leverage)"]
    end

    D["Competitive Proposal<br/>Ready for Submission"]

    A1 --> C1
    A1 --> C2
    A2 --> C3
    A2 --> C4
    A3 --> C1
    A3 --> C2
    A4 --> C2
    A4 --> C5
    B1 --> C5
    B1 --> C6
    B2 --> C3
    B2 --> C6

    C1 --> D
    C2 --> D
    C3 --> D
    C4 --> D
    C5 --> D
    C6 --> D

    style Module1 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style A1 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style A2 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style A3 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style A4 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style Module2 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style B1 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style B2 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style Proposal fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style C1 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style C2 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style C3 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style C4 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style C5 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style C6 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style D fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Explore evidence-based storytelling strategies

2. Generic vs Evidence-Based Problem Description Transformation

This transformation diagram illustrates the stark contrast between weak, assumption-based problem descriptions and strong, evidence-supported descriptions enabled by systematic foundation work. The difference determines funder confidence.

graph TB
    subgraph Generic["❌ GENERIC APPROACH"]
        G1["Vague Problem<br/>Statement"]
        G2["Assumption-based<br/>Claims"]
        G3["No Community<br/>Voice"]
        G4["Weak Evidence<br/>Base"]
        G5["Unconvincing to<br/>Funders"]
    end

    subgraph Transform["🔄 SYSTEMATIC FOUNDATION"]
        T1["Problem Tree Analysis<br/>(E) Evidence-based findings"]
        T2["45 Stakeholders<br/>Across 8 groups"]
        T3["Quantified Evidence<br/>73% employer gap data"]
        T4["Community Validation<br/>Sessions"]
        T5["Source Documentation<br/>MCP research + field data"]
    end

    subgraph Evidence["✅ EVIDENCE-BASED APPROACH"]
        E1["Specific Problem<br/>Statement"]
        E2["Evidence-supported<br/>Claims"]
        E3["Community Voice<br/>Integrated"]
        E4["Strong Evidence<br/>Base"]
        E5["Compelling to<br/>Funders"]
    end

    G1 -.Transform via.-> T1
    G2 -.Transform via.-> T2
    G2 -.Transform via.-> T3
    G3 -.Transform via.-> T4
    G4 -.Transform via.-> T5

    T1 --> E1
    T2 --> E2
    T3 --> E2
    T4 --> E3
    T5 --> E4

    E1 --> E5
    E2 --> E5
    E3 --> E5
    E4 --> E5

    style Generic fill:#FEE2E2,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style G1 fill:#FCA5A5,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A
    style G2 fill:#FCA5A5,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A
    style G3 fill:#FCA5A5,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A
    style G4 fill:#FCA5A5,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A
    style G5 fill:#FCA5A5,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A
    style Transform fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style T1 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style T2 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style T3 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style T4 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style T5 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style Evidence fill:#BBF7D0,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style E1 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style E2 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style E3 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style E4 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style E5 fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:2px

Learn transformation strategies

3. Complete Proposal Structure with Community Voice Integration

This comprehensive diagram shows standard proposal structure with explicit community voice integration points at each section. Strong proposals balance professional requirements with authentic community priorities, validated through systematic engagement.

graph TB
    A["Executive Summary<br/>Problem + Approach + Impact<br/>+ Investment Required"]

    B["Problem Statement Section"]
    B1["Context Setting<br/>(Problem Tree background)"]
    B2["Evidence Presentation<br/>(Systematic analysis results)"]
    B3["Community Voice<br/>(Stakeholder insights, quotes)"]
    B4["Root Cause Analysis<br/>(Problem Tree findings)"]
    B5["Impact Documentation<br/>(Effects if problem persists)"]

    C["Solution & Approach Section"]
    C1["Theory of Change Overview<br/>(Logical pathway)"]
    C2["Community Asset Integration<br/>(Building on strengths)"]
    C3["Cultural Appropriateness<br/>(Respectful implementation)"]
    C4["Partnership Strategy<br/>(Collaborative approach)"]
    C5["Innovation & Evidence<br/>(Why this approach works)"]

    D["Implementation Plan Section"]
    D1["Activity Detail<br/>(From Activity Design work)"]
    D2["Timeline & Milestones<br/>(Realistic, community-informed)"]
    D3["Quality Assurance<br/>(Community & professional standards)"]
    D4["Risk Management<br/>(ToC assumptions)"]
    D5["Adaptive Management<br/>(Feedback systems)"]

    E["M&E & Learning Section"]
    E1["Community-Centered Measurement<br/>(Indicators from Logframe)"]
    E2["Participatory Monitoring<br/>(Stakeholder engagement)"]
    E3["Learning Documentation<br/>(Knowledge capture)"]
    E4["Accountability & Transparency<br/>(To community & funders)"]

    F["Sustainability Section"]
    F1["Community Ownership Development<br/>(Capacity transfer strategy)"]
    F2["System Strengthening<br/>(Enhancing local systems)"]
    F3["Resource Mobilization<br/>(Community fundraising capacity)"]

    G["Budget & Justification Section"]
    G1["Cost-Effectiveness<br/>(Community leverage)"]
    G2["Implementation Readiness<br/>(Planning investment value)"]
    G3["Sustainability Investment<br/>(Capacity building costs)"]

    H["Complete Proposal Package<br/>Ready for Submission"]

    A --> B
    B --> B1 --> B2 --> B3 --> B4 --> B5
    B5 --> C
    C --> C1 --> C2 --> C3 --> C4 --> C5
    C5 --> D
    D --> D1 --> D2 --> D3 --> D4 --> D5
    D5 --> E
    E --> E1 --> E2 --> E3 --> E4
    E4 --> F
    F --> F1 --> F2 --> F3
    F3 --> G
    G --> G1 --> G2 --> G3
    G3 --> H

    style A fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style B fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style B1 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style B2 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style B3 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style B4 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style B5 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style C fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style C1 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style C2 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style C3 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style C4 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style C5 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style D fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style D1 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style D2 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style D3 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style D4 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style D5 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style E fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style E1 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style E2 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style E3 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style E4 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style F fill:#BBF7D0,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style F1 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style F2 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style F3 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style G fill:#A3E4C9,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style G1 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style G2 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style G3 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style H fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Explore detailed section guidance

4. Partnership Documentation Framework

This four-phase framework shows how to document community partnerships for proposals, moving beyond generic letters to demonstrate specific commitments, shared ownership, and ongoing accountability. Lesson 1.2 stakeholder engagement enables this level of documentation.

graph TB
    subgraph Engagement["PHASE 1: Stakeholder Engagement"]
        A1["Primary Stakeholders<br/>(Directly affected)"]
        A2["Secondary Stakeholders<br/>(Expertise/Power)"]
        A3["Community Leaders<br/>(Influence/Trust)"]
    end

    subgraph Documentation["PHASE 2: Partnership Documentation"]
        B1["Engagement History<br/>(Dates, processes)"]
        B2["Partnership Roles<br/>(Specific commitments)"]
        B3["Resource Contributions<br/>(Cash, in-kind, human)"]
        B4["Shared Accountability<br/>(Joint M&E commitments)"]
        B5["Sustainability Role<br/>(Beyond project period)"]
    end

    subgraph Evidence["PHASE 3: Evidence Collection"]
        C1["Meeting Minutes<br/>(Specific agreements)"]
        C2["Commitment Letters<br/>(Resource details)"]
        C3["Joint Planning Sessions<br/>(Collaborative design)"]
        C4["Validation Sessions<br/>(Partnership expectations)"]
        C5["Representative Quotes<br/>(Understanding & commitment)"]
    end

    subgraph Proposal["PHASE 4: Proposal Integration"]
        D1["Partnership Commitment<br/>Documentation Section"]
        D2["Community Consultation<br/>Summary Section"]
        D3["Shared Ownership<br/>Narrative"]
        D4["Cost-Sharing<br/>Documentation"]
    end

    A1 --> B1
    A2 --> B2
    A3 --> B3

    B1 --> C1
    B2 --> C2
    B3 --> C3
    B4 --> C4
    B5 --> C5

    C1 --> D1
    C2 --> D1
    C3 --> D2
    C4 --> D2
    C5 --> D3
    B3 --> D4

    D1 --> E["Compelling Partnership<br/>Evidence in Proposal"]
    D2 --> E
    D3 --> E
    D4 --> E

    style Engagement fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style A1 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style A2 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style A3 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style Documentation fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style B1 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style B2 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style B3 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style B4 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style B5 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style Evidence fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style C1 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style C2 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style C3 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style C4 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style C5 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style Proposal fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style D1 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style D2 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style D3 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style D4 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style E fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Learn partnership documentation strategies

5. Cost-Effectiveness Documentation Flow

This flow demonstrates how to quantify and document resource efficiency through community partnership. Asset-based approaches (Lesson 2.2) create measurable cost-effectiveness that strengthens budget justification and demonstrates strategic resource utilization.

graph TB
    subgraph Analysis["RESOURCE EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS"]
        A1["Community Asset<br/>Leverage"]
        A2["Partner Service<br/>Provision"]
        A3["Volunteer Time<br/>Value"]
        A4["Risk Mitigation<br/>Through Ownership"]
    end

    subgraph Calculation["QUANTIFICATION PROCESS"]
        B1["Volunteer Hours<br/>× Local Wage Rate<br/>= $[value]"]
        B2["Facility Usage<br/>× Market Rental Rate<br/>= $[value]"]
        B3["Partner Services<br/>× Consulting Rate<br/>= $[value]"]
        B4["Risk Reduction<br/>× Failure Rate Decrease<br/>= $[value]"]
    end

    subgraph Documentation["COST-EFFECTIVENESS DOCUMENTATION"]
        C1["Total Community<br/>Investment: $[amount]"]
        C2["Funder Request:<br/>$[amount]"]
        C3["Leverage Ratio:<br/>[X]% multiplier"]
        C4["Cost per Beneficiary<br/>vs Sector Average"]
    end

    subgraph Value["VALUE PROPOSITION"]
        D1["Every $1 invested<br/>leverages $[X] in<br/>community resources"]
        D2["[Y]% cost reduction vs<br/>sector benchmarks"]
        D3["[Z]% sustainability<br/>achievement by Year 3"]
        D4["Risk mitigation value:<br/>$[amount] protected"]
    end

    A1 --> B1
    A2 --> B3
    A3 --> B1
    A4 --> B4

    B1 --> C1
    B2 --> C1
    B3 --> C1
    B4 --> C4

    C1 --> C3
    C2 --> C3
    C3 --> D1
    C4 --> D2
    C1 --> D3
    B4 --> D4

    D1 --> E["Compelling Cost-Effectiveness<br/>Narrative in Proposal"]
    D2 --> E
    D3 --> E
    D4 --> E

    style Analysis fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style A1 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style A2 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style A3 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style A4 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style Calculation fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style B1 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style B2 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style B3 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style B4 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style Documentation fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style C1 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style C2 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style C3 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style C4 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style Value fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style D1 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style D2 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style D3 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style D4 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style E fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Explore cost-effectiveness strategies

6. Proposal Quality Assessment Checklist Flow

This systematic decision tree provides quality assurance before submission, checking four critical dimensions: evidence foundation integration, community voice and partnership, professional quality standards, and competitive differentiation. Most proposals require 2-3 revision cycles.

graph TB
    Start["Proposal Draft<br/>Complete"]

    Q1{"Evidence Foundation<br/>Integration?"}
    Q1A["✓ Problem Tree draws<br/>directly from research"]
    Q1B["✓ Stakeholder engagement<br/>documented with numbers"]
    Q1C["✓ Community priorities<br/>guide outcomes"]
    Q1D["✓ ToC logic provides<br/>clear narrative"]

    Q2{"Community Voice &<br/>Partnership?"}
    Q2A["✓ Community language<br/>& quotes integrated"]
    Q2B["✓ Partnership goes beyond<br/>generic letters"]
    Q2C["✓ Community assets<br/>highlighted, not deficits"]
    Q2D["✓ Local ownership central<br/>to sustainability"]

    Q3{"Professional Quality<br/>Standards?"}
    Q3A["✓ Structure meets<br/>funder requirements"]
    Q3B["✓ Evidence demonstrates<br/>analytical rigor"]
    Q3C["✓ Implementation plan<br/>shows readiness"]
    Q3D["✓ Budget demonstrates<br/>cost-effectiveness"]

    Q4{"Competitive<br/>Differentiation?"}
    Q4A["✓ Depth exceeds typical<br/>consultation"]
    Q4B["✓ Implementation readiness<br/>exceeds standard prep"]
    Q4C["✓ Partnership shows<br/>authentic collaboration"]
    Q4D["✓ Innovation reflects<br/>community contributions"]

    Fix["Fix Gaps<br/>Before Submission"]
    Submit["Ready for<br/>Submission"]

    Start --> Q1
    Q1 -->|All Yes| Q1A & Q1B & Q1C & Q1D
    Q1 -->|Any No| Fix
    Q1A & Q1B & Q1C & Q1D --> Q2

    Q2 -->|All Yes| Q2A & Q2B & Q2C & Q2D
    Q2 -->|Any No| Fix
    Q2A & Q2B & Q2C & Q2D --> Q3

    Q3 -->|All Yes| Q3A & Q3B & Q3C & Q3D
    Q3 -->|Any No| Fix
    Q3A & Q3B & Q3C & Q3D --> Q4

    Q4 -->|All Yes| Q4A & Q4B & Q4C & Q4D
    Q4 -->|Any No| Fix
    Q4A & Q4B & Q4C & Q4D --> Submit

    Fix -.Revise.-> Start

    style Start fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style Q1 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style Q1A fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q1B fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q1C fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q1D fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q2 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style Q2A fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q2B fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q2C fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q2D fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q3 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style Q3A fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q3B fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q3C fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q3D fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q4 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style Q4A fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q4B fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q4C fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q4D fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Fix fill:#FCA5A5,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A
    style Submit fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Use comprehensive quality checklist

7. Multi-Year Funding Strategy Timeline

This progressive timeline shows how to structure multi-year funding requests with decreasing dependency and increasing community ownership. Year 1 focuses on demonstration, Years 2-3 on system strengthening, Years 3-5 on full community ownership and replication support.

graph TB
    subgraph Year1["YEAR 1: Foundation & Demonstration"]
        Y1A["Objectives:<br/>Implement pilot,<br/>validate approach"]
        Y1B["Funding Focus:<br/>Implementation activities,<br/>capacity building"]
        Y1C["Community Ownership:<br/>[X]% activities<br/>community-managed"]
        Y1D["Expected Outcomes:<br/>Short-term outcomes<br/>from ToC"]
    end

    subgraph Year2["YEAR 2-3: Scale & System Strengthening"]
        Y2A["Objectives:<br/>Expand successful approaches,<br/>strengthen systems"]
        Y2B["Funding Focus:<br/>System strengthening,<br/>policy advocacy"]
        Y2C["Community Ownership:<br/>[Y]% activities<br/>community-managed"]
        Y2D["Expected Outcomes:<br/>Medium-term outcomes<br/>from ToC"]
    end

    subgraph Year3["YEAR 3-5: Community Ownership & Replication"]
        Y3A["Objectives:<br/>Complete ownership transfer,<br/>support replication"]
        Y3B["Funding Focus:<br/>Knowledge sharing,<br/>replication support"]
        Y3C["Community Ownership:<br/>[Z]% activities<br/>fully community-managed"]
        Y3D["Expected Outcomes:<br/>Long-term outcomes<br/>approaching impact"]
    end

    subgraph Sustainability["SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS"]
        S1["Community fundraising<br/>capacity: $[amount]<br/>annual potential"]
        S2["Resource sharing<br/>networks: [N]<br/>organizations"]
        S3["Policy integration:<br/>[N] institutional<br/>changes"]
        S4["Replication:<br/>[N] communities<br/>interested"]
    end

    Y1A --> Y1B --> Y1C --> Y1D
    Y1D --> Y2A
    Y2A --> Y2B --> Y2C --> Y2D
    Y2D --> Y3A
    Y3A --> Y3B --> Y3C --> Y3D
    Y3D --> S1
    Y3D --> S2
    Y3D --> S3
    Y3D --> S4

    S1 & S2 & S3 & S4 --> Final["Sustainable Impact<br/>Beyond Project Period"]

    style Year1 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style Y1A fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style Y1B fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style Y1C fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style Y1D fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style Year2 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style Y2A fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style Y2B fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style Y2C fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style Y2D fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style Year3 fill:#BBF7D0,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style Y3A fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Y3B fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Y3C fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Y3D fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Sustainability fill:#A3E4C9,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style S1 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style S2 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style S3 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style S4 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Final fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Learn multi-year planning strategies

8. Funder Adaptation Decision Tree

This decision tree guides adaptation of your core proposal for different funder types while maintaining essential elements. Foundation/private funders emphasize community partnership, government/institutional funders emphasize systematic methodology, corporate funders emphasize efficiency and results. Adapt emphasis, maintain foundation.

graph TB
    Start["Complete Proposal<br/>Foundation"]

    Decision{"Target Funder<br/>Type?"}

    subgraph Foundation["FOUNDATION/PRIVATE FUNDER EMPHASIS"]
        F1["Emphasize:<br/>Community partnership<br/>& grassroots authenticity"]
        F2["Emphasize:<br/>Innovation & local<br/>solution development"]
        F3["Emphasize:<br/>Sustainability through<br/>community ownership"]
        F4["Language:<br/>Community-driven,<br/>asset-based, locally-owned"]
    end

    subgraph Government["GOVERNMENT/INSTITUTIONAL FUNDER EMPHASIS"]
        G1["Emphasize:<br/>Evidence-based approach<br/>& systematic methodology"]
        G2["Emphasize:<br/>Professional quality<br/>& implementation readiness"]
        G3["Emphasize:<br/>Measurable outcomes<br/>& accountability systems"]
        G4["Language:<br/>Evidence-based, systematic,<br/>measurable, accountable"]
    end

    subgraph Corporate["CORPORATE/PRIVATE SECTOR EMPHASIS"]
        C1["Emphasize:<br/>Efficiency &<br/>results achievement"]
        C2["Emphasize:<br/>Innovation &<br/>problem-solving approach"]
        C3["Emphasize:<br/>Partnership leverage<br/>& resource maximization"]
        C4["Language:<br/>Efficient, results-driven,<br/>innovative, scalable"]
    end

    subgraph Core["MAINTAIN CORE ELEMENTS (All Types)"]
        M1["✓ Systematic foundation<br/>work evidence"]
        M2["✓ Community partnership<br/>documentation"]
        M3["✓ Implementation<br/>readiness demonstration"]
        M4["✓ Sustainability planning<br/>through local ownership"]
    end

    Decision -->|Foundation/Private| F1 --> F2 --> F3 --> F4
    Decision -->|Government/Institutional| G1 --> G2 --> G3 --> G4
    Decision -->|Corporate/Private Sector| C1 --> C2 --> C3 --> C4

    F4 --> M1
    G4 --> M1
    C4 --> M1

    M1 --> M2 --> M3 --> M4

    M4 --> Final["Adapted Proposal<br/>Maintaining Community<br/>Voice & Priorities"]

    style Start fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style Decision fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style Foundation fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style F1 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style F2 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style F3 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style F4 fill:#D9F99D,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style Government fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style G1 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style G2 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style G3 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style G4 fill:#FED7AA,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style Corporate fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style C1 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style C2 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style C3 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style C4 fill:#FEF3C7,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style Core fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style M1 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style M2 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style M3 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style M4 fill:#86EFAC,stroke:#007F4E,color:#2A2A2A
    style Final fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

See funder-specific examples

Usage Guidance

These 8 diagrams serve different purposes in proposal development:

Foundation Integration (2)

  • Diagram 1: Evidence-Based Proposal Foundation
  • Diagram 2: Generic vs Evidence-Based Transformation

Structure & Documentation (3)

  • Diagram 3: Complete Proposal Structure
  • Diagram 4: Partnership Documentation
  • Diagram 5: Cost-Effectiveness Documentation

Quality & Strategy (3)

  • Diagram 6: Quality Assessment Checklist
  • Diagram 7: Multi-Year Funding Strategy
  • Diagram 8: Funder Adaptation Decision Tree

How to Use This Page

  • For Learning: Review all 8 diagrams sequentially to understand complete proposal development process
  • For Implementation: Use specific diagrams as templates (e.g., Diagram 3 for proposal structure, Diagram 6 for quality assurance)
  • For Funder Communication: Use diagrams to explain methodology depth and systematic approach
  • For Team Training: Use visual diagrams to communicate proposal development process to staff and partners