Last week my cousin sent me a text message containing the following language:
"idk, lol ttfyn."
At 27 years old, I consider myself somewhat savvy and rather with the times. I have to admit, I had no clue what on earth she was talking about. Sadly, grant review can feel much like getting a text message from an 18 year old.
The other day I read a fairly well written proposal that, ufortuneately used more acronyms than even my cousin could come up with. While acronyms are somewhat par for the course in my line of business, deciphering them becomes rather daunting. What's worse, is that more often than not, the grant writer assumes the reviewer is familiar with the acronyms they've used. While reviewers are familiar with acronyms and know a lot of them, we're not always at the top of our game when we're trying to meet a deadline and have a hundred proposals to read.
Sadly, more than half of the proposals I've read lately have created their own alphebet soup of acronyms, changing titles of agencies, program names, and even, postion titles. The number one challenge for a reviewer is trying to remember what all of these aronyms mean while trying to figure out what the program is asking for and why they need the money. While it is common place to have one or even two acronyms within your proposal, you should avoid using them as much as possible. Changing "Smith County Community Corrections" to "Community Corrections," rather than "SCCC" can make all the difference in the world for a reviewer.
The inclusion of acronyms could not only be detrimental to your grant score but also to the overall understanding of your need. I always suggest that grant writers and programs have their grant read by someone completely un-related to a program to ensure that the proposal is written clearly. You should always assume that the reviewer is someone who is utterly unfamiliar with your program.
Is your agency acronym happy? If so, how do you avoid using them when trying to write a proposal or any other sort formal document?
Comments