For researchers in the Faculty Uplift Summit

Get the Model That Gets You Funded

Download the free companion brief. Walk away with the model.

The Logic Behind the Prose

Stop guessing if your proposal "feels" right. The difference between a triaged application and a funded one isn't the quality of the writing—it's the strength of the scientific model. This brief is a worksheet designed to help you isolate that core logic, stress-test it, and ensure your primary claim is actually a model, not just a list of methods.

This is not a writing template or a "hack" for NIH/NSF formatting. It is a logic check for your scientific model.

Inside the Brief

The Napkin Test. If you can't sketch your model on a napkin in thirty seconds, a reviewer can't either.
Nine qualities, not four. The talk only had time for four traits of a strong model. There are nine in total that determine if a claim actually holds up.
The Colleague Test. Hand your model to someone outside your subfield. What they say back tells you if it's ready.
The three-sentence template. Old model, break point, new model — the exact shape reviewers are trained to look for.
Which one is the star? Most weak proposals feature the wrong kind of claim. There's only room for one.
It's not a model if... Three ways researchers mistake data, methods, or vagueness for a model — and never notice.
Beyond the grant. The same model that gets you funded also holds up your papers, your talks, your mentoring conversations.


A Note from Morgan

I know this because I lived it. Early in my faculty career at UNC Chapel Hill, I faced six rejections in a row. My prose was clean, and my editors were great, but the proposals were still missing the mark. I realized the problem wasn't the writing—it was the model. I'm Morgan Giddings, founder of SCI•Foundry, and I built this resource to help researchers find the logic that reviewers actually reward.

— Morgan Giddings, PhD

Copyright © 2025 Marketing Your Science LLC. All Rights Reserved