What do reviewers actually check in this figure?

Three things: whether the work packages cover the objectives (each objective needs at least one package), whether each package names a real method rather than a slogan, and whether the outcomes are measurable (numbers of papers, patents, demonstration sites). This template aligns the three in columns, so a missing box is obvious to a reviewer, and equally useful as a self-check while writing.

Three work packages side by side make the figure too wide

Keep each box under a few words, or reduce each package to two boxes (scope + methods, with outputs folded into the expected outcomes). If it is still too wide, change the first line to flowchart LR: the packages stack vertically and the figure becomes tall and narrow, which suits a portrait page.

Can I show which key problem each work package addresses?

Split "Key problems to solve" into separate nodes inside G1 and connect each to the matching work package group (for example C1 --> G2). Cross-group links disable the left-to-right layout inside G1, so remove its direction LR and let the nodes stack.

Grant Proposal Roadmap Template

Previewed in the “Ink Teal” theme; you can switch themes in the editor

When to use it

The "research plan" or "methodology" figure in a grant application: national or regional research funding, internal university grants, industry-sponsored projects. Reviewers check whether objectives, work packages, methods and outcomes line up, so this template puts the objectives at the top, three work packages side by side each with its own methods and interim output, and the expected outcomes and final review at the bottom. Following the arrows, a reviewer can verify which objective each work package serves and what it produces.

Making it yours

Replace "Scope", "Methods" and "Interim output" with concrete wording: "multi-source data fusion model", "comparative experiments + ablation", "one algorithm + one paper". Keep each box short and split long ones.
With two work packages delete the whole G4 block plus G1 --> G4 and G4 --> G5; with four, copy the block as G6.
Write the expected outcomes in the categories your funder counts: papers, patents, software, standards, demonstrations, trained researchers.
If one work package depends on another (WP2 uses WP1's results), add G2 --> G3; the layout engine will stagger them.
Applications are usually printed in black and white: switch to the Light theme before exporting, and keep Ink Teal for the interview slides.

Mermaid code

grant-application-roadmap.mmd

flowchart TB
    subgraph G1[Objectives]
        direction LR
        A[Scientific question] --> B[Overall objective] --> C[Key problems to solve]
    end
    subgraph G2[Work package 1]
        direction LR
        D[Scope] --> E[Methods] --> F[Interim output]
    end
    subgraph G3[Work package 2]
        direction LR
        G[Scope] --> H[Methods] --> I[Interim output]
    end
    subgraph G4[Work package 3]
        direction LR
        J[Scope] --> K[Methods] --> L[Interim output]
    end
    subgraph G5[Expected outcomes]
        direction LR
        M[Papers / patents] --> N[Demonstration] --> O(Final review)
    end
    G1 --> G2
    G1 --> G3
    G1 --> G4
    G2 --> G5
    G3 --> G5
    G4 --> G5

Ask an AI for one with this structure

Send the prompt below to ChatGPT or Claude, then paste the whole reply into the editor; the code inside is detected automatically.

prompt.txt

Draw a grant proposal roadmap in Mermaid flowchart TB syntax for the project [project title]. Five subgraph groups with the group name in square brackets and direction LR inside: Objectives (scientific question → overall objective → key problems to solve); Work package 1 [name] (scope → methods [...] → interim output [...]); Work package 2 [name] (same); Work package 3 [name] (same); Expected outcomes (papers / patents → demonstration → final review, the last node rounded). Connect Objectives to each work package and each work package to Expected outcomes, all by subgraph ids. Output only the mermaid code block.

FAQ

What do reviewers actually check in this figure?: Three things: whether the work packages cover the objectives (each objective needs at least one package), whether each package names a real method rather than a slogan, and whether the outcomes are measurable (numbers of papers, patents, demonstration sites). This template aligns the three in columns, so a missing box is obvious to a reviewer, and equally useful as a self-check while writing.
Three work packages side by side make the figure too wide: Keep each box under a few words, or reduce each package to two boxes (scope + methods, with outputs folded into the expected outcomes). If it is still too wide, change the first line to flowchart LR: the packages stack vertically and the figure becomes tall and narrow, which suits a portrait page.
Can I show which key problem each work package addresses?: Split "Key problems to solve" into separate nodes inside G1 and connect each to the matching work package group (for example C1 --> G2). Cross-group links disable the left-to-right layout inside G1, so remove its direction LR and let the nodes stack.

More in this category

All templates

Updated 2026-09-22