Prepare the source pack
Choose the proposal kind and supply the buyer brief, approved evidence, delivery assumptions and commercial terms. For RFP work, retain the issued requirements and separate known answers from missing evidence.
Arc · worked guide
Research proposal format: connect the question to the method
A research proposal explains the question a study would answer, why that question matters, how the work would be conducted and what resources it would require. A useful format makes the proposed method and its limits inspectable. Follow the receiving institution’s required sections and funding rules before using a general template.
Choose the Research proposal type →Arc · real output
From a supplied scope to a proposal you can inspect.
Read a real exported proposal alongside the brief Arc received. The example keeps supplied scope, commercial assumptions and reviewer responsibility visible.
Consulting proposal: repairs satisfaction measurement, Harbourside Housing Association
A ten-week advisory engagement for an invented housing association: situation, approach and phases, a requirement-by-requirement compliance matrix, deliverables, timeline, team, terms, and a fee built phase by phase from the bidder's day rates, with the days of each role shown.
Inspect the source brief or data
Propose a ten-week advisory engagement for Harbourside Housing Association, on behalf of Larkfield Analytics Ltd, that answers the association's brief: review the current repairs survey, recommend how to measure repairs satisfaction by contractor, and leave a reporting approach for the repairs team and the board. Build the fee for each phase from the standard rates in the evidence file (the days of each role times the day rate) and show those days. Add nothing the evidence file does not state. Put a notice on the cover page that the buyer and the bidder are fictional and the proposal is a worked example. Inputs: the buyer's document (brief-harbourside-housing.md); the bidder's evidence file (larkfield-evidence.md); commercial terms: value 46,000 to 52,000 GBP, valid for 60 days, payment terms 'Invoiced monthly in arrears, payable within 30 days.'; deal context: The buyer and the bidder in this proposal are fictional, and this proposal is a worked example. The engagement lead presents to the buyer's board in the ninth week.
Read the sample review notes
A separate reviewer agent read its 177 claims against the bidder's evidence file, the buyer's brief and the deal terms: 115 are supported, 58 add design detail or an inference, 4 are in no input (it calls the fee fixed) and none contradicts one. Every price line recomputes. It is not a person's review.
Review the proposed response
Inspect scope, exclusions, requirements and price assumptions. Use reviewable edits and saved comparisons; an unresolved buyer question needs an owner or an explicit qualification.
Package the reviewed version
Inspect the actual PDF, Word or HTML output. Tracked delivery activity and a recorded deal outcome answer different questions; verify the recipient, permissions and current approval state before sharing.
Buyer requirements and response ownership
Keep buyer RFP files separate from bidder evidence and approved reusable answers. Inspect extraction coverage, requirement source locations, questionnaire previews and submission limits. Response work can carry an SME owner, due date, escalation owner and required reviewer decisions. Compare an addendum with the source before changing a response.
Commercial schedules and recurring totals
Review each line's quantity, rate, unit, optional status and one-off, monthly or annual recurrence. Inspect recurrence totals and the estimated first-year total separately. Currency, supplied tax input and commercial assumptions need review. When importing Business metrics, select and review the source values before applying them to the schedule.
Buyer edition and submission package
Choose the current saved response or an approved edition. Inspect retained attachments, filled questionnaires, the compliance matrix and the package preview. A release manifest identifies stored delivery bytes. For tracked links, review recipient access, expiry, password and permissions separately from delivery activity and the recorded opportunity outcome.
A draft or readiness check is not approval of pricing, legal terms or a delivery commitment. Arc proposal drafting does not imply CRM, CPQ or tax-calculation automation.
Filled research-planning template
This filled example is an editorial explanation of the structure. The related real product output above is separately identified.
| Part | Example and review point |
|---|---|
| Working question | Fictional example: Which onboarding steps do first-time users find unclear? |
| Scope | One product’s existing onboarding flow; no claim about all users or other products. |
| Method | Review permitted support notes, prepare an interview guide, recruit eligible participants and record how responses will be analyzed. |
| Evidence | List the actual prior studies and documents supplied. Mark missing references rather than inventing citations. |
| Schedule and budget | Separate preparation, recruitment, data collection, analysis and reporting; enter approved effort, rates and dependencies for each stage. |
Review the proposed study, not a claimed result
State what would count as evidence and what the chosen method cannot establish. Separate a proposed participant count from people already recruited. Identify consent, privacy, ethics and organizational approvals that require review before collection begins. Arc can draft a Research proposal from supplied context; it does not conduct the study or create valid findings. Use the proposal to request a decision on the planned work, and revise the method or resource request when the source assumptions change.
Reference: UKRI EPSRC proposal guidance. Checked 20 October 2026.
Updated
More from Gixo