Filling Out and Assembling the Proposal Forms

Last updated on 02/15/2026 by Mike Eracleous

LaTeX FormVersion 24-5 (2024-05-15)

This page contains step-by-step instructions on how to put togethe a proposal. A summary of instructions is also included in the LATEX file containing the form, but the  instructions given here are more detailed.
It is the responsibility of the proposer(s) to read these instructions carefully, understand  them, and follow them.  

As noted in the PSU HET Primer, the available facility instruments are the HPF and LRS2 (red and blue cameras).  VIRUS is available on a shared-risk basis.  

Please refer to the road map at the end of the Call for Proposals for a concise summary of all the stages of preparing and submitting a proposal.

Necessary Files

The necessary files reside on PSU’s Google Drive and the links are provided below.

• To write the science justification, download the two files below. (these files were developed over the years by Robin Ciardullo, Mike Eracleous, Jason Wright, and Felicia Krauss). 

HET_form_24-5.tex, the current LaTeX template for all proposals (updated in May 2024)

PSUHET24-5.cls, the required LaTeX class file 

(HET_form_24-5.pdf shows you how the blank form should look).

• To put together the target list you will need to make a copy of the Target List Google Sheet Template.

• Read below for instructions on how to fill out the these forms.

• Submit the final PDF file following the instructions on the Submission tab.

Filling Out the Proposal LaTeX Form

As a general rule, the proposers should not change the font sizes, line spacing, and margins of the LaTeX document nor deviate from the default format of the form in order to buy themselves a little bit of extra space. The reviewers can spot these deviations from the standard format and they "frown upon them." 

Proposal Title and Investigators

Enter a concise title along with the name and email address of the principal investigator. The email address should be complete (do not just give the PI's Penn State user ID for example). Enter as many members of the proposing team as you can along with their affiliations. If you cannot enter the names all the co-investigators, makes sure you include the critical team members (those who have the most relevant scientific and technical expertise to the proposed program). 

If the PI is an undergraduate student, the student's research advisor should be listed as the first co-investigator. The expectation here is that the advisor would be guiding the student through the process of putting together and submitting the proposal.

Observing Request Summary

Summarize your time and instrument request and observational constraints. Timing and  other constraints should be justified in later sections of the proposal (e.g., in the Scientific  Justification or in the Experimental Design). Entries should consist of pure numbers in  the units given, or allowed options, as specified. Some of the entries in this summary are  self-explanatory; the others are clarified below. In the case of observing constraints, if no  constraint is desired, give a sufficiently extreme number (see specific instructions below).  

• Exposure Time / Total Time – Give both the net exposure time and the total time  requested in hours. The total time should include overhead as applicable. After  completing the proposal, check your own entries in this section against the accounting  summary at the end of the proposal.  

• Collaborative Proposal – Those proposals that represent a collaboration between the  HET partner institutions. For such proposals, the time request should include only the Penn State share of the time. Explain in the Description of Observations how the total  time is divided up between institutions.  

• Maximum Sky Brightness – Specify the desired sky brightness as D (dark; near new  moon), G (grey, near 7-day moon), B (bright, near full moon), or N (no constraint). Do  not leave this entry blank and do not use combinations of the allowed letters (one allowed letter only). If you can use dark or grey time, for example, then enter “G”. Note that the  sky brightness as seen by the HET appears to be 1–2 mag higher than what one might  expect, namely:
  0-day moon → µV ~ 20.8 mag/☐",
  7-day moon →  µV ~ 20.4 mag/☐", and
  14-day moon →  µV ~ 18.0 mag/☐"
  For more details, see the HET Performance Characteristics page. On that page follow the Image Quality link to see summary statistics on image quality and transparency. To see detailed statistics on image quality, transparency, and sky brightness, go directly to Sky Quality Statistics page.

• Maximum Seeing – The maximum acceptable seeing (i.e., image quality) for your  observations. Consult the relevant HET RA Web page for the most up-to-date statistics  and make your choice accordingly. If you do not want to impose a constraint set the  maximum seeing to 10′′.  

• Sky Transparency – Choose one of the following:
  P (photometric, ≥ 95%),
  S  (spectroscopic, 50–95%), or
  N (no constraint).  

• Split Exposure – Give the maximum interval of time (in days) over which the exposure  can be broken up without affecting the scientific goals of the program. Enter 120 if no  constraint is desired.  

• Special Calibrations – The standard calibration observations (taken by default, without  any special request) should be described on the relevant HET RA Web pages. If you need  additional or different calibration data, you should answer “y” to this question and give  details in the Description of Observations.  

Scientific Justification

Make your scientific case concisely and clearly. Do not overflow the allowed space,  defined by the box. Figures, tables, and references, up to one page, can be added on the  following page. See the instructions in the LATEX file, in the block just before the  Contingency Plan section.  

You can insert figures and references using your favorite method but please observe the following rules:

• Only one extra page is allowed for figures and references. Any additional pages may be removed before the proposal is passed on to the TAC.

• Do not change the fonts of the references or the figure captions, nor the margins or box sizes. The TAC frowns upon such tricks. 

• Make sure that the figures and all their labels are clear and legible. It often happens that a figure is shrunk to fit into the space available with the results that the fonts shrink accordingly and the labels become illegible. This is something you should avoid.

Experimental Design

Explain how the scientific goals of the project dictate the choice of instrument, instrument configuration, exposure time, number of visits, etc. Also briefly describe the path from the data  to the conclusions e.g., what do you aim to measure and how well do you need to  measure it in order to achieve the scientific goals or the project. Give enough information for the TAC to evaluate the feasibility of the observations. There is no formal page quota for this section, but be concise and do not  use this space to make the scientific case for your observations; all the scientific arguments in support of the proposal should go in the scientific justification.  

Proposals requesting ToO time must include an estimate of the probability that the observations will be triggered and the rationale/logic behind this estimate. Such an estimate may be quite uncertain but the proposal should still include the best estimate (and range) that can be made at the time of writing.

Description of Observations

Describe the strategy and scientific requirements for your observations, giving enough  information for the HET resident astronomer to understand how to carry them out. Any  requests for non-standard calibrations should be described in this section and the  calibration targets should also be included in the target lists.  

All proposers should check the observability and feasibility calculator on the HET Observability Page to see to see the track lengths and observability periods of their targets during the trimester (see the useful scripts and plots in the second half of the page). 

Proposals requesting ToO time should consider carefully and balance competing constraints on rapid response and observing conditions. For example, a ToO proposal that requests very rapid response will have to relax constraints on observing conditions (e.g., seeing, transparency, background). The resident astronomers will need clear guidance on these matters because the default interpretation of the constraints is to carry out the requested observations as soon as the observing conditions meet the requirements expressed in the proposal. Moreover, the TAC will be paying attention to these issues in order to evaluate the technical feasibility of the requested observations.  

Observing and Target Notes

Give any special instructions or special notes for individual targets here. Number your  notes and use the same number as in Column A of the Exposure Table to indicate an  association between notes and targets. Specify any nonstandard assumptions of  overheads, for instance for switching between LRS modules or for extra acquisition time  for HPF. 

Plan for Reduced Allocation

Describe briefly how the scientific goals of your program will be affected if only a  fraction of the requested time is allocated or if the time is allocated at a lower priority than requested. Give the minimum time (or sample size in case  of survey programs) and/or target requirements to attain a meaningful scientific result. Do not overflow the allocated space (bounded by a box). Do not try put in this section any new or duplicate information that belongs in other sections of the proposal (e.g., the scientific justification or the experimental design); instead, refer to otehr sections of the proposal as needed. Keep it concise and to the point. 

Since the PSU HET time is often oversubscribed, the TAC relies on this section to understand if a smaller allocation of time or an allocation at a lower priority than requested is still useful for a particular program. Therefore, it should be completed thoughtfully. The TAC will not use its own judgement to infer what priorities are useful for the proposed program. If this section is blank or vague, the TAC will assume that the proposed program absolutely needs all the time requested and at the priority requested. Therefore, if the TAC cannot allocate all of the requested time at the requested priority, it will not allocate any time at all.

Here are some examples where the plan is concise, clear, and to the point:

• “We request P0 time since the main goal of this program is to observe a binary star at a specific orbital phase during the first three weeks of the trimester. P1 time may be useful, but there is a substantial risk that competition with other programs will not allow our proposed observations to be carried out at exactly the right time. P2–4 time is not useful for these observations  because competition with higher priority time will make it almost impossible to get the proposed observations at the right time.”  
  In this case the proposers state clearly what priority they are requesting and why. They also make it clear that the program can tolerate P1 time, even though it is not optimal and they also note that P2–4 is useless. Therefore the TAC will only allocate P0 or P1 time, if available. If the proposal does not rank high enough and P0–1 time is allocated to higher-ranking proposals, this program will not get any time at all. 

• “Since this a survey program, any allocation of time at any priority is useful. We will use the allocated time to observe as many objects we can during the upcoming trimester and we will return with followup proposals in future trimesters to complete the survey.”
  In this case the proposers make it clear that any time allocation is acceptable because of the nature of the program. Therefore the TAC will allocate as much time as possible, even at low priority (even P4). 

• “This a large survey program that has been running for the past four trimesters. Most of the 35 targets have been observed and the three remaining targets are the subject of this proposal. Therefore, we request P0–1 to observe these remaining targets and complete the program. The reasons for needing all targets to be observed to get a significant scientific result are explained in the experimental design section of the proposal.”
  This is a program that is very close to completion. The proposers can legitimately request high-priority time to observe their last few targets. They also refer the TAC to the sections of the proposal where they explain why they need all the proposed targets. 

• “As we explain in the scientific justification, the observations of some targets need to be contemporaneous with HST observations.. Therefore, we request 1.34 hours of P0 time for those observations so that we can coordinate them with the HST observations. We request 6.32 hours of P2 time for the fainter of the remaining targets so that they can be observed during good weather in order to achieve the necessary S/N (see Experimental Design). For five very bright targets, we request 1.2 hours of P3 since they can be observed even in marginal weather. For all the targets that are not also HST targets, any priority is useful acceptable”
  This proposal requests a mix of priorities and explains why. Importantly, the text spells our unambiguously how much time is requested at each priority, which saves the TAC from having to make assumptions and guesses. Moreover, there is a statement at the end that tells the TAC that lower priority is still useful for some targets (and specifies those targets).

Here are some examples where the plan is either vague or uninformative and does not give the TAC much to work with:

• The section entitled  PLAN FOR REDUCED ALLOCATION is blank.
  The TAC will take the priorities entered in the target list at face value and will not consider allocating time at any other priority. 

• “We request P2 time so that we have a fair chance of getting the observations executed in the upcoming trimester.”
  In this example the proposers do not provide a clear and compelling justification for their request that is based on scientific or practical/operational grounds. Therefore the TAC will only consider allocating P2 time, if the proposal ranked high enough. If only P3 is available, this program will not get any time at all. 

• “Since the science is very timely, we request P1 time in order to complete the observations in the upcoming trimester.”
  The argument here is vague and not particularly strong on its face. The proposers are relying on the TAC to appreciate the timeliness of the proposed observations based on other sections of the proposal. If the proposal does not rank high enough for P1 time and the TAC does not see why the program is timely, no time will be allocated.

• “We can manage with a reduced allocation for our first target but we may then come back in a future trimester to request more time. If we do not get time at P1 that will prevent us from coordinating the observations with the Whole Earth Telescope and therefore we will not be able to get 5% flux calibration of our spectra. ”
  These may be correct statements but they do not explain clearly to the TAC if and how well this program can tolerate lower-priority time. The opening sentence is not particularly informative because the TAC may not consider the program urgent (especially if it did not rank very high). The second sentence is a technical statement that should be accompanied by a more detailed explanation in the experimental design section. 

Connection to Thesis Project or Previous Use of the HET

Graduate students who are submitting a proposal as principal investigators and intend to use the data from the proposed observing program for their thesis should enter a brief explanation of how their proposal is connected to their thesis project. For example, the requested observations may represent the beginning of the thesis project or they may provide the last data needed for the thesis to be completed. Student principal investigators who do not intend to use the data from this proposal for their thesis state this clearly and concisely and then follow the instructions in the next paragraph.

If the principal investigator is an undergraduate student, the TAC recommends that, they use this box to explain who they are, the role they played in putting together the proposal, and whether this proposal is related to their honors thesis. This clarification is for practical purposes, i.e., to introduce the PI to the TAC who may otherwise not recognize the name. Any other information that puts the project in context, e.g., identifying the student's advisor and/or team, is also helpful. However, this space should be used to make scientific or technical arguments about the proposed observations.

Other proposers should describe their previous use of  HET in the past two years. This section gives the TAC context on  the amount of previous allocations, the fraction of those allocations used, the status and progress of ongoing programs, and the scientific output those allocations have enabled.  Publications resulting from past programs can be entered here as well. The TAC relies on the proposers to give a concise, informative, and self-contained summary. Links to one's ADS bibliography are not at all useful (the TAC members will not be inclined to sift through the proposer's bibliography, find the papers that are relevant, and figure out for themselves what the proposer has done with their HET time in the past couple of years).

Students who have just defended their thesis or are so close to finishing their thesis that the proposed observations will not have any impact on it, will be regarded by the TAC as “other proposers” and will be expected to fill out this section accordingly.

Do not try put in this section any new or duplicate information that belongs in other sections of the proposal (e.g., the scientific justification or the experimental design). 

Filling out the Object and Exposure Tables

Object and exposure tables should be constructed using this Google Sheets template.  Make your own, separate copy of this spreadsheet for each proposal you wish to submit: in the command menu-bar use File → Make a copy, give the copy the desired name and select where to store it. Do not download this spreadsheet and open it in Excel; make a copy in Google Sheets and edit the copy in your browser. The next section gives instructions on how to incorporate the tables from the spreadsheet in your proposal.

Object Table

For large surveys, only enter enough objects to show the range of observation parameters.  But you should give the total number of objects so that these can be counted correctly in  the automatic accounting summary.  

Exposure Table

List every exposure sequence your program will use. Be sure that the number on the  summary page accurately reflects your intentions, and is faithfully reported in your  LaTeX document.  

You may modify the overhead values using the “Overhead adjustment” column (do not  modify the defaults) if you justify it in your proposal. For instance, if you have a large  survey and experience shows you will have a lower average overhead over many  observations, you may adjust the overhead downwards.  

If you plan on doing multiple exposures at a single pointing (a “CRSPLIT” in HET  jargon) you should add the readout time as an “overhead adjustment”.  

“LRS2-B+LRS2-R” means that you request both sides of the LRS2 spectrograph during  the same visit. The spreadsheet is programmed to assume that this incurs only 2 minutes of overhead to switch between modules, instead of the usual 10 minutes for a new  pointing.   

Preparing the Proposal for Submission

Fill out the LaTeX file as described above, and run LaTeX to produce a PDF file. If your LaTeX installation produces postscript files, convert these to PDF before  submission. Please take extra care when completing the LaTeX form and follow the  instructions above and in the LaTeX template carefully.  Check that the summary of the requested number of hours calculated in the Summary Table tab of the spreadsheet are consistent with the numbers you enter in your LaTeX file. 

From the Google spreadsheet create a PDF file with the Object Table, Exposure Table, and Summary Table tabs and append these as the last pages of their proposal.  The PDF file can be made in your browser on Google Sheets by clicking on File > Print (bottom of the menu); then on the upper right select Worksheet under Print, and select only the middle three sections/tabs (not the Instructions tab and not the Overhead Assumptions tab). Then choose to save those as a PDF file in the subsequent dialog box. Examine these PDF files and ensure they are legible, and do not include any pages with just blank cells or pages that were not requested (e.g., Instructions or Overhead Assumptions). Append the final target pages to the the scientific justification file to produce a single PDF file.  

After producing the final, self-contained PDF file, name it using the first initial of your first name and your entire last name, followed by an underscore and a number. For example, if your name is Principal Investigator, name your files as PInvestigator_1.pdf, PInvestigator_2.pdf, etc. Include an underscore and a number even if you are submitting only one proposal.  

Submit your final proposal through Google Forms following the instructions in the submission tab.