PU615 · Unit 7

PU615 Unit 7 budget and justification example

Grant Writing for Health Promotion Projects Purdue University Global Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

Year one of Molars First asks for $226,906.33, and the PU615 Unit 7 budget and justification sets that request in the object classes of the SF-424A, personnel through indirect charges. Every line carries its own arithmetic, and every paragraph of justification tests its cost the way federal cost principles do: allowable, allocable to this project, and reasonable.

What this page holds

At $226,906.33 for year one, a PU615 Unit 7 budget sets out personnel, fringe, equipment and a de minimis indirect charge on a stated base, each line justified. Searches like "pu 615 unit 7 assignment example", "pu615 unit 7 sample" and "pu615 unit 7 example" land here.

What a finished PU615 Unit 7 budget and justification looks like

A one-page table comes first, arranged by SF-424A object class, and the five pages behind it justify each class in turn. Personnel totals $102,544: the coordinator at half time, $28,080; the hygienist and the assistant at 0.6 FTE each, $43,680 and $26,208; a data clerk at a tenth, $4,576. Fringe at the county's 34.5 percent adds $35,377.68. Travel is $2,275, mostly 2,280 miles hauling equipment between schools. Equipment holds two portable dental units at $7,850 each. Supplies come to $13,281, including sealant materials at $8.60 per child sealed. Contractual carries $26,760, of which $12,480 is a subaward to the health center for referral work. Other is $3,420. Indirect charges of $27,548.65 bring the request to $226,906.33, or $378.18 per child sealed.

How a PU615 Unit 7 example is structured

Federal cost principles supply the frame. Each paragraph asks three things of its line, in the order a grants management specialist would: whether the cost is allowable under the notice, whether it is allocable to this project rather than to the county's other work, and whether the amount is reasonable against a named source. Allocation matters most for personnel, since the hygienist's other 0.4 FTE belongs to the county's immunization clinics and time records will show the split. Reasonableness rests on evidence: the county pay plan for wages, two vendor quotes for the portable units, the 45 clinic days from Unit 5 for every per-day cost. Category rules follow where a reviewer might pause, among them the subrecipient status of the health center. Estimated Medicaid program income, about $30,206, sits below the total and is never netted from it.

Hours before dollars

Each personnel line starts from the hours the methods require, 45 clinic days plus consent, recheck and charting time, and only then applies the hourly rate. A reviewer doubting the 0.6 FTE can challenge the hours instead of the salary.

Why two units count as equipment

Under the federal definition, equipment starts at the lesser of the recipient's capitalization level or the federal threshold. Ashgrove capitalizes at $5,000, so each $7,850 unit is equipment, while the $3,480 sterilizer stays in supplies.

Contractor or subrecipient

The collaborating dentist sells hours to the county and is priced as a contract. The health center carries out referral work toward the project's own objectives, so its $12,480 is a subaward, with the monitoring duties that classification brings.

Indirect on a stated base

Lacking a negotiated rate, the county applies the de minimis 15 percent to modified total direct costs of $183,657.68. The base excludes the $15,700 of equipment, and the paragraph shows the subtraction rather than asserting the result.

Absent on purpose

Fluoride varnish appears nowhere in the request, because the district already provides it under a state grant. It is listed below the total as a partner contribution, beside the donated school space, so no line pays twice for one service.

Where marks go in PU615 Unit 7

Budget rubrics in PU615 tend to mark traceability first: can each figure be followed back to an activity and a rate? This example passes that test on every line, and its 45 clinic days reconcile with the methods to the day. Accuracy is the second criterion, and here the table foots to the cent, per-child and per-sealant figures are both shown, and nothing is rounded silently. Category handling earns further credit, because the equipment threshold, the subaward and the indirect base are each explained where a reviewer would pause. Budgets of this kind lose marks for lump sums without arithmetic, for personnel shown as salaries with no hours behind them, for indirect charges applied to the wrong base, and for costs the narrative never mentions, which a reviewer will simply strike.

Get a PU615 Unit 7 example written to your instructions

Attach the PU615 Unit 7 prompt, the funder's budget form or categories, and the activities and staffing from the methods section. The free first custom sample, delivered within 24-48 hours, prices each line from quantity and rate, explains category choices such as equipment and indirect costs, and foots to the cent.

PU615 Unit 7 questions, answered

What is modified total direct cost?

It is the base to which many indirect rates apply under federal rules. It starts from total direct costs and removes certain items, most commonly equipment, patient care, rent, tuition and participant support costs, plus the portion of any subaward above a set amount. Showing that subtraction line by line is what lets a reviewer confirm your indirect figure.

Should in-kind contributions appear in the budget?

Usually below the requested total and clearly labeled, unless the funder requires cost sharing and specifies where to show it. Listing donated space, staff time or services demonstrates community commitment, but mixing them into the request inflates it and leaves reviewers unsure what the funder is actually being asked to pay for.

How precise do the figures need to be?

Precise enough to recalculate. Show hours and rates rather than annual lump sums, carry cents where the arithmetic produces them, and make sure the table, the justification and the narrative use identical numbers. A small inconsistency between sections suggests the budget was built apart from the plan, which is exactly the suspicion reviewers read for.