Project is feasible given stated resources and timeline

What to Check

A research proposal must be feasible: the data must be obtainable, the methodology must be executable with the available data, and the timeline must be realistic. Unfeasible projects waste resources and may not produce results even if the question is interesting and new.

How to Check

Apply all three criteria. Failure on any one criterion is a blocker.

Criterion 1 — Data availability: Is the required data obtainable within the stated timeline and budget?

• For pre-existing data: does it actually exist, is it accessible (public, licensed, or negotiated), and is its quality sufficient for the stated methodology?
• For new data (survey, experiment): is the sample accessible, is funding secured for data collection, and is the timeline consistent with the collection and cleaning period needed?

Criterion 2 — Methodological executability: Given the data that will actually be available, can the proposed identification strategy be implemented?

• Does the instrument exist and vary as assumed? Is the running variable actually observed?
• Is the sample large enough for the proposed sub-group analyses?
• Are the assumptions (parallel trends, exclusion restriction, etc.) plausible for this specific data context?

Criterion 3 — Timeline realism: Can the project be completed within the stated or implied timeline?

• For dissertation chapters: is the timeline consistent with the program milestone requirements?
• For grant deliverables: are milestones achievable given data collection, analysis, and writing phases?
• Flag if the proposal assumes zero time for unexpected delays (data access problems, revisions, co-author coordination).

Pass Condition

All three criteria pass: data is accessible, the methodology is executable with that data, and the timeline has a credible path to completion with reasonable slack.

Failure Examples

1. Data not actually available: Proposal uses “administrative records from the Ministry of Finance.” No data access agreement exists; the ministry has not agreed to share. Timeline says “data acquisition: 1 month.” Access negotiations for administrative data typically take 6–24 months. Fails criterion 1.
2. Instrument does not vary: Proposal uses a DiD design where the “treatment” is a national policy that applies to all units simultaneously. No control group is identified. Methodology cannot be executed as described. Fails criterion 2.
3. Unrealistic timeline: Proposal for a field experiment includes: “survey design (2 weeks), IRB approval (2 weeks), data collection (1 month), analysis (1 month), writing (2 weeks).” IRB approval alone typically takes 2–6 months. Fails criterion 3.

Notes

• Feasibility is assessed relative to the specific resources available to the researcher — not in the abstract. A large-team project with grant funding has different feasibility constraints than a solo dissertation chapter.
• For established researchers proposing extensions of existing projects with existing data, criterion 1 is easily satisfied. Focus scrutiny on criteria 2 and 3.