As many of us know, the release of a grant program’s guidance document usually occurs roughly six weeks before the grant’s application deadline date. In the event that a current deadline is missed, common practice indicates that a would-be applicant should be targeting a submission to the next available offering.
Don’t approach this “down time” with idle hands–understand that there is always important work to be done with the next submission in mind.

The progression of the Information Age has fundamentally altered the ways in which people interact, affecting all areas of our lives. From communicating with friends and colleagues on platforms like Facebook and LinkedIn to keeping up with global news (and our favorite celebrities) via feeds such as Twitter and Digg, the world in which we live has become increasingly digital, connected, and immediate.

It has been two years of high price-tag legislation, including the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), and the upcoming debate over the extension of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. Given these kinds of historic legislation, Americans are experiencing something of a national sticker shock and demands for deficit reduction continue to grow. All of this is hardly auspicious news from the vantage point of grantseekers.

Even after a priority funding opportunity is identified and an organization is beginning down the grantwriting road, there are still pitfalls and roadblocks on what seems like a simple linear path. Employing a grantwriter that is not on organizational staff and might not be familiar with the intricacies of the project is a method of grantwriting that can present its own unique challenges to the grantseeking process. Grantwriting engagements involve both give and take—there is a necessary level of exchange of information and expectations from both the client and the grantwriter. Successful engagements often involve executive and editing support from those outside of the immediate grantwriting and client staff, and the grant development phase can become an arduous process for everyone if expectations are not clear. Collaborative involvement between a client and a professional grantwriter can result in the development of a superior proposal, and many common pitfalls of such an engagement can be avoided if all involved parties understand and commit to their roles in the grantwriting process.

Despite growing up in a truly Digital Generation fed by Wi-fi access, smart phones, and iPods, U.S. students are falling alarmingly behind in the same academic and professional fields that created such ubiquitous modern-day necessities. In mid-September, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and the National Science Board (NSB) released reports calling for renewed attention to how the United States attracts and educates students in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, or more popularly referred to as STEM.

By Vince Siragusa
October 2010 (GO Know)

Wouldn’t it be nice if you could run a project by the grant maker before spending hours on a grant proposal? Needless to say, you don’t want to waste valuable time and resources positioning an application with limited funding potential. Inasmuch as the applicant’s time can be better spent exploring other funding avenues, the grant maker doesn’t want to be inundated with applications for projects they have no real interest in supporting. Understanding the role of the Letter of Intent or Letter of Interest (LOI) is one of true time savers in the world of foundation grant seeking. This document must be as well developed as the project for which funding is warranted.

Run a grants search on the internet and you'll stumble across many websites claiming to provide access to "Free Money," "Grants for Moms," and "Government Grants - Everyone Approved!" These claims have a common theme—easy, free money. In a perfect world, organizations laboring for a worthy cause would be able to tap into the money they need simply on the basis of their noble aims. Unfortunately, there truly is no such thing as a free lunch.

As many organizations and agencies can attest, nothing quite compares to the disappointment of an unfunded grant application, particularly one that an organization has put its full weight behind with planning, implementation, and drive. It's tempting to take that application, throw it in the trash, and move on. However, successful, tenacious grantseeking often involves taking those applications that were not successful and learning from them.

Anyone who has ever been involved in a fundraising effort will recognize the following scenario in terms of process. A specific need for the organization has been identified. The equipment and training associated with the project will inevitably save time, money, and provide a long lasting impact to the community. Fiscally responsible organizations often factor in some level of cost-benefit analysis in their prioritization of projects, and without a viable funding source, often the project finds itself on the back burner when other costs such as salaries and overhead are factored into this zero-sum game.

Like most components of the $787 billion Recovery Act passed into law in 2009, the $4.35 billion Race to the Top grant program often receives notice as "unprecedented" for its sheer size. With nearly every state in the U.S. facing a budget deficit or outright fiscal crisis, the billions for education funding represent a critically important source to keep local school districts afloat.