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.

HHS recently announced over $390 million in federal funding for the Hospital Preparedness Program. This is federal funding that passes through state health departments to health care providers. Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that the federal government is requiring a 10% match on federal funds. In other words, states and local providers must commit at least $1 for every $10 in federal contributions.

In the grants world, "matching funds" means bringing two different funding sources together for one project. Match or cost-share requirements are minimum amounts of funding that must be derived from a source other grant funder. The purpose of match requirements is usually to promote collaborative efforts, as discussed in the July issue of GO Know, and/or demonstrate the ability of your organization to sustain a project beyond the life of a specific grant.

In the shadow of the recently closed Investing in Innovation (i3) grant program, the importance of collaborative projects and clear partner agreements remain vital pieces of a grantseeking and project development phase. This particular program involved the possibility of collaborative efforts, and documentation of these collaborations was required for this type of engagement.

The grants world is full of any number of variables that must be defined. To which grant program should I apply? How much time do I have for proposal development? Is there a need for collaboration? Will my project fit into the eligible expenses of the grant program?

These are a few of the many grant questions for which grant answers are necessary. By developing a familiarity with the funding opportunities and an understanding of how the system works, you will quickly begin to address some of these gaps.

If you are paying close attention to the health care funding landscape, a new phrase and abbreviation has entered the grants lexicon. Many opportunities being released by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) are being prefaced with "Affordable Care Act" or "ACA". Apparently, this is the consensus designation for grants authorized through the health reform legislation, or the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that was signed into law on March 23, 2010. The ACA has authorized several grant programs over the next decade to address workforce development and professional shortages in the health arena, improve health care quality overall, and fund the deployment of comprehensive care management delivery models.

With most schools officially on summer vacation, now is the perfect time for developing projects and mapping out a grant strategy for the coming months. As many grant programs for educational institutions involve significant collaboration, the summer months can provide time for creating relationships and beginning dialogue with potential grant partners.

By Susannah Mayhall
June 2010 (GO Know)

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 infused an unprecedented sum of public funding into the struggling American economy, making over $700 billion available for education, healthcare, public safety, and more. The Recovery Act bolstered support for new initiatives such as broadband infrastructure and energy efficiency. These massive amounts of funding produced a flurry of interest from various private sector industries, all hoping to become involved and receive their share of the stimulus.