There is always more to learn about how to research and find the best grant opportunities and funders for your organization. But what happens when it’s time to talk to that potential funder? What do you say? How do you get their attention and fuel their curiosity? How can you talk about your nonprofit without overwhelming them with details?

With the passage of the CARES Act and other COVID-19 response funding packages there has been a surge in stimulus-sourced grant opportunities, the likes of which have not been seen since 2008-2009 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Out of the nearly $2 trillion CARES Act package came a number of direct allocations or entitlements, as well as competitive grant opportunities totaling approximately $234 billion and acting as a means for local and state governments, healthcare and education providers, and other organizations to prepare for- respond to- and maintain continued operations during the global coronavirus pandemic. Of this amount, the US Department of Education alone was granted $30.75 billion in funding to support continued K-12 and higher education efforts. 

While not a new notion, the desire to avoid hasty generalizations within one’s grant proposal is ever present. We are all guilty of it. Facing character or page limits, we often try to distill complex ideas down to as few of words as possible while still making our message clear. We make broad-based statements such as, “surveillance cameras can help our police department reduce crime”, “video conferencing equipment will empower our hospital fight the opioid epidemic”, or “1:1 classroom technology is necessary for successful education in this digital age”. However, there is a huge problem with these kinds of statements. They are weak arguments that do not tell the funder anything of actual substance.

Has the perfect grant opportunity ever presented itself to you, but with the caveat that the deadline is next week and that you just aren’t ready to apply in such a short time? In over two decades of grant writing, I’ve encountered this scenario all too often with my clients which is why I think it’s so important to spend a little time to make sure you are ready when the next great grant opportunity comes your way.  

The 2020 grant landscape contains dozens of education, workforce development, and public safety programs offering priority consideration for projects deployed inside a Qualified Opportunity Zone (QOZ). This classification originates with the US Department of Treasury and - at its core - has absolutely nothing to do with grants. Zones are selected by individual State Governors as a way to bring private financial investment into distressed communities. So you might find yourself wondering, “why does language about QOZ tax breaks and capital gains continue to pop up in our grants world?”

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was created over 35 years ago to “open up the workings of government to public scrutiny” (Fielding v. CIA, 1983). This system allows any US citizen to request information about the daily activities and spending of their government agencies. And while many folks are aware of news organizations leveraging FOIA for investigative journalism, the media makes up less than 8% of all FOIA petitions annually (Schouten 2017). More often, individuals, law firms, and private businesses leverage this system to gain valuable information for their own daily operations at little to no-cost.

As more and more school districts and institutions of higher education gain interest in the possibilities of Esports, many wonder how they will be able to finance the often expensive equipment needed for start-up and eventual tournament success in these new arenas.  Following we’ll look at some of the biggest challenges to finding external funding for your Esports initiative, as well as offer guidance on potential solutions

n reality, nearly 95% of all law enforcement agencies in the US have less than 100 full-time officers on staff (Reaves 2015). Three quarters serve communities of less than 10,000 residents. These small, usually rural, jurisdictions face the same crime problems as their counterparts in urban locations, but they must do so with lower budgets, less staff, and insufficient equipment 

Not surprisingly, demand for the pilot round of SVPP funding in Summer 2018 far exceeded the available supply of grant dollars. Only 45% of the 200+ submitted applications were funded, and competition for the 2019 grant cycle (applications due May 31st) is anticipated to be even more fierce. These steep odds have districts across the US asking – What is the Department of Justice looking for? How can we stand out from the pack? In searching for answers to these questions, it is beneficial to review previous awards.

It is true that a vast majority of private foundations skip over government agencies when creating their criteria for giving. This decision is not necessarily because the board disagrees with a Mayor’s politics, or because they don’t appreciate the local fire department. More often than not, the choice to not distribute to government groups is due to some complex tax argument offered by the foundation’s accountant. But there are numerous exceptions to this rule – and finding that needle in a haystack funder can be worthwhile for a small government initiative, particularly if there are no viable state or federal funding sources available.

It is true that a vast majority of private foundations skip over government agencies when creating their criteria for giving. This decision is not necessarily because the board disagrees with a Mayor’s politics, or because they don’t appreciate the local fire department. More often than not, the choice to not distribute to government groups is due to some complex tax argument offered by the foundation’s accountant. But there are numerous exceptions to this rule – and finding that needle in a haystack funder can be worthwhile for a small government initiative, particularly if there are no viable state or federal funding sources available.

Being deliberate and selective in the grant programs and funders that your organization pursues allows you to maximize your most precious commodity: your time. It also decreases the odds of rejection and risk of “giving up on grants completely” after multiple failed attempts.  With that in mind, we encourage you to consider the following before you decided to take the plunge on a given grant opportunity.

Any seasoned grant professional will tell you that rejection is part of life. And while the data for predicting proposal acceptance rates is spotty, at best, many grant seeking organizations set an arbitrary acceptance rate goal for their measure of grant seeking success.

The truth is that your proposal is just a plan. Plans are blueprints to a successful implementation, but they are not meant to be static. As such, you might wish to keep the following tips and suggestions in mind when your next grant-funded project requires modification!

It’s only human nature to feel demoralized after you put all your time and energy into a proposal only to receive a negative response from the grantmaker. The easiest thing to do is throw in the towel, protecting both your time and ego. However, if you are willing to be patient and persevere, the rewards can be plentiful.

On July 31st President Trump signed into law the Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act. This bill effectively reauthorizes the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006. Perkins funds are commonly known for being the federal government’s primary vehicle for supporting Career and Technical Education (CTE) at high schools and community/technical colleges across the country. This is a win for career education advocates who have spent the last 6 years arguing for updates to Perkins law in effort to make it more consistent with previous changes to the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (made in 2013).

For many grant funders, requiring that their applicants leverage personal funds towards a proposed project is an effective way to guarantee that their grantmaking dollars have a greater impact. Doing so increases the total amount of monies spent on the propose initiative, effectively making their investment go further. This tactic also ensures that the applicant entity “has some skin in the game”. After all, it’s easy to propose a risky venture when you’re spending someone else’s cash! However, if you’ve also had to pay out of pocket for the initiative, its much more likely that you’re going to want to guarantee the proposed project’s success.

In the wake of recent high profile school shootings across the US, Congress passed the Students, Teachers, and Officers Preventing (STOP) School Violence Act in June 2018. The bill included key provisions to improve school safety initiatives, providing students and teachers with the tools they need to recognize mental health crises, respond to violent attacks, mitigate risk exposure, and prevent future acts of violence. The $75 million in funding allocated to the STOP School Violence Act in 2018 is dedicated to three brand new grant programs.

The current grants landscape features several law enforcement programs with language prioritizing projects that respond to a “precipitous increase in crime.”

When preparing a grant proposal there are several key elements that go into the final product. Often, the narrative – or project description – section is that which receives most of the applicant organization’s time and attention. Indeed, there have been ample articles written here, and elsewhere, providing tips and tricks for developing a proposal narrative. But an equally important piece of the proposal is often over looked: the budget. As such, we wanted to take moment to share three Q &As from...

It’s no secret that the practice of grant seeking is pretty involved. It consists of countless hours of work: researching state, federal, and foundation funding sources; sorting through various opportunities to choose those that best match your project’s goals, funding needs, and timeline; figuring out what aspects the funder specifically requires for your project; collecting partnership agreements; not to mention actually writing the proposal! Moreover, few organizations are fortunate enough to have the means for keeping a full-time grant professional on staff. So what is an organization to do?...

Imagine this scene: You find yourself sitting at the computer, coffee in hand. The project details your team has spent weeks carefully plotting are printed and neatly stacked in the center of your desk. The plan is ready, the budget set. All that’s left to do is type the grant narrative. You open a fresh Word document and are met with that awful blank page… We’ve all had that moment of dismay – It’s daunting to start a grant proposal from scratch. Well-written narratives contain an overwhelming...

Whether you’re just starting out as a grantseeker or have been working in the field for years, and whether you work in education, government, or healthcare, you should find some useful information and insights in this issue of FUNDED – our biggest issue yet!You can download the issue directly at http://grantsoffice.com/Portals/0/funded/issues/FUNDEDNov2017.pdfHigher education takes the lead with highlights of two NSF grant programs that support research infrastructure-building initiatives across...

One thing that plagues the healthcare industry is an overabundance of acronyms and terms that can leave the heads of the uninitiated spinning.

     Throughout my near decade of grants consulting, I’ve had the opportunity to speak with thousands of organizations, many of which were having their first conversation about grants.   In most cases, the people I spoke with were either new to their position, their organization didn’t typically apply to grants, or they knew that their organization received grants, but they weren’t historically part of the process.  For whatever reason, there are some strategies and tips I’d like to offer those folks...

    The Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) should be released any day now and it’s time to start thinking about your application for this year.       In a previous issue of FUNDED I covered the basics of AFG, so if you’re unfamiliar with this funding opportunity, you may want to refer back to the aforementioned article before proceeding.       In this issue we will focus on best practices and tactics for making your department’s application more competitive.     First, you’ll want to ready...

Rarely are there grants expressly for the purpose of purchasing technology equipment. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is host to one of these exceptions, the Distance Learning and Telemedicine (DLT) grant, wherein the USDA funds the acquisition of video conferencing equipment for rural end-users proposing either distance learning or telemedicine projects.



Opportunities such as DLT are few and far between and often come with strict eligibility requirements that knock...

1. Can I use grant funding to fund the movement of data from physical to cloud infrastructure?2. Can I use grant funding to convert from physical to cloud infrastructure?3. Can I use grant funding to support cloud compute and storage infrastructure?There is a growing trend within universities and research entities towards utilizing cloud compute and storage infrastructure. There are numerous advantages to moving data into the cloud, particularly when it comes to the collaborative nature of research...

...it's who.At least that’s true in the world of public safety. Most folks in the public safety realm are well aware of the annually administered, direct federal grants, such as the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program and the Justice Assistance Grant Local Solicitation. These grants are a “straight shot” from applicant to funder—that is, the applying entity submits an application directly to the funding agency—no middleperson.However, there are a myriad of programs from the Department of Homeland...

It’s no secret that the National Science Foundation (NSF) concerns itself with awarding grant opportunities related to STEM endeavors. However, often times we only consider cutting-edge, high-level research, or sub-field specific grants. Yet, there also exists a plethora of fellowship opportunities that are available to individual researchers. Often forgotten are those grants which can be utilized as a vehicle to support the effectiveness of STEM learning for people of all ages in all settings -...

It’s that time of year again where folks from fire departments and emergency medical services (EMS) communities need to start thinking about Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) Program.  For those who aren’t familiar with the program, AFG provides funding for fire departments, EMS, and to a lesser extent State Fire Training Academies to fund projects ranging from training, equipment acquisition, facilities improvements, vehicles, micro grants for small projects, and large-scale regional projects.  It is a very well-administered and well-funded program with over $300,000,000 available in this year’s competition alone!  However, it is a competitive program and not everyone who applies will win.

Some will argue that they would rather err on the side of providing too much information rather than the alternative, but in the context of a grant proposal, the key to success is to find the sweet spot, or the bottom of the pendulum swing.  Since most people understand the perils of providing too little information, the focus of this month’s column is on avoiding the pitfalls of doing the opposite.

Increasingly, state and federal grant programs are requiring partnerships as a prerequisite to applying.  And even if a partnership isn’t expressly required as part of the grant program, demonstrated partnerships are often treated preferentially.  Within the context of this broad emphasis on collaboration, let’s review how to avoid two common pitfalls in forging these partnerships. 

The May 2014 issue of FUNDED is now available for download.

 

 

Recently, I’ve come across some proposal development scenarios where the applicants were scrambling at the last minute to construct their project budgets and subsequent budget narratives.  It seemed that these pieces were being treated as an afterthought, and as a result the documents reflected as much, with missing line items, incorrect calculations, and poor supporting documentation.  It’s not exactly certain how these poorly conceived budgets will impact the review process, but it stands to reason...

Every grant manager I know earnestly wants to ensure that everyone who applies to their program is clear on the requirements and has all the tools to present their project for consideration. More compliant applications means more projects in the pool and potentially better projects receiving awards at the end of the process.

Many folks believe that once they’ve logged in with their SAM username and password per the instructions in step 6 they are all set, but they’ve only created the account, they haven’t fully registered with SAM.  Failure to see SAM registration through in its entirety will result in your organization not being able to submit federal grants.

So what else do you need to do?

Even if you've been successful at obtaining grants in the past, the prospect of poring over a federal or state grant guidance document may still rate right up there with oral surgery.

The good news though is that these large documents (often 100+ pages in length) actually follow a fairly consistent format, and with a few tips from Grants Office’s reserve of hard-earned experience, you can approach new grant programs much more confidently.

While each grant proposal will have its own set of specific guidelines and required supporting documents, grant writers can save a lot of time (and probably spare some headaches) by maintaining a "Frequently Used" file of the most commonly-requested supporting documents and materials. Depending on the type of programs to which your organization typically applies for funding, your list may vary from the one below.  However, determining which documents to file and keeping the files up to date can smooth out the proposal development process for several different grants and, if you find yourself pinched for time, can mean the difference between a high-quality, successful submission and an unsatisfactory or incomplete proposal.

For organizations engaged in projects designed to benefit communities, distilling the overall impact of that project into a list of concrete and measurable objectives can prove challenging. Unlike profitable businesses, nonprofit organizations and public entities are not necessarily wired to produce a clean-cut demonstration of return on investment for their projects. However, with grant dollars dwindling while community needs continue to increase, funders are looking for increasingly empirical data to demonstrate that their money is being well spent. In the examples below, a few average (or worse) project objectives are diagnosed and treated with a good dose of specificity. While these examples are purely fictional, the methods used to improve them can be used for a variety of grant applications.

In today's competitive grants market, there are a variety of sure-fire ways to get your grant proposal tossed into the rejection pile.

Show me the money! As far as a grant funder is considered, it is probably more appropriate to say “show me how you are going to spend the money”. For the applicant, it is the piece of the proposal that is likely to keep you up at night. After all, the reason you are seeking grant funding the first place is because you are most likely facing a funding deficit for an important project. It is only natural that you may be preoccupied with budgetary needs while you are still developing the project and the accompanying proposal narrative.

Despite the persistently slow economy and ongoing budget cuts at every level, the U.S. Federal Government awarded nearly $600 billion in grants in 2011, which represents a 20% increase over the approximately $500 billion in grants awarded in 2009. On average, only about three to five percent of grant proposals submitted to the federal government are awarded funding. With more budget cuts on the horizon, the already tough competition for federal grant dollars is poised to become even more fierce. That means that now more than ever, only the 'best of the best' proposals will get funded. The loss of just a single scoring point can make the difference between success and failure. I regularly work as a peer reviewer for a number of federal funding agencies so I see firsthand what sets winning grant proposals apart from the others. I would like to share with you several common pitfalls that I frequently run across that ruin an otherwise solid proposal's chances of getting funded.

Many people submit their grant application and anticipate the end of the process: notification from the funder on whether funding is approved. Of course, those who win awards understand that the notice is not the end, but a transition to a new phase in post award administration and project deployment. Unfortunately, many who are denied funding simply accept the fate of their application as the end of the road. Being notified that an application has been denied funding may be a depressing setback, but is should never be viewed as the end of the grantseeking process. Some of the most successful organizations at pulling down grants don’t win every time they submit an application. Successful organizations are denied funding and ask themselves: How do we pick up the pieces and move forward?

Anyone who's been involved with the grants process knows its one thing to find the right grant and another thing to actually submit an application. Once you go through the trials and tribulations of putting the application together, you have may have looked over the application hundreds of times, or you may not have had much time to look it over at all. In this economic state, organizations are downsizing and people are being asked to take on more and more tasks. This can hurt the quality of an application when the submitter doesn't have enough time to properly proofread the application before it is time to submit.

The start of the new year means big business for gyms and fitness clubs as overstuffed holiday revelers seek to atone for their overindulgence by resolving to get in shape and lose those extra pounds. Whether or not this year's flock will stick with their goals remains to be seen, but the beginning of the year is also a great time to think about getting your grant-seeking program in shape. Whether you have yet to embark on a quest for grant funding or are a weather-beaten veteran of the process, take this opportunity to rethink your strategies, or develop an entirely new one, and make 2012 your most successful grants year yet.

With what seems like a never-ending saga of budget cuts, organizations across the country continue to seek out alternative sources of funding such as grants from different government sources or private foundations. Many of these requests, perhaps unsurprisingly, tend to be for basic operating expenses, salaries, or equipment such as new computers or technology. Even as more organizations line up to compete for grants for basic purposes, funders are actually seeking much more comprehensive projects beyond these kinds of requests.

Grant funding, like any other competition, inevitably results in winners and losers - and unfortunately, the latter tend to outnumber the former. Take for instance, the Investing in Innovation program available from the U.S. Department of Education. This year's competition brought out over 500 applicants for just under $150 million in total funding. It is likely fewer than 30 of these applications will receive funding - making it just as unlikely to receive grant funding as it is to get into Harvard.

From one of the more memorable movie scenes of the past 20 years, you may recall a phone conversation between Tom Cruise and Cuba Gooding, Jr. that portrays the amusing contract negotiation of an agent and one of the professional sports figures he manages. A repeated and emphatic shouting of “Show me the money!” helped endear Jerry McGuire to movie viewers and helped Cruise’s character succeed in achieving his intended task—the movie scene ends with Cruise receiving a simply stated, “Congratulations, you’re still my agent,” from his star-in-the-making. It’s not necessarily the aggressiveness of the message itself but rather its impassioned delivery that may best carry over to grant applications.

As the new calendar and fiscal year 2011 begins, many grant programs are being reminded that they are only as valuable as the actual projects they support. Those consistently lacking results often find their government appropriations dwindle, if not dry up entirely. With everyone positioning their stake for a finite, albeit ever-growing level of federal funding, many grantmaking agencies demonstrate their value by leveraging investments in various projects that represent not only immediate community benefits but also the greatest potential for a long-term return on investment. Grantseekers therefore have an opportunity in the new year to strike while the iron is hot. Savvy applicants will likely consider one of the following project components in their FY2011 applications.

A big federal agency just released a new grant that is accompanied by a guidance document filled with 150 pages of content. The guidance document contains all the granular details on the grant program, including instructions for development of the proposal and submission. The guidance document may be referred to by several names, including request for proposals (RFP), request for applications (RFA), and Notice of Funds Availability (NOFA). Based on a quick review of the information, you are considering developing a proposal under this recently released grant program. Considering the size of the guidance document, one would assume that the items and services eligible for purchase with the grant funding are clearly delineated.

The application has been submitted, the award has been drawn down, and all seems quiet on the grant front. Can you relax, now that the project planning and actual writing has been drawn to a close?

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.

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.

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.

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.