Funding for Law Enforcement Agencies

There are many sources of funds for law enforcement agencies for such purposes as the hiring of new employees, overtime, and the purchase of equipment. A significant portion of the funding available to law enforcement agencies is passed from the federal government to the states for distribution to local police departments and sheriffs’ departments.  In addition, many states appropriate funds from their own budget for this purpose.  Generally, one agency plays the lead role in distributing the NOFA (Notice of Funding Availability), and accepting and reviewing applications.

 

In order to determine the agency which handles the funding for law enforcement in your state, go to the website for that state. Do a search for the state agency which handles law enforcement issues.  In most cases, that is the agency which distributes the grant funds.  In the state of Maryland, this agency is referred to as the Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention.  However, in New Hampshire, for example, the appropriate agency is referred to as the Department of Safety. In Nevada, the administering agency for law enforcement grants is the Department of Public Safety.

 

The single largest source of law enforcement funds is the U.S. Department of Justice. There are a number of programs administered by this agency which are channeled directly to local law enforcement agencies.  A significant portion of the funds, however, are channeled to the states for distribution.

 

There are three separate categories of grants awarded by the U.S. Justice Department to localities. One of these is the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grants.  This funding was created by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.  The theory behind this program is that crime can be reduced by having law enforcement interact with the community through special events and neighborhood- oriented patrols.  This program also recognizes that such activities as Neighborhood Watch, Operation ID, and D.A.R.E. (Drug Awareness and Resistance Education) can also have a significant impact on reducing the crime rate.

Dec 18, 2011 | 1 comment | View Post

The Importance of Critical Thinking

 

In the grant field, critical thinking is absolutely necessary. The caveat here is to take nothing for granted. I would like to point out several areas where grant writers should think critically. These are just examples and it is incumbent upon the grant writer to use this type of big picture thinking in all aspects of their work. These examples are as follows:

 

  • Do not assume that what has worked in another place will work in yours.  It is necessary to consider how the geographic location of that project affected the results.  If that is the case, then it might not be completely transferable to your area.
  • Do not assume that intangibles do not count in a project. Not everything can be measured in a scientific and mathematical way. Most projects do not take into account how individual will (or lack thereof) can affect the results. This is particularly true in projects having a social services component. An after-school program may not take into account students who are unusually ambitious and dedicated.
  • Do not assume that the staff of your agency necessarily has the capacity to carry out a particular project. It is necessary for the grant writer to mentally put herself and her colleagues into the picture of the new project and try to visualize the various pitfalls as well as strengths there might be in a given situation.
  • Do not assume that commonly accepted remedies to problems are always the best way to go. One of the best examples of this is working to create new jobs in a community and not being selective about what types of companies come in. Always putting the creation of new jobs ahead of environmental considerations will, in the long run, be detrimental to the community.

 

Dec 15, 2011 | 0 comments | View Post

Reasons for Rejection of an Application

There are many and various reasons for rejection of an application.  Some of these are as follows:

 

  • The grant proposal is poorly written.
  • The project is a poor fit with the need and will not do much to alleviate that need.
  • The proposed activities are not clearly thought out and do not seem feasible.
  • The competition from other applications is overwhelming.
  • The application is good and the need is great, but other projects will serve even needier populations.
  • The funding agency does not have confidence that the applicant has the capacity to successfully carry out the project.
  • The applicant has had problems in administering other grants.

Part of the problem is getting to the real root of the rejection.  This can sometimes be difficult.

A debriefing is a discussion with the funding agency as to why the application was not funded.  Many governmental agencies will be happy to discuss the reasons for rejection.  However, I would urge the grant writer to listen to the debriefings with a bit of caution.  Feedback is sometimes given by staff members who were not actually reviewers and were not charged with the responsibility of assigning points to the application.  When this is the case, something can sometimes get lost in the translation.

Overall, however, it is an excellent idea to request a debriefing.  This information can be invaluable in developing the proposal for a re-submittal or for a submittal to a different agency.  This is especially true for beginning grant writers.  As one gains more and more experience, it will be easy to see the weaknesses in your proposal even prior to submittal.  I would definitely recommend that a proposal still be re-submitted even though there are minor flaws in it.  Sometimes these can be worked out with the funding agency.  Sometimes they are so insignificant as not to matter.  It is important to take to heart the information received in a debriefing and attempt to remedy the problems identified.

Dec 09, 2011 | 1 comment | View Post

Grant Administration- How Hard is This Going to Be?

 

The grantee should be prepared for many varying requirements in grant administration.  I feel that it would be helpful to give a few examples showing the difference in the required paperwork for various granting agencies.  All funding agencies will request documentation that the funds were spent appropriately and for the purposes specified in the grant application.  This is the very least that one can expect in terms of documentation. 

 

Probably the simplest grants to administer are those from private foundations.  The application forms can be very simple, sometimes involving no more than two pages.  Sometimes, no grant agreement is required.  The grantee is still obligated to use the funds for the purpose for which they were intended. I am not aware of any foundation or government agencies which would simply send the money and not require some accountability.

 

Some foundations require several progress reports.  It is also possible that special conditions may be attached to the grant in order to meet the specific preferences of the board members.  These can vary widely.  It may be that the foundation requires the grantee to only utilize American labor and products, or limits funding to certain geographic areas, or wishes to remain anonymous.

 

Most governmental entities will require the following once the grant is approved:

 

  • environmental review (this is sometimes done prior to approval)
  • execution of the grant agreement
  • documentation of banking information in order to expedite the processing of payments
  • written progress reports at varying intervals — these could be either quarterly, semi-annually, or annually
  • execution of grant closeout documents

 

Dec 03, 2011 | 0 comments | View Post