Tips for the Application Process:

 Make letters of inquiry brief (no more than 2 pages) but informative – stress the need for the project, your organization’s ability to carry it out, and the benefits which will accrue from it.
 Respond promptly if a foundation requests a full proposal based on a letter of inquiry.
 Check the web site of a funding agency thoroughly before e-mailing or telephoning so as to avoid asking questions which are clearly answered on the web site.
 Ensure that you have the latest version of the application and regulations.
 Check the math in the budget – although this is obvious, many applicants make mathematical errors.
 Pay attention to those agencies which require that a Letter of Intent be filed prior to a full application. In nearly all cases, there is a specific deadline for submitting this letter.
 Pay careful attention to the rating and ranking criteria when crafting a proposal. Incorporate the application language into the narrative.
 Be concise but thorough in the narrative.
 If there is a specific page maximum, be sure that you come as close to that as possible without exceeding it. You can rest assured that the other applicants will provide as much information as possible.
 Give a descriptive narrative with specific examples.
 Be crystal clear in your writing. Do not “beat around the bush”.
 Be complete and thorough in the narrative – do not leave the reviewer wondering what you mean. Answer the questions completely.
 Use good grammar and correct punctuation and spelling.
 Re-read the application at least twice.
 Give proper attribution for all information derived from others and cite sources for statistical data
 Answer the funding agency’s requests for additional information completely, cheerfully, and on time.
 Send letters of support with the application itself unless the guidelines state otherwise. However, some U.S. Representatives and Senators will only send support letters directly to the funding agency.
 If there is any doubt whatsoever about whether an application will reach the office of the funding agency on time, send it overnight or two-day guaranteed delivery.
 Send the application directly to the person named in the solicitation, with the correct number of copies.
 Check to see that the application arrived on time.
 Start on-line applications early so that you can get your questions answered before the deadline.
 Keep the user name and password for on-line applications in a handy place where they will not be lost.
 Do your best to stave off performance anxiety as the due date for the application arrives – this will impair your ability to do the best job possible.
 Do your best to be available for site visits when the funding agency wants to come. Only change the date if there is an emergency.

Apr 07, 2012 | 0 comments | View Post

Developing a Grant Seeking Strategy

Once you have decided which funding sources will be included on your list, it is necessary to develop a plan of action, or strategy. Obviously, it is necessary to sort the due dates in order to address those which must be submitted first. However, a good strategy is more than that. It is a specific outline of what steps should be taken and in what order. In essence, it is a work plan for requesting funds from all of the sources which made the cut in the evaluation process as discussed above. The following rules should be followed in developing and carrying out your strategy:

• Develop a two-page letter of inquiry which needs to be modified only slightly for most of the private foundations on the list.
• Plan to send the letter of inquiry to all of those private foundations for which that is the first method of contact and for which no specific due date is given.
• Set up a calendar which shows the due dates for letters of inquiry to those foundations with deadlines for the receipt of those letters and send them as they come due.
• Plan to personally contact those foundations which require proposals rather than letters of inquiry in order to determine your chances of getting funding. Once these conversations have been held, decide whether it is worth committing your resources to an application.
• Determine which governmental sources represent the best chance of funding. For those which accept applications on a continuous basis, begin with the best fit and work your way down. For those applications which have specific due dates, plan to have the resources committed at that time so that those submissions can be made.
• For those sources which are open for applications only once a year, plan to keep checking every two weeks or so to see if the solicitation announcement has been made. Quite often, these yearly submissions are not tied to an exact date. Some try to invite applications at approximately the same time every year. More often, however, administrative and fiscal matters can cause the solicitation to be made earlier or, more commonly, later, than twelve months after the last solicitation. Some of these programs can actually skip a year or it may be as much as eighteen months between solicitations. I have even seen grant solicitations withdrawn after being published.
• If you find yourself in the position of having a number of sources with applications coming due at the same time, figure out a way to commit staff resources so that all applications can be submitted. Make the decision that the job will be done and that you will find a way to do it. You will regret it if you let a good chance slip away. The application that you decide you do not have time to do may very well be the one which would have provided the funding. Remember, this is just for a short period, and you will get through it. If you really feel that you could not do this yourself, try to farm it out to other staff or consultants.

Dec 27, 2011 | 0 comments | View Post

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

Letters of Inquiry to Foundations

Most foundations require a letter of inquiry as the first contact.  If the project seems to be within their guidelines and funding priorities, they will then invite the submission of a full proposal. 

 

First of all, the grant writer should restrict the length of this letter to no more than two pages if the guidelines do not specify.  In this letter, your only job is to convince the foundation that your project is a good fit with their fields of interest. 

 

Prior to beginning the letter, a decision should be made on the amount to be requested.  This will be dependent in large part on the resources of the foundation.  Search material should discuss the total assets of the foundation, along with the average grant amount, the smallest grant, and the largest grant.

 

The first paragraph should clearly state the purpose of the project so that the reviewer will know exactly what will be done. This is also the place for the total project cost and the amount requested from the foundation.  Lastly, a couple of sentences regarding how the project fits with the foundation’s funding priorities should be included.  These basic facts are important to have in the very beginning, so that they will catch the reviewer’s eye and she will want to read on.

 

The next paragraph should go into detail regarding the need for the project and include as much statistical information as possible.  This is also the place to make a strong appeal to the emotions of the reader.  It is wise to give one or two specific examples of the distress suffered as a result of the need for the project.  This is where the “human factor” comes in.  The grant writer will be wise to combine hard data and emotion in this section.

 

Following this, a history of your organization should be given.  This should include a description of similar projects which have been successfully undertaken.  This is also the place to discuss your organization’s mission and its priorities. You want to convince the reader that your organization has the capacity to undertake the project, that your staff has the appropriate skill sets for the work, and that you will give it the priority it deserves so that it may be completed in a timely manner.

 

The next section of the inquiry letter should go into some detail regarding how the project will be implemented.  It is important to detail each step in the process from beginning to end.  By doing so, the reader may see the feasibility of the project and feel confident that your organization knows exactly what it takes to get the project completed on schedule and within the budget.  Goals, objectives, and positive outcomes will also be discussed here.

 

Sustainability and evaluation should be discussed next.  Having solid plans in place for both issues assures the foundation that your organization has thoroughly thought through the entire process.  The foundation will want to know that resources have been identified to continue the project beyond the grant period and that a thorough evaluation will be performed in order to determine its effectiveness.

 

Close the letter by offering to meet with the foundation officials at their office, host a site visit, or discuss the project over the telephone.  Emphasize your willingness to provide any additional information requested by the foundation.

Nov 29, 2011 | 0 comments | View Post