Unit 3 Grantwriting

269 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
269
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Unit 3 Grantwriting

  1. 1. Chapter 10 Writing, Submitting, and Revising Grant Proposals
  2. 2. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Prior to the Grant Writing Process • Keep a journal/notebook to note ideas. • Gather documents before writing begins, such as tax certificates and bylaws. • Develop a grant-tracking form to record grant applications, funding cycles, funding received, etc.
  3. 3. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Initial Steps of the Grant Writing Process • Make a plan; identify needs/wants. • Locate potential funders. • Identify the audience. • Draft the grant proposal. • Revise/edit and prepare the final proposal.
  4. 4. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Elements of a Grant Proposal • Grant proposals vary. • There are usually a number of elements, but the sections will likely vary. • Grants are extremely competitive and each section must be prepared meticulously in order to not be rejected by the reviewers.
  5. 5. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Letter of Inquiry/Intent • Sometimes required to determine if the agency’s project falls within the funder’s criteria. • Includes contact information. • Presents overview of agency’s mission. • Provides the total amount requested. • Includes a statement of gratitude.
  6. 6. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Cover Letter • Some grants only require an agency submit a cover letter to the grantor. • Very much like a cover letter does for a job applicant, it introduces an agency to a prospective funder. • Short, friendly, stand out. • Charm the reader and display enthusiasm.
  7. 7. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Title Page/Cover Sheet • Project’s title. • Names of the principle investigators. • The agency’s name, address, and phone/fax numbers. • Project dates, type of grant, amount of funding, and the grant period.
  8. 8. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Abstract/Executive Summary/Introduction • One of the shortest yet most important sections of the grant proposal. • Often forms the first impression; must convince grantor the proposed is worth the investment. • A strong abstract is concise, limited to key points, strongly written.
  9. 9. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Literature Review • Sometimes required to provide crucial background information. • Compiled reviews highlighting published writings on subjects related to the project. • A basic literature review is comprised of the introduction, body, and conclusion.
  10. 10. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Needs/Problem Statement • Proves that the grant meets a vital societal need. • Clear, well-supported statement of the problem that will be addressed. • Addresses the need and how the agency’s clients are affected. • Both qualitative and quantitative.
  11. 11. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Goals and Objectives • Provide a map to the project, influence the design of the program, determine the methods and strategies needed to achieve the goals/objectives. • Goals are long term statements of hope. • Objectives are narrow, precise, and short term.
  12. 12. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Program Design/Methods/Strategies • Methods for achieving the goals/objectives set. • Include supporting statements that cite research, expert opinions, personal communication, and past experience. • Justify the course of action that will be taken.
  13. 13. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Evaluation Plan • Defines how success will be determined. • Clarifies the purpose of the project. • Chronicles the progress and assesses the effectiveness. • Obtains feedback from the individuals served as well as community members. • Facilitates project improvement.
  14. 14. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Types of Evaluations • Process Evaluations – descriptive and ongoing. • Outcome Evaluations – identify if a project’s outcomes have been achieved. • Impact Evaluations – assess the changes that can be attributed to a project.
  15. 15. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Organizational Information • Provides a convincing argument of the agency’s credibility to accomplish the goals/objectives of the project. • Position the nonprofit as the best agency to implement the proposed project.
  16. 16. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Program’s Budget and Budget Narrative • Lists both administrative and project costs. • Consists of a spreadsheet or table with detailed line items. • Explains how the budget will be spent and why it is cost-effective. • Provides a clear picture of the impact that can be made with the requested funds.
  17. 17. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Special Considerations • Equipment Purchases • Additional Space and Equipment • Increases in the Cost of Insurance • Salaries • Indirect Costs • Matching Funds
  18. 18. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Other Funding/Sustainability • Describes the nonprofit’s long-term continuation plan or vision for the project after the grant period has ended. • Explains how the agency will raise funds to continue the project. • Includes a list of other funders approached.
  19. 19. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Commonly Requested Supplemental Materials • IRS tax-exempt verification letter • List of board directors and affiliations • List of staff experience • Financial statement for the previous year • Current fiscal year’s budget • Next fiscal year’s budget • List of clients served and annual report
  20. 20. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Review and Proof • The proposal should be reviewed by a neutral third party. • Reviewed for continuity, reasoning, and clarity. • The proposal must not contain any unsupported assumptions or jargon. • Reviewed for neatness and accuracy.
  21. 21. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Submitting the Proposal • Copy the entire application. • Check with the grantor on the preferred format for binding the original proposal. • Mail the proposal in the format requested and several days before deadline. • A follow-up call may be placed after a week of not hearing from the grantor.
  22. 22. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Online Grant Applications • Sometimes paperless formats have limited space. • Online grant applications can improve the efficiency and accuracy of the process. • Submission must be made early in order to avoid possible technology issues.
  23. 23. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Some Grant Writing Mistakes • Hastily assembled. • Too lengthy. • Written in first person. • Included false, inaccurate cost estimates. • Overkilled a point. • Not logically formatted. • Did not follow grantor’s instructions.
  24. 24. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. The Review Process • Proposal reviews are very rigorous and competitive. • Proposals are normally scored using a grading rubric to ensure consistency of evaluation. • Process varies based on the type of grant.
  25. 25. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Federal Human Service Grants Proposal Reviews • A review committee of experts is formed for the review and recommendation of proposals. • Each funding agency will develop its own set of evaluation criteria. • Some criteria include significance, approach, match/fit, quality, environment.
  26. 26. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Federal Grant Review Process • Proposals are reviewed, evaluated, and scored. • Review committee meeting is held. • All views/opinions are shared. • Proposals are given priority ratings. • Funding decision makers have the final say.
  27. 27. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Foundation Grants Review Process • Foundation staff verifies the applicant’s eligibility. • Conducts a review of the proposals. • Grant review panel discuss the merits of each request. • Board of directors reviews suggestions and the approved applicants are notified.
  28. 28. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms of Award Letter • Specifies the obligations of both the grantor and the grantee. • States the terms and conditions of the award, reporting requirements, and public policy requirements. • Agencies must immediately verify their information.
  29. 29. © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Rejection Is a Step to Future Success • The success rate for most federal grants is less than 25 percent. • Rejection may mean that there was another proposal that was a better match. • If possible, organizations should request the reviewers’ evaluations and comments to assist in preparing future proposals.

×