Board members and committee chairs |
Membership managers |
Newsletter editors
Program (education) managers |
Publicity managers |
Treasurers
Volunteer managers |
Home
|
|
|
Board members and committee chairs |
Membership managers |
Newsletter editors |
by Saul Carliner
Despite that grantwriting course, you’re still having difficulty writing fund-able grants. Consider these issues as you polish your grantwriting style.
Although many feel tempted to make a case for the worthiness of a project by writing in marketing-speak or the techno-speak of your discipline, the most convincing proposals take a reader-centered approach. That is, they merely speak to the grant committee.
Specifically, a reader-centered proposal focuses on the needs of the funding organization, and making the task of reading and approving the proposal as easy as possible. It:
More specifically, although most Grantwriting I courses encourage grantwriters to consider their audience and purpose, the number one concern with most failed grants is that they don’t consider their audience and purpose.
Ultimately your grant proposal is a sales document; it is intended to “sell” your idea and motivate a funding organization to underwrite your project, capital request, endowment request, or similar project.
But unlike brochures, websites, and similar marketing materials that are intended to sell to a somewhat generalized audience on broader topics, a grant proposal is a conversation of sorts. So you must demonstrate a more intimate knowledge of your audience, and a more detailed description of your purpose than is feasible in more general marketing material.
Through the Request for Proposals, the granting organization begins the conversation by indicating its willingness to fund projects and by declaring the types of information it needs to assess your request.
This information gives you a substantial amount of information on which to base your response, if you use it effectively.
Certain up-front preparations can help you move more productively through the grant-writing process.
First, define the project as succinctly and clearly as possible. Run the description by other stakeholders in the program. Make sure that it accurately represents the program.
Then, classify the project as one of the following: program, building, capital, endowment. Different foundations fund different types of programs. Also, foundations require different types of supporting evidence for different types of proposals. For example, according to Louisa Basarrate, Development Director for the Atlanta Speech School, foundations require long-term financial projections for capital and building requests, demonstrating that the organization is aware of the additional administrative costs associated with larger facilities and larger constituencies, and has a plan to generate additional income to cover these costs.
Similarly, for building and program projects, funding organizations often like to see “samples,” such as plans for buildings and detailed discussions of programs.
After clarifying your project, seek out foundations and other granting sources that are likely to consider your proposal. Each foundation has a mission; look for ones that have the closest match with your project.
The Internet has a wealth of information about foundations. You might work with a research librarian to form an Internet search that will provide the closest possible “hits.”
Similarly, most communities have resources to assist you with grantwriting and finding funding sources. One such source is the Support Centers of America. Your United Way chapter should also be able to provide information.
No one knows better the qualities that a funder seeks than someone who reviews or approves proposals for that organization. Furthermore, most of these organizations want to fund proposals, so they will work with you to increase the likelihood of success.
Questions to ask:
Also ask about the following:
Many proposals fail because they do not meet the funding criteria.
Examples:
In some instances, these proposals might slip by. But usually, at least one person on the review committee can identify proposals that do not meet criteria and successfully kill the proposal.
Use the guidelines as a means of organizing your proposal. For example, if an organization asks you to provide the following information about a proposed project:
Then the subheadings of your proposal should read:
By providing this information in the Request for Proposals, the funding organization states the information which it seeks. By organizing your proposal with headings using the same terms as used in the Request for Proposals, you make the reviewers’ job substantially easier.
Two nagging questions facing grant writers are “how much information is too much?” and “how much is too little?” The Request for Proposals usually tells you exactly how much information is needed.
The following paragraphs offer suggestions for addressing some of the specific challenges:
Project Descriptions: Present a succinct description of the proposed project, using plain language whenever possible. To force yourself to be succinct, try to limit the description to 100 words. A succinct description helps the time-pressed reviewer get a quick, clear picture of your proposed project. Plain language speeds understanding; many reviewers will not have detailed technical knowledge of your service area. Rather than impress them of your expertise, the unnecessary use of terminology will put them off.
Example of a clear project description:
The monies requested will provide language masters for the three and four year old children with severe language delays in the integrated programs. These “Cheap Talk” instruments provide immediate auditory responses when a picture clue is identified.
Statistics to Support the Need for Your Program: Whenever credible evidence exists, support the need for your program with evidence from the research. But when doing so, consider the following:
Objectives: Increasingly, program proposals require that you state observable and measurable objectives for your program. A good objective is SMART: specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and trackable.
Although nonprofits ultimately try to affect attitudes and feelings, they are not easily measured. Behaviors are more easily measured. So whenever possible, try to state the objective as a behavior, not an attitude.
For example:
| Correct | Not Correct |
| Prepare hard-core unemployed for the workforce by developing competency in customer service and administrative skills, and related job-seeking and interviewing skills. | Improve the self-esteem of hard-core unemployed through job-training experiences. |
Project Descriptions: Provide a detailed description of the project, but watch the extent of the description. Often, a summary chart is helpful.For more guidance on writing objectives, click here.
Also, make sure that you list of the constraints affecting the proposed project, as well as the criteria for comparing among alternatives. Constraints include the traditional business constraints of schedule and budget, as well as programmatic constraints. Also list technical constraints, such as needs of the program and limitations of your facilities.
Finally, list and prioritize among criteria for considering among alternatives. For example, of schedule, cost, and quality, which is most important (no, all three cannot have equal weight despite belief to the contrary).
Alternatives: Because funders often ask, “Why didn’t the agency consider….” When reviewing a proposal, make sure you explain how you arrived at your decision (if it is clear that other alternatives are available.) List the options you considered. Explain the criteria used to each option, and the criteria you used for assessing them. Then, explain how you arrived at the solution you did.
For example, if you are thinking about purchasing a new computer system, list the other systems that you considered. Next, state the criteria used to assess each of the systems considered (such as cost, ease of use, maintenance, and so on). Then, explain how you evaluated each criterion (for example, ease of use was based on ratings from a trade magazine, from 1 (impossible) to 5 (simple)). Then show the ratings for each option considered (like the charts in Consumer Reports). Then, explain how you arrived at your choice. In some cases, you also need to estimate the cost of each alternative to convince the funder that you have made the most appropriate choice.
Component Costs: A component cost is a partial cost of a project, such as costs for program services, software, and registration fees for training. One of the concerns about many proposals is that they inadvertently omit one or more of these costs.
For example, estimates for educational programs usually under-estimate the costs of printing resource materials and renting audiovisual equipment. Estimates for social service programs often under-estimate the cost of materials.
After listing all of the costs, make sure that the estimates are realistic. Research those costs. For example, use salary surveys to calculate labor costs, check the Internet to estimate software costs, and check with facilities staff (usually sales) for complete estimates of rental costs.
List costs in a table, so sponsors can compare the component costs for each alternative side-by-side. Note, too, that some costs are not financial. Anticipate the response to each alternative and identify them in the business case.
Projections of Financial Returns: As investors in businesses want to see returns, so investors in your organization look for returns. Similarly, as the projected yield on most financial investments range from worst-case to best-case scenarios, so the investment in your organization can yield a variety of potential outcomes.
So often, grant proposals only single projected return, and that often represents a best case scenario. For example, a proposal for a revenue-generating activity might assume only a high level of participation, even though the anticipated participation might range from a low end to a high end.
Instead, present 3 or 4 potential scenarios: at one end of the spectrum, a worst case scenario and, at the other end, a best case. For example, for a revenue-generating course, your worst case scenario might represent the minimum threshold and the best case scenario might represent the anticipated best. Base estimates of revenue on market rates.
If you have a history with similar activities in the past, use them to estimate participation in the current year. Adjust for economic conditions (for example, lower estimates in a bad year).
Evaluation: As funders increasingly expect projects to have observable and measurable objectives at their outset, so they also expect organizations to have plans to effectively evaluate whether the objectives have been met, and to include this information in a proposal. Evaluation data is important to funders. Ultimately, it is a part of their accountability to their own financial sources. The funder can say, “You invested in us, and here’s the return you received on that investment.” But rather than financial returns, the returns are social and emotional.
Evaluation is complex. The people whom are studied must be representative of the target population of the project, and the questions asked must really assess whether or not the project met its goals. Many organizations rely exclusively on satisfaction surveys for evaluation. Although this information is helpful, it only assesses whether people were satisfied. In most instances, only explorations of long-term changes in behavior assess whether the project met its real goal.
For example, one cannot assess the effectiveness of a smoking cessation course by the satisfaction of participants immediately after the course. It is assessed by the number of smokers who quit and remain smoke-free over the long-haul.
Many funding organizations require that you disclose certain financial information in the grant proposal. Despite the request, many organizations don’t, or provide misleading information.
Don’t do that.
Many reviewers take offense at proposals that lack the requisite financial information or that provide incomplete or misleading information. For example, a funder that provides partial operating funds for an organization becomes suspicious if other grants that the organization receives do not include a set-aside for administrative costs. Most funders are willing to cover some administrative costs ; an organization that routinely refuses to ask for them appears to be writing incomplete grants or not disclosing information.
At the least, most organizations require that you include proof of designation by the Internal Revenue Service as a nonprofit corporation. At the most, they might request financial statements.
If you have sensitive financial information that must be handled confidentially, speak with the program officer before submitting the grant request. In certain instances, the program officer will find a way for you to submit this information without compromising the sensitivity of the material.
If you would need to request a percentage of the grant to cover administrative costs, review the grant proposal or speak with the program officer. In many instances, funding organizations will let you include administrative fees in the proposal, though most set a ceiling, depending on the type of project. For many programs, for example, the percentage is 10 to 20 percent. For research, the percentage can be as high as 50 percent.
Although they’re not showstoppers, grammatical and stylistic problems detract from the credibility of your proposal. Grammatical and spelling problems are the most serious. By breaking a rule of grammar or misspelling a word, the meaning of a sentence is changed. For example, someone accidentally included an “r” in the expression “fee service;” doing so essentially negated the message.
Some of the most common grammatical and spelling problems:
The most significant grammatical problem pertains to usage. Some choices of words are more appropriate than others. Some of the more common problems include:
Stylistic errors are less serious because they do not change the meaning of your sentence. But you should avoid them because they make the proposal look sloppy. Examples:
Your careful formatting of the proposal can literally make the proposal easier on the eyes of the reviewer. The more pleasant the reading experience, the more favorably disposed the reviewer may be. Specifically consider the suggestions in this chart.
| Design the cover page |
|
| Design pages |
Make sure that each page has the following:
|
| Limit Blocks of Text | Because long blocks of text drain the eyes of energy:
|
| Conservatively choose type |
|
| Use emphasis type appropriately |
Bold:
Italic:
Underscore: only to indicate hyperlinks. Avoid any other use. Color: to indicate hyperlinks. ALL CAPS: Never use. Looks like you're screaming at someone. |
| Appropriately justify type | Align all headings and body type on the left margin. Do not justify the right margin. |
| Present information in lists | · Bullets or numbers: o Ordered list (in which list items must be considered in a particular order), use numbers. o Unordered list (in which list items may be considered in any order), use bullets. · Margins: o Bullet or number against the left margin. o Text indented .25 inches from the left margin. · Nested lists: o Align the number or bullet with the beginning of text from the basic list o If using an ordered list within an ordered list, items on the nested list should begin with letters o If using an unordered list within an unordered list, items on the nested list should begin with m-dashes |
| Design tables | Use grid lines and borders, or alternate colors of rows and shading on columns, to help readers scan across rows and down columns without losing their places. Use headings at the top of columns to help readers decipher what's below . Use lists within cells, to further help readers in scanning. |
| Present information visually. | · Numerical data: o To show relationship of parts to a whole, use a pie chart. o To show the trend over time, use a histogram. o To compare, use bar charts. · Qualitative data: o Objects (such as a machine or a building): line drawings or, if a marketing brochure, photograph o Procedures: flow charts (if appropriate, use icons to represent steps in the process), animations o Relationships of people: organization charts o Schedules: calendars or GANTT charts |
Yes, you should proofread the proposal.
But more significantly, go through the proposal as a reviewer would. Using the review criteria you requested earlier, evaluate your proposal.
Although touted as a solitary activity, writing is actually a collaborative activity, especially grantwriting. The nature of the team dynamics varies by organizations, but some possible ones include:
Getting a second set of eyes to review the proposal before submitting it. | Although the responsibility for grant writing usually falls to a single person in smaller organizations that are stretched for staff and funding, usually they can spare another staff person or board member for a review of the proposal before submitting it. At the least, the second person should look for formatting and copyediting errors (grammar, spelling, and punctuation problems). At the most, the second person should assess the logic of the proposal. |
Splitting up the writing responsibility. | In some organizations, different people take responsibility for different parts of the proposal. One might prepare the description of the organization, another might prepare the description of the project being funded, and a third might prepare the financial information. In such instances, one person must act as editor of the entire project, taking primary responsibility for making sure that all information is submitted on time and editing it so the finished proposal has a single “voice,” rather than looks like the uncoordinated work of three people. |
Hiring a professional grantwriter. | If funds permit, consider hiring a grant writer to prepare the entire proposal or, at the least, to review and edit it for you. This is a useful option for those organizations that have the funds, lack the writing skills, or both. |
Board members and committee chairs |
Membership managers |
Newsletter editors
Program (education) managers |
Publicity managers |
Treasurers
Volunteer managers |
Home
(c) Copyright. Saul Carliner. 2002. All rights reserved.