Statement

gramt.pdf

Home >Social Science homework help >Sociology homework help >Statement

Winning Grants Step by Step The Complete Workbook for Planning, Developing, and Writing Successful Proposals FOURTH EDITION

Tori O’Neal-McElrath

Cover design by Michael Cook Cover image © Ankur Patil/iStockphoto

Published by Jossey-Bass A Wiley Brand

One Montgomery Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, CA 94104-4594—www.josseybass.com

Some of the materials on the accompanying website and certain pages of this book may be customized and reproduced. The reproducible pages are designated by the appearance of the following copyright notice at the foot of each page:

This notice must appear on all reproductions as printed.

This free permission is restricted to limited customization of the website materials for your organization and the paper reproduction of the materials for educational/training events. It does not allow for systematic or large-scale reproduction, distribution (more than 100 copies per page, per year), transmission, electronic reproduction or inclusion in any publications offered for sale or used for commercial purposes—none of which may be done without prior written permission of the publisher.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, fax 978-646-8600, or on the Web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, 201-748-6011, fax 201-748-6008, or online at www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifi cally disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fi tness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profi t or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Readers should be aware that Internet websites offered as citations and/or sources for further information may have changed or disappeared between the time this was written and when it is read.

Jossey-Bass books and products are available through most bookstores. To contact Jossey-Bass directly call our Customer Care Department within the U.S. at 800-956-7739, outside the U.S. at 317-572-3986, or fax 317-572-4002.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some material included with standard print versions of this book may not be included in e-books or in print-on- demand. If the version of this book that you purchased references media such as CD or DVD that was not included in your purchase, you may download this material at http://booksupport.wiley.com. For more information about Wiley products, visit www.wiley.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

O’Neal-McElrath, Tori, date. Winning grants step by step : the complete workbook for planning, developing, and writing successful proposals / Tori O’Neal-McElrath. — Fourth edition. pages cm. — (The Jossey-Bass nonprofi t guidebook series) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-118-37834-2 (paper/website) 1. Proposal writing for grants. 2. Nonprofi t organizations—Finance. I. Carlson, Mim, date. Winning grants. II. Title. HG177.C374 2013 658.15’224—dc23 2013014312

Printed in the United States of America

fourth edition

PB Printing 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

http://www.josseybass.com

http://www.copyright.com

http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions

http://booksupport.wiley.com

http://www.wiley.com

The Jossey-Bass Nonprofi t Guidebook Series

The Jossey-Bass Nonprofi t Guidebook Series provides new

to experienced nonprofi t professionals and volunteers

with the essential tools and practical knowledge they

need to make a difference in the world. From hands-on

workbooks to step-by-step guides on developing a criti-

cal skill or learning how to perform an important task or

process, our accomplished expert authors provide readers

with the information required to be effective in achieving

goals, mission, and impact.

FREE Professional ContentP

This book includes professional content that can be accessed from our Web site when you register at www.josseybass.com/go/winninggrants using the password professional.

http://www.josseybass.com/go/winninggrants

Other Titles in the Jossey-Bass Guidebook Series

How to Write Successful Fundraising Appeals, Third Edition, Mal Warwick

Content Marketing for Nonprofi ts: A Communications Map for Engaging Your Community, Becoming a Favorite Cause, and Raising More Money, Kivi Leroux Miller

The Nonprofi t Marketing Guide: High-Impact, Low-Cost Ways to Build Support for Your Good Cause, Kivi Leroux Miller

The Executive Director’s Guide to Thriving as a Nonprofi t Leader, Second Edition, Mim Carlson, Margaret Donohoe

Strategic Communications for Nonprofi ts: A Step-by-Step Guide to Working with the Media, Second Edition, Kathy Bonk, Emily Tynes, Henry Griggs, Phil Sparks

The Budget-Building Book for Nonprofi ts: A Step-by-Step Guide for Managers and Boards, Second Edition, Murray Dropkin, Jim Halpin, Bill La Touche

Contents

Website Contents vi

List of Figures, Samples, and Worksheets vii

Acknowledgments ix

The Author xi

How to Use This Workbook xiii

Introduction An Overview of the Grantseeking Process 1

STEP 1 Developing the Proposal Idea 13

STEP 2 Developing Relationships with Funders 21

STEP 3 Writing a Compelling Problem Statement 31

STEP 4 Defi ning Clear Goals and Objectives 39

STEP 5 Developing the Methods 49

STEP 6 Preparing the Evaluation Component 55

STEP 7 Developing Sustainability Strategies 65

STEP 8 Developing the Program Budget 71

STEP 9 Writing the Organization Background Component 85

STEP 10 Writing the Proposal Summary 91

STEP 11 Putting the Package Together 97

STEP 12 Sustaining Relationships with Funders 105

Bibliography 111

Resources

A. What Is a Foundation? 113 B. How to Research Funders 117 C. Resources for Grantseekers 121

Index 125

Website Contents

Worksheet 1.1: Proposal Idea Questionnaire Worksheet 2.1: Letter of Inquiry Questionnaire Worksheet 3.1: Statement of Problem Questionnaire Worksheet 4.1A: Goals and Objectives Exercise Worksheet 5.1: Methods Exercise Worksheet 6.1: Evaluation Planning Questionnaire Worksheet 7.1: Future Funding Questionnaire Worksheet 8.1: Revenue and Expense Budget Worksheet 9.1: Organization Background Exercise Worksheet 10.1: Summary Questionnaire Worksheet 11.1: Final Proposal Checklist Budget Template: Multiyear Budget Template: One Year Budget Template: Swim 4 Life Program Sample Proposal: Capacity Building for Museum Consultant Sample Proposal: Common Grant Application for Autism Program Sample Proposal: Electronic Application for Deaf Teen Pregnancy

Prevention Sample Proposal: Electronic Application for Disease Advocacy

Program Sample Letter of Intent: To a New Prospect for Scholarships Sample Letter of Introduction: For a Food Bank’s Expansion Resource A: What Is a Foundation? Resource B: How to Research Funders Resource C: Resources for Grantseekers

vii

List of Figures, Samples, and Worksheets

Introduction

Figure I.1: 2011 Contributions: $298.42 Billion by Source of Contributions (in billions of dollars—all fi gures are rounded) 4

Step 1

Worksheet 1.1: Proposal Idea Questionnaire 16

Step 2

Sample Letter of Inquiry 25 Worksheet 2.1: Letter of Inquiry Questionnaire 27

Step 3

Sample Problem Statement 34 Worksheet 3.1: Statement of Problem Questionnaire 36

Step 4

Worksheet 4.1A: Goals and Objectives Exercise 45 Worksheet 4.1B: Objective Worksheet Completed for

the Swim 4 Life Program 46

Step 5

Sample Timeline (Abbreviated Version) 51 Sample Methods Component 52 Worksheet 5.1: Methods Exercise 53

Step 6

Sample Evaluation Component 60 Worksheet 6.1: Evaluation Planning Questionnaire 61

Step 7

Sample Sustainability Component 67 Worksheet 7.1: Future Funding Questionnaire 69

viii List of Figures, Samples, and Worksheets

Step 8

Sample Budget Justifi cation 80 Worksheet 8.1: Revenue and Expense Budget 83

Step 9

Sample Organization Background Component 88 Worksheet 9.1: Organization Background Exercise 89

Step 10

Sample Summary 92 Worksheet 10.1: Summary Questionnaire 94

Step 11

Sample Cover Letter 98 Worksheet 11.1: Final Proposal Checklist 102

Acknowledgments

THIS WORKBOOK IS a coming together of all aspects of the winning grants process: prospect research, program planning, grantwriting, proposal sub- mission and follow up, and relationship building and stewardship. In this fourth edition, Winning Grants Step by Step will continue to augment the many workshops and clinics and the various forms of consultation avail- able on proposal writing.

Special acknowledgments specifi c to this fourth edition go to three extraordinary individuals, all of whom were also strong devotees of the fi rst three editions of this workbook. Ashyia Johnson is a contributing author to this edition, serving as the primary writer for Step 8 (Budgets). Ashyia brings over fi fteen years of fi nance and budget experience in both public and private sectors. She has spent the past fi ve years in project man- agement and leadership roles in the federal government, where her primary focus is on budgetary and fi nancial matters. She is also an active member of several nonprofi t volunteer organizations, including Delta Sigma Theta, Inc., Jack and Jill of America, Inc., and the Junior League of Washington where she serves in various roles that involve fi nancial and program planning, as well as fundraising. Sheryl Kaplan is back again from the third edition to contribute several sample proposals for successfully funded grants. Sheryl is an eighteen-year veteran as a grantwriting consultant and has her own consulting practice, SKaplan Grants. Patricia Sinay is a second contribut- ing author to this edition, and is the primary writer for Step 4 (Goals and Objectives). She brings more than twenty years of experience working with nonprofi ts and foundations. She now runs Community Investment Strate- gies, a consulting fi rm she founded where she specializes in collaboratives, board development, nonprofi t capacity building, and philanthropic program development. Patricia teaches a class on public service at the University of California, San Diego, and is in frequent demand as a speaker and facilitator at conferences and workshops.

The Author

TORI O’NEAL-McELRATH has more than twenty-fi ve years of experi- ence in the areas of organizational development, fundraising, program design and implementation, and capacity building with a broad range of nonprofi t organizations and foundations. Since 2009, Tori has served as the Director of Institutional Advancement at the Center for Community Change (CCC), a national nonprofi t focused on building the power and capacity of low-income people, especially low-income people of color, to have a signifi cant impact in improving their communities and the policies and institutions that affect their lives. Prior to joining the senior manage- ment team at CCC, she was the founding principal of O’Neal Consulting, a full-service organizational development practice that specialized in multi- funder collaborations, board development, fundraising, strategic planning, and interim executive leadership. She has successfully raised millions of dollars from foundations, corporations, and individuals throughout her years as a consultant, staff person, board member, and volunteer. Over the years, Tori has taught major gifts fundraising while on the faculty of the University of California Los Angeles Extension, and grantsmanship, annual fund campaigns, and nonprofi t management workshops through various volunteer centers. She has served as a presenter and facilitator at numerous local, state, and national conferences, and was most recently a contributing author to Nonprofi t 101: A Complete and Practical Guide for Leaders and Professionals (a Wiley Publication).

xiii

How to Use This Workbook

WINNING GRANTS STEP BY STEP, Fourth Edition will walk the reader, step by step as the title implies, through the basic grantwriting process and will clearly illustrate that conducting thorough research up front, following directions, building relationships, and implementing sound program plan- ning is what best positions organizations to win grants. By employing the strategies as outlined, grantseekers will signifi cantly increase their ability to turn organizational programs, projects, and even general operating needs into proposals worthy of the full consideration of funders.

This is a hands-on, user-friendly workbook that guides the user through the various stages of development that will enable organizations to take an idea or concept and make it come to life in the form of a proposal. Real-life examples, samples of materials, worksheets to support grantseekers as they create materials, and helpful tips can be found throughout the workbook. Guidelines, suggestions, and exercises prepare the reader to tackle proposal development for various organizations in the nonprofi t arena—commu- nity-based agencies, educational institutions, hospitals and clinics, and research organizations. “Reality Checks” and “Helpful Hints” offer brief focused guidance. “Defi nitions,” unless otherwise stated, are provided by the Nonprofi t Good Practice Guide (www.npgoodpractice.org/Glossary), a project of the Johnson Center at Grand Valley State University. One of the new features of Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition is that it has a companion website, josseybass.com/go/winninggrants. This website contains all of the worksheets found at the end of each chapter, live links to the references provided in Resource C (Resources for Grantseekers), and sample proposals.

Ultimately, the worksheets and other activities are crafted to assist in developing proposals and letters of inquiry to meet the requirements of funding institutions of various types—corporate, private, operating, family, and community.

Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition is crafted with three kinds of individuals in mind: (1) entry-level grantwriters, (2) other organizational staff and volunteers with limited knowledge or experience of grantwriting, and

http://www.npgoodpractice.org/Glossary

http://josseybass.com/go/winninggrants

How to Use This Work bookxiv

(3) people with some experience who are seeking a refresher in “grantwrit- ing 101.” Though grantwriting basics can be generally applied to all types of grant processes, this workbook focuses primarily on foundation grants, with some limited focus on corporate grants. Several resources on other sorts of grants can be found in the Resources for Grantseekers section on the website.

This workbook is modeled on creating proposals for program funding, and can easily be adapted for general support and other proposals as well. Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition targets this basic truth: a grant proposal must clearly articulate a well thought out, well-crafted program that both inspires confi dence in the nonprofi t’s ability to successfully implement it and fi ts within the interests of the funders who will receive it. Funders are looking to make strategic investments with their limited grant resources, and they need to see a direct connection between the organization’s program and community need(s) being met—and they need to see how grantseekers will track and measure their success.

Almost every organization out there addressing community needs has good ideas. The key to winning grants is to match those good ideas with funders who are interested in the same actions and outcomes.

Step One of this workbook walks grantseekers through the process of developing a proposal idea.

Step Two provides guidance on introducing a project to possible funders, as well as some helpful ideas about ways to develop relationships with funders, which is a critical component in winning grants.

Steps Three through Ten focus on the specifi c process components that will take ideas from a concept to an effective proposal.

Step Eleven walks grantseekers through the fi nal step in the process, submitting a proposal.

Step Twelve focuses on how to sustain relationships with funders after the grantmaking process has concluded—whether the program was funded or not.

Finally, the Resources for Grantseekers section, which can be found both in the book and on the companion website, addresses key components of the grantseeking process, such as prospect research, and offers a number of direct links to directories, guides, tutorials, portals, and actual foundation websites, as well as other websites deemed potentially helpful to the users of this workbook.

Incorporated throughout Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition are samples that are intended to highlight what a particular step is addressing. These samples focus on the work of the Swim 4 Life program, whose mis- sion is to empower youth in the underserved communities throughout King County, Any State, through high-quality programs to utilize the discipline

How to Use This Work book x v

of swimming to improve physical fi tness, nurture self-esteem, and acquire the confi dence to advance their lives. The Swim 4 Life program is fi ctitious, but based on a similar real-life organization.

The best way to use Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition is to actu- ally go through it step by step, crafting a grant proposal along the way. This workbook is unique in that is structured to follow a process typically used when preparing a proposal; grantseekers can develop a proposal of their own while reading the book and completing the exercises.

Remember, there is no magic to navigating the grantseeking process or to preparing successful proposals. These activities simply take good planning, good writing, good research, and an approach that is geared to a prospec- tive funder with whom the organization has developed a good relationship.

Introduction An Overview of the Grantseeking Process

LET’S START WITH THE OBVIOUS: every nonprofi t organization, from start-ups to well-established, local community organizations to national affi li- ate organizations, consider foundation grants both a desirable and essential source of funding support. Compared to other revenue generating options, grants appear to take less effort and yield a larger reward. In many respects, that is true. However, the word “appear” is important: while grant seeking is relatively inexpensive in comparison to other fundraising strategies and can, in fact, yield large award amounts, it does have expenses associated with it, including a signifi cant amount of dedicated staff (and possibly consulting) time for research, program planning, budgeting, and attention to details and various deadlines. A strong proposal—that is, a well-written, well-organized, and concise proposal—can bring in substantial income for organizational programs.

That being said, not every organization is ready to pursue or receive grant funding. So before an organization starts on the path of seeking grant funding, or attempts to move up from smaller grants to grants of larger amounts, the staff and board should ask itself: Is the organization ready for grant funding or a signifi cant increase in grant funding?

Organizational leadership should start by answering these fi ve sets of questions:

1. Are the organization’s mission, purpose, and goals already well- established and articulated? Does the organization have its strategic plan or annual operating plan in place?

2. Does the organization have solid fi nancial procedures and systems in place? Does it have the ability to effectively track, monitor, and report on how it expends both restricted and unrestricted grant funds?

Winning Grants Step by Step2

3. Does the organization have the necessary staff in place to ensure that it can deliver on its stated goals and objectives? Can it do what it promises? If not, does the staff leadership possess the ability to effec- tively get the right staff in place should the organization be awarded a grant?

4. Is the organizational leadership prepared to do what it takes to meet the requirements that come with receiving grant funding? These requirements may vary greatly depending on the amount and source of the funding, and might include some or all of the following: producing quarterly, semiannual, or annual progress reports (including fi nancial updates relative to the grant); conducting ongoing program evaluation; participating in special training; and attending conferences and meetings (particularly if the funding relates to a special initiative of a foundation). Meeting grant expectations might also require the organization to expand its services, increase its offi ce space, and support staff expansion (with human resources efforts, information technology, and training).

5. Does the organization have solid access to—and understanding of—technology? Foundations of all sizes and focus areas are switching to online submission processes, and many conduct nearly all of their communication with their grantees and prospective grantees via email. In addition, does the organization have an online presence in the form of a website? While not a mandatory tool with most foundations, an organization with a website presents as technologically “in step.” An organization needs to honestly assess whether it has the basic technology in place to communicate with funders and access and engage in the grantseeking process online.

If an organization can answer yes to these fi ve groups of questions, it is well positioned to begin the grantseeking process.

In many instances a well-prepared and clearly articulated proposal can build an organization’s credibility with grantmakers, whether the organization is initially successful in securing a grant or not. Nonprofi ts that have the respect of grantmakers are often proactively sought after to work on issues of particular concern to both themselves and the funders. Often this funder solicitation comes in the form of a targeted funder initia- tive. This provides both the grantmaker and the nonprofi t with a unique opportunity to collaborate on a larger scale than they would under an individual grant.

Introduction—an O ver view of the Grantseek ing Process 3

More funders of all types (public, private, and operating foundations, as well as some government funders) are engaging in community or issue convenings, or both, as a routine part of their work. Participation in these types of convenings is another solid way to engage potential funders.

Grantseeking is, naturally, the most popular way for nonprofi ts to secure funding for programs; however, it is but one of several ways an organization can potentially raise funds. There are many different fundraising campaigns that may increase revenues—and visibility—for an organization, includ- ing (but not limited to) direct mail and email efforts, social media strate- gies involving Facebook, Twitter, and various other social media outlets, mobile strategies, membership drives, work place giving, special events, donor giving clubs, “thons” (as in walk-a-thons, dance-a-thons, and jump- a-thons), and more. These strategies should all be kept in mind in addition to grantseeking as a part of a well-rounded fundraising plan. Not only is a diversifi ed fundraising plan something grantmakers like to see, but it is vital to a nonprofi t’s ongoing work, as gaining support is important to build shared ownership in the nonprofi t by constituents and other supporters, so it remains well grounded. Also, grantseeking is a process that takes time. Some grant cycles take as long as six months from the time a grant proposal is submitted to the time an organization learns whether it has been funded. Then, if an organization is awarded a grant, it might take up to another few weeks before funding is received—which is increasingly being done by wire transfer as opposed to mailing a paper check (once again a reference to the increased need for organizations to have appropriate technology in place). If an organization is in need of immediate funds, writing a grant proposal is not the most effective way to raise it in most cases, although there is always an exception to the rule.

Nonprofi t organizations have seen some fairly signifi cant shifts in the funding climate over the last few years, but one thing remains the same, particularly for larger organizations: the vast majority of the funds raised in the private sector come from individuals, not foundations. The chart in Figure I.1 illustrates this point.

Government funding, delivered through grants from federal, state, and local agencies, adds billions of public dollars that are not factored into the chart in Figure I.1. That said, government funds are typically offered for projects aimed at very narrow target audiences and qualifi cations, so grantseekers should do their homework to ensure that there is indeed a match worth investing the time to produce these typically onerous grant proposals—it will most certainly take time and clear intention, not to mention the fairly signifi cant due diligence to steward this kind of funding once secured.

Winning Grants Step by Step4

FIGURE I.1

2011 Contributions: $298.42 Billion by Source of Contributions

(in billions of dollars—all fi gures are rounded)

Individuals $217.79 73%

Foundations $41.67 14%

Bequests $24.41 8%

Corporations $14.55 5%

Source: Giving USA Foundation, Giving USA 2011: The Executive Summary of the Annual Report on Philanthropy for the Year 2011. Glenview, Ill.: Giving USA Foundation, 2012.

Categories of Support

Organizations are dynamic and have varied fi nancial needs, which typically fall into one of the following categories:

• Operating (general support or unrestricted income). This is the fund- ing nonprofi ts need to pay rent, utilities, and the other everyday costs associated with running the organization—the basics that allow it to

Reality Check All foundations are not created equal. Many—though by no means all—national foundations are, by and large, directing the lion’s share of their grants to larger organizations (national nonprofi ts, includ- ing those with affi liates throughout the nation, major universities, hospitals, museums, and the like). Yet there are literally thousands of local, regional, and statewide foundations that fund various-sized orga- nizations. Smaller and mid-sized foundations are often located in the very communities of the organiza- tions themselves. Therefore, organizations seeking grants need to be diligent about conducting thor- ough prospect research up front and before the fi rst word is written for any new grant proposals. This is also all the more reason for grantseekers to state their case clearly throughout its proposal.

Introduction—an O ver view of the Grantseek ing Process 5

fulfi ll its mission. Typically, the sources of general operating funds are individuals (through annual fund campaigns, direct mail campaigns, and special events), earned income, and grants.

• Program (temporarily restricted income). Program or special project funding is of primary interest to most grantmakers, be they founda- tions, corporations, or even government agencies. It is funding that organizations receive to start a new program, continue running or expanding an existing program, or launch a time-limited project.

• Capacity building. This special project funding is used for a targeted effort to increase an organization’s capacity to better support its mission and fulfi ll its particular administrative or fundraising goals. Some foundations are willing to invest in capacity-building grants to organizations doing great work.

• Capital or equipment. Funds for capital support are often raised through a targeted fundraising drive known as a capital campaign or through seeking special equipment grants. These intensive efforts—designed to generate a specifi ed amount of funds within a specifi ed time period for construction, remodeling and renovation, building expansion, or the purchase of land or equipment—typically involve large-scale individual major gift solicitations, followed by substantial support from foundations and corporations. Some govern- ment agencies also provide funds for capital projects.

• Endowments. Funds for endowments are often generated through bequests and planned gifts; that is, through giving by an individual to an organization under the terms of a will or trust. Endowment funds may also be received as part of a capital or endowment campaign, using the methods for raising capital or equipment funds. In some cases, a longtime funder dedicated to an organization over a period of time may be willing to make an endowment grant, which may be a way to solidify their support of said nonprofi t or may be a part of an exit strategy on the part of the grantmaker, particularly if they have been funding the nonprofi t for a while. Generally the endowment principal is held as a long-term investment for the organization, and the interest income is used each year for operating needs.

There are other categories of support that might be considered under one of the categories already outlined or might be stand-alone. These include

• Planning. This is the funding nonprofi ts need to support a continuing process of analyzing program data, making decisions, and formulat- ing plans for action in the future, aimed at achieving program goals.

Winning Grants Step by Step6

• Research. Funds awarded to institutions to cover costs of investigation and clinical trials. Research grants for individuals are usually referred to as fellowships.

The Proposal Process

There is no secret or trick to writing a winning grant proposal. The keys to success are

• Documenting an unmet community need, which the grantseeker is in a position to address

• Developing a clear plan for the program (or operations growth or capital work)

• Researching funders thoroughly

• Building strong relationships with funders

• Targeting proposals carefully

• Writing a concise proposal

Whether preparing a proposal for a foundation or a corporation, the process of proposal writing will be essentially the same. Organizations will

• Identify an unmet need that said organization can or should address

• Determine if other organizations within the community they service are currently attempting to address this unmet need

• Develop the plan to meet the need

• Determine whether there are potential partners or collaborators

• Identify potential funders and begin to build relationships with them

• Write the proposals, with each being tailored specifi cally for one potential funder

• Engage in strategic follow-up once the proposal has been submitted

Defi nitions Earned income. “Money received by an organization in return for the sale of a product or rendered service.” Capacity building. “The development of an organization’s core skills and capabilities, such as leadership, management, fi nance and fundraising, programs, and evaluation, in order to build the organization’s eff ectiveness and sustainability.”

Introduction—an O ver view of the Grantseek ing Process 7

This book covers the proposal process in detail in Steps One through Twelve. The major components of a proposal are as follows:

• Cover letter: a short letter that accompanies the proposal and briefl y describes its signifi cance

• Executive summary (or proposal summary or summary): a very brief (usu- ally one to two pages) overview of the proposal

• Problem statement (or statement of need or need statement): a compelling description of the need to be addressed by the grantseeker

• Organization background (or background statement): a presentation of the nonprofi t’s qualifi cations to carry out the proposed project

• Goals and objectives: a description of what the organization ultimately hopes to accomplish with a program (goal), and a spelling out of the specifi c results or outcomes to be accomplished (objectives)

• Methods (or strategies): a description of the programs, services, and activities that will achieve the desired results

• Evaluation: a plan for assessing program accomplishments

• Sustainability: a presentation of the nonprofi t’s strategies for develop- ing additional funding to continue the program after the initial grant funding is over

• Budget: a line-item summary and narrative of program revenues and expenses

A proposal’s format and length will vary depending on the grantmaker. In general, proposals contain the same key components to help funders understand that an organization has a sound plan that meets an important need and will make a positive impact on whomever it serves. The format laid out in this book is commonly used among funders but is by no means the only format possible. In fact, as previously mentioned, many funders large and small are moving to an online grant proposal process. These pro- cesses, while sometimes limiting an organization’s ability to go deeper in explanation and details due to space limits, typically follow to a large degree the step-by-step process outlined in this book.

The step-by-step process is a useful and hands-on way to develop an organization’s thoughts and present its program. After following these well- defi ned steps, it will be much easier to put the results into whatever order the funder requests. The importance of following each grantmaker’s guidelines cannot be emphasized enough. These guidelines will walk grantseekers through each funder’s requirements for proposal development, packaging, and submission. The proposals on the Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition

Winning Grants Step by Step8

website show some of the different formats required by different funders. Many foundations belong to a regional association of grantmakers (RAG); RAGs provide education, networking, and services to their members and advocate for foundations’ interests and concerns with policymakers. Members of a RAG may use a common statewide or regional application form (some examples of which can be found on the website), which makes the process of grantseeking easier. Be sure to check with your local RAG to fi nd out if common applications exist in your area.

Types of Proposals

Broadly speaking, there are three types of proposals. A letter of intent (or letter of inquiry) is generally a two- or three-page

summary (though some funders may request a specifi c number of pages) submitted when the funder wishes to see a brief description of the project before deciding whether to ask for a longer, more detailed proposal. This document must focus on how the proposed project fi ts the priorities of the funder. It should also clearly describe the need and outline the plan to meet it.

A letter proposal is the type most often requested by corporations. It is typically a three- or four-page description of the project plan, the organiza- tion requesting the funds, and the actual request. The letter proposal and the letter of intent are often confused by grantseekers. The difference between a letter proposal and a letter of intent is this: In the letter proposal grant- seekers are actually requesting funds. In the letter of intent grantseekers are only introducing their idea to the funder in order to determine whether the funder has an interest in receiving a more detailed proposal.

The long proposal (or full proposal), a format that includes a cover letter and a proposal summary, is the type most often requested by foundations. Corporations should not receive this format unless they specifi cally request it. Long proposals range from fi ve to twenty-fi ve pages, with most funders being interested in receiving about seven to ten pages, plus attachments. In the longer proposal, the grantseeker has an opportunity to give many details about the project and its importance to the community. When using this longer format, grantseekers should make sure that the funding request—the actual dollar amount—is not hidden. It should appear in the cover letter and in the summary as well as in the body of the proposal.

Foundations employing an online grant submission process will abide by much of what is outlined above, although the space for each step is likely to be more condensed than a typical document proposal, so grantseekers should be prepared for that eventuality.

Introduction—an O ver view of the Grantseek ing Process 9

Tips for Writing Proposals

There are three basic things grantseekers should keep in mind when con- ceiving their proposals:

1. Picture the reader of the grant as a friendly and fairly educated person who hasn’t been around in a while and doesn’t have a clue about the work of the organization, but she’s interested. What would the grant- seeker share to transfer excitement and a sense of mission?

2. Be sure to use compelling facts, but equally important, be sure to tell compelling stories that highlight what the organization does, how it does what it does, and why it matters. Put a face, place, and situation to the facts to make them real.

3. Always keep in mind that a grant is not just a grant; it is an invest- ment on the part of the funder. Foundations have limited resources and are focused on advancing the foundation’s mission. Therefore, it is important to their board and the larger community that they make smart investments.

The heart and soul of an organization’s proposal will come from those who have identifi ed the problem or unmet need and conceptualized the program to address it; they must be an integral part of the proposal devel- opment process. Grantseekers need to decide on one person to write the proposal—either the staff person with the strongest writing skills or an outside grantwriter—and have that person working closely with those who developed the program to be funded. Keep in mind that the pro- posal will suffer if the writer selected—whether internal staff or outside grantwriter—does not have an understanding of what the project is, why it is important to the community, and why the organization seeking funding is best qualifi ed to undertake the project. And even when the writer does have this understanding, it is essential to have the program staff involved in the development of the grant proposal.

Stick to the following principles when preparing the proposal:

• Follow the grant guidelines. Organizations do not want their proposal dismissed on a technicality, which happens more than most grant- seekers think. It is common for grantmakers to make explicit the format they want followed. Make the proposal visually attractive, but do not overdo it. Whenever possible, break up the written page. Use a reasonable font size, and use bulleted lists and other formatting tools to make each page look inviting—but follow the instructions outlined by each individual funder.

Winning Grants Step by Step10

• Get the facts straight. Make sure data are relevant and up-to-date to support the need for the program. General data to help set a frame- work for the statement of need are worthwhile, but the most impor- tant data are the facts and fi gures specifi c to the geographical area served, target audience, and other key elements.

• Do not make the organization’s proposal so bleak that the reader sees no point in trying to address the problem. Use an affi rming writing style, and present a well-reasoned, thoughtful presentation. A grant proposal should contain some elements of emotional appeal yet also be realistic and factual.

• Be aware that many grantmakers read the executive summary fi rst, followed closely by the program budget. If they go beyond the executive summary and budget—congratulations; at a minimum their interest is sparked. For this reason, grantseekers should consider developing the proposal summary last.

• KISS (Keep It Sweet and Simple). Avoid jargon and do not overwrite. Make it easy for someone who probably is not an expert in a par- ticular fi eld to read, understand, and successfully digest the entire proposal. Jargon (specialized words that only people in the relevant fi eld will understand) acts as a barrier to understanding, and people cannot be sympathetic to things they cannot comprehend. Be thrifty with words, particularly now in the age of online proposals, where word limits are typically in place, but do not sacrifi ce information that is critical to making the case for the project.

• Get some honest feedback on the proposal before submitting it to a funder. Ask one or two people (maybe a staff or board member or even some- one outside your organization) to review the proposal carefully. Does everything make sense? Is the need clear? Do the proposed objec- tives (Step Four) and methods (Step Five) seem to be an appropriate response to the identifi ed unmet need? Use the answers to these ques- tions to strengthen the fi nal proposal.

• Remember that one size does not fi t all. After developing a proposal, study the guidelines of each prospective funder identifi ed as a possi- ble match for the program and tailor the proposal for each one accord- ingly. It is true that most funders want the same basic information. That said, it is also true that they request it in different formats, which will require reordering sections, cutting and pasting, and possibly relabeling some sections (for instance, the problem statement may become the need statement). Occasionally, additional material

Introduction—an O ver view of the Grantseek ing Process 11

may need to be added or some material deleted from the original version. By tailoring the proposal for each funder, each proposal reviewer will potentially be provided with confi dence that the proposal is responding to the specifi c grantmaker’s concerns.

• Plan ahead. The grantseeking process typically operates within six- month to nine-month windows, and each funder operates on its own schedule. From the time a proposal is submitted to the time a poten- tial funder responds will be on average six months, and many funders have specifi c deadlines for receiving proposals. Develop a calendar that lists all foundation and corporation prospects and their deadlines. Also maintain a list of each funder’s priorities that seem applicable to the organization’s desired program, and then be sure to clearly spell out the parts of the organization’s program that fi t those priorities. This calendar will help grantseekers stay organized and on track as numerous deadline dates and priority areas are juggled.

Step 1 Developing the Proposal Idea

NOW THAT AN INTRODUCTION to the process of preparing a proposal has been given, let’s take that fi rst step! This section of the workbook walks grantseekers through developing the proposal idea by answering some key questions. Before beginning to write a proposal to secure funds to address an unmet need, grantseekers must fi rst determine which programs in the organization are the most “fundable.” That is, which programs are most likely to garner the most interest from grantmakers?

Many funders have a fairly strong preference for investing in new programs and successful continuing programs that are expanding over general operating support or basic program continuation. Again, be sure to do a thorough job of researching prospective funders so that there is a sense of clarity specifi c to the audience with which the organization has to work. Funders might also have an interest in a special project, such as a new time-specifi c project, a capacity-building idea, a set of technology improve- ments, or technical assistance. This workbook uses the idea of expanding a successful pilot program as the model for developing a proposal.

To start developing a proposal idea, begin with the end in mind. The organization has identifi ed an unmet need, or wants to expand on a pro- gram already in existence that is successfully meeting an unmet need. So sit down with everyone involved to begin to fl esh out this program idea— how an organization is going to meet, or grow the existing program to continue meeting, that unmet need it has identifi ed. Use a team approach in developing the plan and involve the appropriate staff, clients, and vol- unteers from the very beginning. The team can develop an initial program plan fi rst or expansion plan, which then will become the basis of the entire proposal.

The importance of having the right people at the table when the program plan is developed cannot be emphasized enough. One of the worst things

14 Winning Grants Step by Step

that can happen to a nonprofi t is to be funded for a program that it then discovers it does not have the ability to successfully implement or, worse yet, a program that does not effectively meet the needs initially identifi ed because it was developed in a vacuum—or in the development director ’s offi ce—rather than with the individuals who will be responsible for implementing it.

When preparing a proposal, many writers start with the planning sections (problem statement, goals and objectives, methods, evaluation, program sus-

tainability, and budget) because these sections form the core of the proposal. Then they write the organization background section, fi nishing with the summary and the cover letter. This workbook follows that format, which is easily adaptable to online proposal submissions as well.

The planning sections of the proposal deserve careful attention; without a clearly articulated program plan, it is nearly impossible to get funding. Writing a clear, goal-oriented, thoughtful proposal is crucial. If a grantseeker can’t clearly and effectively explain what they’re doing, why they’re doing it, and how they’re going to do it in a way that is easily understandable, staff at grantmaking institutions will not have what they need to advocate on the organization’s behalf.

A guideline here is that nonprofi ts should expect to focus approximately 70 percent of their time on program planning; the other 30 percent can be dedicated to writing and packaging the proposal. Also, the tighter an orga- nization’s program plan, the easier the proposal will be to write. Go into this process knowing that even with all of the planning, fi ne-tuning of the plan will be necessary as the proposal is being developed—this is common practice.

Logic Models in Program Design

What exactly is a logic model? A logic model is a valuable tool that pro- duces a basic program picture that shows how the organization’s program is intended to work. The tool also helps organizations outline the sequence of related events in their programs. These events provide a direct and visual connection between the need for the planned program and the desired results and outcomes expected from the program. A logic model can be particularly useful when it comes to designing the evaluation for a new program. More information on logic models, including examples and online tools, can be found on the website, including actual logic model building portals.

Helpful Hint General operating support. While still not as available as is needed in the nonprofi t arena, there is a growing movement on the part of some funders to invest in gen- eral operating support. Be diligent in the research phase of grantseeking to uncover those funders receptive to receiving a gen- eral operating proposal.

Step 1—Developing the Proposal Idea 15

To get started on developing a compelling proposal idea, complete Work- sheet 1.1. The more thorough the answers, the more helpful the worksheet will be. After answering the questions in Worksheet 1.1, use those answers to identify one specifi c idea to develop using the exercises in this book. To check the merit of the idea identifi ed, ask the Proposal Development Review Questions at the end of this step. Then follow Steps Two through Twelve to create a well-planned proposal. Throughout these steps, this workbook will refer grantseekers to the accompanying website for worksheet examples and templates.

Reality Check Check the fi t. When conducting prospect research, grantseekers are bound to come across many won- derful opportunities presented by grantmakers—special initiatives and pots of funding for specifi c programs and projects within defi ned fi elds of interest. And even though they might sound exciting and worthwhile, always measure every funding opportunity by the organization’s mission. Is there really a fi t—a natural fi t? Or is the organization “growing another foot” to fi t the “shoe” the funder has to off er? Always, always use the organization’s mission and organizational purpose as the primary guide.

Winning Grants Step by Step16

WORKSHEET 1.1:

Proposal Idea Questionnaire

1. What new projects is your organization planning for the next two to three years?

Project A:

Project B:

Project C:

Project D:

2. Which of these projects are most compatible with your organization’s current mission and purpose, and in what way?

Project Compatibility

3. What is unique about your organization’s project?

Project Uniqueness

On the Web

Step 1—Developing the Proposal Idea 17

WORKSHEET 1.1:

Proposal Idea Questionnaire (Continued)

4. What other organizations are doing this project? Is there duplication of eff ort? Is there potential for collaboration?

Duplicate Project Possible Collaboration Project (with whom) (with whom)

5. What community need does each of your organization’s projects address?

Project Need Addressed

6. What members of your community—including civic leaders, political fi gures, the media, your organization’s clients or constituents, and other nonprofi ts—support each project?

Project Supporters

On the Web

Winning Grants Step by Step18

WORKSHEET 1.1:

Proposal Idea Questionnaire (Continued)

7. Does your organization currently have the expertise to undertake each project? If new staff is necessary, can the organization manage growth in infrastructure (HR, technology, supervisory oversight, and so forth) eff ectively? (Check each category that applies to each project.)

Project Expertise HR Technology Other (specify)

8. Is there internal (board and staff ) support for the project? External support (community leaders, clients, neighbors, and so forth)? (Check the category that applies to each project and specify the type of support.)

Project Internal Support (specify) External Support (specify)

On the Web

Step 1—Developing the Proposal Idea 19

Proposal Development Review Questions

To fi nd out whether the proposal idea being presented has merit, answer the following six questions:

1. What community need does the program or service that the organiza- tion has identifi ed address? (The answer to this question will become the framework for the proposal’s need statement.)

2. What would an improved community situation look like? (This answer will become the basis of the proposal’s goals and objectives.)

3. What can the organization do to improve this situation? (This answer will become the basis of the proposal’s methods.)

4. How will the organization know if its program or service has suc- ceeded? (This answer will become the basis of the proposal’s program evaluation.)

5. How much will the organization’s program or service cost, and what other sources of funding will it have? (This answer will become the basis of the proposal’s program budget.)

6. How will the organization’s program or service be funded in the future? (This answer will become the basis of the proposal’s program sustainability.)

Now that the organization’s proposal idea is successfully identifi ed and framed, let’s move on to Step Two, which addresses a critical part of winning grants: developing relationships with funders.

Step 2 Developing Relationships with Funders

BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS WITH FUNDERS is a long-term, sincere, and strategic investment of time and intention. Once it is determined that an organization’s proposed program is solid, time and focused effort needs to be invested in identifying funders who are potentially a match with both the organization and its proposed program, project, or special initiative. Resources on the Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition website offer links to other sites with detailed information and tips on how to effectively conduct prospect research to successfully identify possible funders. Step Two also provides no- nonsense advice about prospect research and then offers ideas for developing relationships once funders are identifi ed. Please refer to Resource A (What Is a Foundation?) to learn more about what foundations are and how they work.

Making the Initial Approach

A grantmaker ’s website typically holds all the information grantseekers need to determine whether it is a match. In fact, in this day and age, it is now fairly commonplace for all grant guidelines and supporting materials to be on the website; funders are “going green” in every way and reducing paper consumption. So not only are grant guidelines online but, as mentioned in the Introduction, grant proposals are now routinely submitted online and paperless. Typically, grantseekers will fi nd an abundance of information, including—but by no means limited to—background information on the foundation as an institution, its staff and board of directors, grant guidelines, and special funding initiatives, if any. Most funder websites will also proudly feature current and previous grantees or the programs successfully funded. Foundations, like all 501(c)3 organizations, are required by law to provide access to their Internal Revenue Service Form 990, which is their annual tax

Winning Grants Step by Step22

return. Many may have a link to this document on their websites, or they can be located by visiting Guide Star (www.guidestar.org) or the Foundation Center (www.foundationcenter.org).

These success stories provide the very best indicators of what specifi c funders are likely to fund in the future. Some funders may have additional microsites (separate sites that are linked to the main site) for particular funding initiatives they have launched. That said, other funders may still require additional sleuthing on the part of the grantseeker before they can appropriately glean whether there is truly a match. So in addition to reviewing funder websites, grantseekers should use various search engines to research their previous giving to other organizations and perhaps also to look for feature stories about them (if not found on their websites) or pick up the telephone and call a foundation directly.

But be prepared: this conversation just might lead to a brief discussion of the proposed project or program, so the caller should be ready to talk about it and hit the highlights. Who knows? This may be the start of a great new relationship. After reviewing a grantmaker’s website and other related materials, determine clarity around there being a potentially solid fi t between the organization’s proposed program or project and what the grantmaker says it is interested in funding. Grantseekers need to recognize that the relationship they make with foundation staff is one based on mutual need; they then need to be on a mission to educate foundation staff on what they need from the grantseeker’s organization.

In addition, it is important not to assume that funders know and under- stand the grantseeking organization’s mission or target audience or that the program being presented is addressing a priority of theirs.

Developing the Relationship

After establishing that there is a good fi t, relationship building becomes a continuous process that begins before a single word of a proposal is written, and it spans many years. Keep in mind that it is a relationship, rather than a transaction. Good communication with funders should never end, even if and when the organization may stop receiving grants from them. Once a relationship exists, funders like to receive progress reports about how the organization or program they funded is doing. They may also take an inter- est in other compelling ideas that the organization has developed.

It’s not always easy to develop relationships with funders, especially if they have not previously funded an organization. However, the key is the relationship part of that phrase. It’s relationship building, rather than sell- ing, that makes a difference.

http://www.guidestar.org

http://www.foundationcenter.org

Step 2—Developing Relationships with Funders 23

Here are a few concrete ways to approach a funder to open the door to relationship building. These are discussed more fully in the following subsections.

• Send the funder a brief email inquiry.

• Call the foundation and speak with someone regarding your proposal idea.

• Send a brief (no longer than two pages maximum) letter of inquiry to the funder.

• Invite the funder to your organization for a site visit.

While grant guidelines determine a nonprofi t’s initial approach, grant- seekers may have a connection to the funder, either directly or through one or more contacts who can potentially open a door on behalf of the organiza- tion for an initial meeting or phone conversation.

Sending Email Inquiries to Funders

Many funders offer grantseekers the option of contacting them via email with questions and funding inquiries. Some grantmakers even provide direct email access to their program offi cers from their websites; others may have an “info@” email that is routed to the appropriate staff person after review. In either case, email is a valuable tool for stimulating further, more meaningful, contact because it provides an opportunity for a brief introduction as a staff person, as well as the organization represented and the program needing funding. At the same time it gives the program offi - cer the time he needs to review the information and potentially respond. Email is far less demanding for program offi cers than a phone call and less wasteful than paper documents. And given the signifi cant shift from paper to electronic processes, email is all the more important. The key is to keep it brief! Resist the urge to write a mini proposal in the email. Grantseekers can also request an in-person meeting or time for a phone conversation in the email, which then provides the funder with options for responding to the communication.

Reality Check Be strategic and err on the side of restraint when using a contact to open a door with a funder. Few things are worse than dealing with a program offi cer who feels pushed into a meeting. Grantseekers always want an invitation, rather than a meeting based on obligation. Think “soft touch” rather than “heavy hand.”

Winning Grants Step by Step24

Contacting a Funder by Telephone

Before calling a funder to pitch an idea, be prepared. The person with whom a grantseeker speaks may have only a short time for a conversa- tion, so preparation is essential. Be ready to provide the highlights of the organization’s program within a ten- to fi fteen-minute conversation. This time frame includes the time it may take for the person to ask for clarifi cation of any points. Grantseekers should remember that they are not selling their organization’s program to a funder; they are attempting to make a connection between the program and the funding institution’s interest areas. To actively build a long-term relationship with the funder and with this particular representative, careful and engaged listening to the funder’s needs and providing information the funder wants is extremely important.

In listening to the funder’s needs, one might discover—sometimes very early in the conversation—that there in fact is not a match between the organization’s program and the funder’s current funding priorities; that is why grantseekers should have one or two other program ideas in mind to present as a backup. Do not waste this opportunity with the funder; be fully prepared with information on clearly identifi ed unmet needs that may fi t into the funder’s interest areas.

Writing a Letter of Inquiry

A letter of inquiry (or LOI) is sometimes the fi rst step in a funder’s grant- making process, particularly if the relationship between prospective grantee and funder is new. An LOI provides the funder with a “sneak peek” at the organization, target audience, and prospective program, without requir- ing the grantseeker to develop a full proposal at this early stage. After the funder has reviewed the information presented in the LOI, the organiza- tion may or may not be invited to submit a full proposal. Even though an LOI is a preliminary step, it should be treated as a vital part of relationship building. It is an integral fi rst interaction of what grantseekers hope will be many interactions with the funder. If asked to submit an LOI, check to see whether the funder has specifi c LOI guidelines. If it does not, the following list suggests what information to include, as a general rule:

• Organization’s mission and related programs

• The need the organization wishes to meet

• The outcomes expected from the organization’s project

• General details of how an organization will conduct the project

• The potential fi t between the funder and the organization

The sample LOI included in this step presents to a funder the Swim 4 Life Program, which will be used as an example program throughout this

Step 2—Developing Relationships with Funders 25

workbook. This is the letter that the Swim 4 Life program executive director would submit if an LOI was invited by the funder or if the funder accepted unsolicited submissions.

Sample Letter of Inquiry July 17, 2012 Wendy Wonder President XYZ Foundation 0000 Clinton Avenue, Suite 2330 Anytown, Any State 02009

Dear Ms. Wonder: I appreciate the time Anne Jonas has taken to communicate with us about how our programs fi t with

the XYZ Foundation’s funding priorities, and the encouragement she off ered us. Therefore, on behalf of the Board of Directors and staff , I am honored to submit this brief Letter of Inquiry introducing Swim 4 Life, an innovative swimming instruction program by Jane Swimmer, a former U.S. Olympic swimming hopeful and hometown hero. We respectfully request your consideration of a grant of $25,000 to help us expand our programs for low-income youth from two to three schools in the Gathenton School District.

Established as a 501(c)3 organization in 2008, the mission of the Swim 4 Life program is to empower youth in the underserved communities throughout King County through high-quality programs to utilize the discipline of swimming to improve physical fi tness, nurture self-esteem, and acquire the confi dence to advance their lives. This mission is currently being fulfi lled through programs currently operated at Arthur Schomburg Middle School in South Spring and the Rockmore Education Complex High School in Abbington. More than 450 youth have participated since operations began, and we would now like to add Cooperville Middle School, also located in Abbington.

The need for programs like Swim 4 Life is enormous in the communities we serve. Swimming has not been a popular sport in African American or Latino communities in some measure as a result of various factors including access to pools and other safe places to swim. Historically speaking, African Americans were denied access to public pools prior to the civil rights movement—and after in many instances. As a result, this population turned to water holes, ponds, and other unsupervised alternatives, which led to rates of drowning among people of color that far exceed those of whites. For example, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s latest report in early 2012, the drowning rate for African Americans between the ages of fi ve and fourteen was more than three times that for whites.

Through a range of summer and after-school services, the Swim 4 Life program teaches children to be “water safe” and to swim, and prepares them for competitive team training if they want to further develop their skills. Our program at one school even provides swim instruction specifi cally for students with disabilities. Our partnership with the Gathenton School District off ers us the opportunity to replicate the programs throughout the cities of Rockmore and South Spring in King County, contributing to improved health and fi tness of hundreds of youth who have been excluded from the sport because of limited access to safe pools.

With your help, we will expand our program from two to three schools in the Gathenton School District and achieve the following specifi c programmatic outcomes with the low-income students and students of color we plan to serve in 2012:

Winning Grants Step by Step26

Now that a sample LOI has been presented and reviewed, take the time to answer the questions in Worksheet 2.1, which is located both at the end of this chapter and on the Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition companion website, as clearly as possible. This exercise will help in developing a strong letter of inquiry for funders. If grantseekers cannot clearly and articulately answer the questions, that probably means that they need to gather more information before they can effectively complete an LOI.

• 100 students participate in water aerobics classes, which will enable nonswimmers to participate, since classes are conducted in shallow water

• 25 students are trained as Junior Lifeguards and Lifeguards, including seven at Rockmore Education Complex (a high school)

• 58 students participate on a swim team • 37 students participate in swim fi tness classes, workouts for students who already know how to swim

and are looking for an exercise alternative as a part of a healthier lifestyle

• 13 students participate on a water polo team (Note: In previous years, we found that not one of our students even knew what water polo was until the program introduced it as an option)

• 29 students with Individualized Education Programs (IEP) complete the Adapted Learn-to-Swim class • 39 students complete the Learn-to-Swim class

The outcomes listed above represent a 25% increase in the numbers of students we will serve. Because of your commitment to encouraging low-income youth and young people of color to reach

their fullest potential, as well as your geographic focus in King County, we sincerely hope that the XYZ Foundation will join us as our partner in this important program.

The Swim 4 Life Program budget is $468,800, of which $150,000 remains to be raised. So as you can see, your gift of $25,000 for the expanded program will go a long way toward helping us meet our budget. In addition, investing in Swim 4 Life will make a signifi cant impact on the ability of economically disadvantaged King County, Any State, youth to create a brighter future for themselves. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (111) 111–1111. We deeply appreciate your invitation of this Letter of Inquiry and trust that you will see enough of a connection between our program and your foundation’s mission that you will invite a full proposal.

Sincerely, Shawn Jones, Executive Director

Step 2—Developing Relationships with Funders 27

WORKSHEET 2.1:

Letter of Inquiry Questionnaire

1. What is the purpose of this letter of inquiry? To whom is it being sent, and what is the connection?

2. What year was the organization founded? What year was it incorporated?

3. What is the mission of the organization?

4. What are the long-term goals for the organization?

5. What programs does the organization provide that support these goals?

6. What is the need in the community that you seek funding to address?

7. How, in the organization’s view, is the need related to its programs, long-term goals, and mission?

8. What does the organization propose to do about this need?

9. What outcome does the organization anticipate after the fi rst year of funding?

10. What is the total cost of the proposed idea for the fi rst year, or what is the cost to expand the current program? (Or multiple years if you plan to request multiple-year funding?) How much do you want from this funder?

11. Who will be contacting the funder to determine its interest and when? Whom should the funder contact for more information?

On the Web

Winning Grants Step by Step28

Meeting with a Funder

Many grantseekers dream of having face-to-face meetings with prospec- tive funders prior to submitting a proposal because they want not only to get clarifi cation from the funders on key issues but also an opportunity to “prime the pump” and get the grantmakers excited about the program even before they receive the proposal. Unfortunately, preproposal funder meetings are few and far between, because funders simply cannot accom- modate every nonprofi t’s request for them. Also, some funders are leery of these meetings because they do not want to raise unrealistic funding expectations in grantseekers. Managing grantseeker expectations is of the utmost importance to the majority of funders: they certainly want to encour- age the submission of solid proposals for programs meeting their interest areas, but they do not want to raise false hope at the same time. Remember: every foundation and corporate grantmaker has a limited amount of funding available for grants every year. That said, if an organization has a contact that already has a strong relationship with a funder, this individual may be able to help broker a meeting. After doing the due diligence of funder research, grantseekers should think about others they know who may also know the funder. Understand also that any early meeting secured with the grantmaker will be very preliminary and in no way ensures that the grant- seeker will receive funds from this source.

If an in-person meeting is scheduled, grantseekers should take materials that best describe the organization and the proposed program. In the meet- ing the grantseeker should attempt to cover the following topics:

• Credibility of the organization

• Need for the proposed project

• Program description

• Community interest in the program

• Proposed outcomes

• Ability to measure success

• Costs and projected revenue sources

• Why this funder’s interests may be met by investing in the program

Time with a program offi cer is likely to be short, so organizations should be prepared to hit the highlights. Listen carefully to the funder’s questions and any concerns expressed, and make sure questions are answered fully and truthfully. These questions and concerns should also be addressed again in the proposal that will be submitted following the meeting, provided there is a good fi t.

Here are some additional steps to take to develop good relationships with funders with whom the grantseeker has spoken:

Step 2—Developing Relationships with Funders 29

• Add the program offi cer to the organization’s mailing list or list serve

• Add the program offi cer to the organization’s newsletter distribution list, and go the extra distance by including a personal note with his newsletter

• Send brief (one- to two-page) progress reports on the successes of the organization’s work—ones that the program offi cer has not funded but that his colleagues at other funding institutions may have funded

• Invite the program offi cer to organization events with personal notes—even if she cannot come, she will remember the contact

• Contact the program offi cer occasionally by telephone or email with brief messages and updates. Include quotes or even notes specifi cally from program constituents

Letter of Inquiry Review Questions

1. Is the name of the program and amount of request clearly stated in the fi rst paragraph?

2. Does the second paragraph elaborate further on the proposed project, as well as any related projects (when applicable)?

3. Is the organization’s mission statement included?

4. Is the need the proposed program intends to meet clear? Are some preliminary data to support the need for the proposed program included?

5. Are the specifi c program outcomes the program is targeted to achieve described clearly?

6. Is program implementation included?

Reality Check Electronic applications. These come in the form of either an actual web-based portal that grantseekers es- sentially fi ll out/fi ll in, and grant guidelines that instruct grantseekers to email the proposal and required attachments, rather than mailing paper copies. The web-based grant proposal portals have a specifi c space for each proposal component, and they are sometimes limited in the number of words per section. Among funders using electronic applications are the W. K. Kellogg Foundation (www.wkkf.org), The Skoll Foundation (www.skollfoundation.org), The Agnes and Eugene Meyer Foundation (www .meyerfoundation.org/apply-for-funding), and the Hertz Foundation (www.dot hertzfoundation/org/dz /fellowships/application.aspx). Please visit any one of these foundation websites to see clear examples of online application processes. There are more examples located on the Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition website.

http://www.wkkf.org

http://www.skollfoundation.org

http://www.dothertzfoundation/org/dz/fellowships/application.aspx

http://www.meyerfoundation.org/apply-for-funding

Winning Grants Step by Step30

7. Is the “fi t” or natural connection between the organization’s pro- gram and the funder’s priority areas, as identifi ed in their guidelines, included?

8. If there is some funding already committed to the project, and is it mentioned?

9. Is the program’s contact person clearly identifi ed, including all con- tact information?

Developing relationships with funders is such an important step in the process of winning grants that the value of doing it well cannot be emphasized enough. Now that funder relationships have been explained and helpful hints provided, it’s time to develop the problem statement, which is Step Three.

Step 3 Writing a Compelling Problem Statement

THIS STEP HIGHLIGHTS THE KEY ELEMENTS of a problem statement (for grantseeking purposes this statement might also be referred to as the state- ment of the need or need statement), including the four requirements for it to be successful. The section also offers a worksheet and sample to serve as guides to preparing a problem statement for a proposal.

Purpose of the Problem Statement

What is the problem to be addressed? An organization’s problem statement will—or at least it should—directly address this question. Therefore this is the best place to begin writing a proposal. A problem statement sets the framework for the entire proposal, as it describes a critical condition, set of conditions, or a social need affecting certain people or things in a specifi c place at a specifi c time. The need statement is fundamental to a proposal because funders must agree with the organization that the program addresses an important community problem. Bolstered by accurate data (quantitative statistics) combined with the right selection of stories that provide a more personal illustration of the need (qualitative data), a compelling need state- ment is often the fi rst component that motivates a funder to give serious consideration to a nonprofi t’s request. Make no mistake: a good, solid, and well-supported problem statement is the key that unlocks the door, moving a proposal that much closer to funding consideration.

Finally, the unmet need—and an organization’s ability to successfully address it—gives grantmakers an opportunity to realize their own goals.

32 Winning Grants Step by Step

Content of the Problem Statement

Here are some basic rules to follow when developing the project’s problem statement:

• The need being addressed in the statement should have a clear rela- tionship to an organization’s mission and purpose.

• The problem statement should focus squarely on those the organization serves and their specifi c needs, rather than the organization’s needs— unless an organizational capacity-building grant is being sought.

• Any assertions about the problem should be well supported with evidence (statistical facts, expert views, trends found in the experience of doing the work, and so on).

• The organization must be able to directly connect—and substantiate— the need described in the proposal with the organization’s ability to successfully respond to that need (that ability will be described in a subsequent section of the proposal).

• The problem statement must be easily digestible. Avoid using jargon, and do not make the reader have to work to understand the point. Graphs and charts with data to support the case are often good addi- tions to a proposal, as they present the data in the most compelling way.

The problem being addressed by the organization may be specifi c to its geographical area or it may be found in many communities. Do not overpromise: if the problem occurs in an area larger than that served by the organization or the proposed program, it is important to focus only on what the organization or program can reasonably accomplish. Should this be the case—the problem exceeds the boundaries of the organization or proposed program—consider positioning the program as a potential model for other nonprofi ts in other locations. By taking the model approach, an organization broadens the pool of potential funders to include those concerned with the problem in other geographical areas. Consideration should also be given to conducting research to discover whether other organizations in the service area have—or are developing—similar programs to address the same prob- lem. Should this be the case, consider exploring a collaborative program that would leverage and expand the reach of program plans and grant funds.

If the organization decides to take either the model or collaborative approach, highlight this fact in the problem statement; the organization is addressing the need on a larger level through the development of a program that can be a model for others or that it is leveraging its efforts with another organization so it can expand the reach and impact of its program.

Step 3—Writing a Compelling Problem Statement 33

Often arts organizations struggle with this section owing to a percep- tion that the arts do not meet a compelling community need. However, arts organizations should be encouraged, as they do meet important needs. Without these nonprofi ts, certain cultures and traditions would be lost, lives would not be enriched, and young people would not learn new and differ- ent ways of expressing themselves. The same holds true for social justice organizations who may struggle with how to quantify social change. Over the last few years, there has been more research in this area, and the website offers some data, studies, and overall guidance on how best to frame social justice outcomes.

For general support grants, there might be a struggle with the problem statement because the proposal addresses the general work of the organi- zation. Focus on describing the problems that the organization addresses: mission and purpose. This, again, goes back to something touched on earlier in this workbook: when focusing on soliciting general operating support, always use the nonprofi t’s mission and purpose as the guide.

Tips for Writing the Problem Statement

The problem statement should be contained to no more than three pages. Being concise with the problem statement will serve grantseekers well, and the real- ity is that most foundation guidelines limit proposals to ten to twelve pages in total; corporate guidelines typically limit proposals to even fewer pages. Space constricts even more with the online proposal portals, as they literally limit the space to a specifi c number of words.

In stating the problem, use hard statistics from reputable sources and steer clear of assumptions and undocumented assertions masquerading as legitimate facts.

• Use statistics that are clear and that document the current unmet need or problem. If talking about a specifi c community within a city, offer one or two data points about the city, then zero in on the data specifi c to that community.

Defi nition Collaboration. “A mutually benefi cial and well-defi ned relationship entered into by two or more organi- zations to achieve common goals. The relationship includes a commitment to mutual relationships and goals, a jointly developed structure and shared responsibility, mutual authority and accountability for success, and sharing of resources and rewards.”

Winning Grants Step by Step34

• Use comparative statistics and research where possible. Look at the exam- ples in the accompanying Reality Check box. As shown, using data from a community that did something very similar to what the grant- seeker wants to do and citing the benefi ts that the community derived from the project can make a strong case for the nonprofi t to do the same.

• Quote authorities who have spoken on the topic. Be sure to cite the person who made each statement and the source where it was found, and if appropriate, provide backup information that substantiates that this person is indeed an authority on the subject matter.

• Make sure all data collection is well documented. Grantseekers will use the Internet for research, which is of course more than appropriate. Just make sure that the websites being referenced are reputable and the links are both accurate and current; then clearly cite the sources.

• Use touching stories of people as examples. This is very effective, but only when balanced against hard data. Keep in mind that foundations vary in what they seek in terms of the right mix of vignettes and numbers.

• Give a clear sense of the urgency of the request. Funders need to under- stand why the funding is important now.

Take a look at the following Sample Problem Statement from the Swim 4 Life program. Then, using the proposal idea identifi ed and developed in Step One, answer the questions on Worksheet 3.1, as this will assist in beginning to defi ne the need the organization is addressing. After reviewing the Sample Problem Statement and completing the worksheet questionnaire, write the organization’s problem statement based on the information developed. Next answer the Problem Statement Review Questions listed at the end of this step to make sure the statement is written well. Rewrite the problem statement until all the review questions are satisfactorily addressed.

Sample Problem Statement The need for programs like Swim 4 Life is enormous in the communities we serve. Swimming has not been a popular sport in African American or Latino communities in some measure as a result of various factors including access to safe pools. Historically speaking, African Americans were denied access to public pools. As a result, they turned to water holes, ponds, and other unsupervised alternatives, which led to rates of drowning among people of color that far exceed those of whites. For example, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s latest report in early 2012, the drowning rate for African Americans between the ages of fi ve and fourteen was more than three times that for whites.

Step 3—Writing a Compelling Problem Statement 35

To this day, a deep-seated fear about swimming has discouraged African Americans and, to a lesser yet still signifi cant degree, Latinos in the United States from participating in the activity. A story relayed to us by a previous program participant:

Our family is originally from Louisiana, though many of us moved to Any State after Hurricane Katrina. Those of my family who stayed in Louisiana were having a family picnic a few years ago by a waterway, and not one person at the picnic could swim. A few of the kids were playing at the water’s edge when the land gave way and all fell into the water. Nine of my family members died that day—seven kids and two adults who tried to help them. I promised myself that if I ever got the chance, not only would I learn to swim, but I would become a lifeguard.

According to our most recent survey of current and previous program participants, nearly 75 percent of those surveyed have family members who have drowned or experienced a traumatic water incident and are terrifi ed of drowning themselves.

Arthur Schomburg Middle School, one of the program sites, is located in a part of South Spring that off ers children and youth little in the way of public resources and facilities for sports, especially swimming. A county facility, Thurgood Marshall Park, 1.7 miles from the school, has a seasonal swim program, open only during the summer even though the pool is indoor and heated. Rosa Parks and Garfi eld Recreation Centers, twelve miles from the school, have indoor heated pools that open during the summer but are not accessible to young students after school; they would have to cross major thoroughfares to get there.

Most experts agree that children approaching adolescence are particularly vulnerable to peer infl uences, and for youth living in disadvantaged neighborhoods, the lack of positive opportunities often puts them at risk for gang affi liation, substance abuse, and/or low academic performance. A report issued by the Urban Institute in 2011 detailed the risks, obstacles, and positive strategies needed relative to middle school children from low-income families. According to the study, it is a prime time to introduce innovative and challenging youth sports programs—those not typically available in communities of color—as exciting alternatives to unhealthy risk-taking activities. The Swim 4 Life program in King County, Any State, is designed to take advantage of this age group’s interest in experimentation and exploration.

The city of Abbington is served by the program site at the Rockmore Education Complex. It is the most densely populated city in the state, with 8,552 people occupying every square mile, compared with an overall average of 2,093 people per square mile in other cities. It has the highest crime rate in the state, and the poverty rate is 46 percent, nearly twice that of South Spring. Fifty-one percent of children under the age of 18 live in poverty, compared with 31 percent in South Spring, and less than 20 percent the rest of the state. Young people in this city—and South Spring—clearly live under stressful conditions and could benefi t greatly from structured and supervised physical activity, as well as safe opportunities for fun and positive engagement. And for all of the reasons outlined, we have selected Cooperville Middle School, also located in Abbington, to expand our program.

A swim program off ers many advantages over other physical activities. Swimming is an excellent form of exercise because all the muscles of the body are used, and it requires a constant supply of oxygen to the muscles, making it a mainly aerobic exercise. It is also a gateway to all aquatic sports and is considered one of the important life-saving skills. Many studies such as the one conducted in 2012 by the Center for Research on Eff ective School for Disadvantaged Youth at the Johns Hopkins University have drawn a connection between participation in structured athletic programs and academic achievement. Yet today, students in local high schools, particularly in the eleventh and twelfth grades, have so many academic requirements that there is not enough time for physical education, even as an elective.

Winning Grants Step by Step36

WORKSHEET 3.1:

Statement of Problem Questionnaire

Who? Where? When? What? Why?

Evidence of

Problem

Impact If Problems

Resolved?

Who is in need (people,

animals, land, and so

forth)?

Why does this problem

exist?

What evidence do

you have to support

your claim?

What will occur if the

needs are met? What

will be diff erent—and

how?

Where are they?

(General: city/state; and

specifi c: neighborhood,

geography)

What is the problem?

(Get specifi c)

How is the problem

linked to your

organization?

When is the problem

evident?

On the Web

Step 3—Writing a Compelling Problem Statement 37

Problem Statement Review Questions

Once a problem statement is completed, answer the following six questions to see whether what has been developed hits the mark:

1. Is the problem statement focused on those who will be served by the program (and not on your organization)?

2. Does the problem statement directly connect to the organization’s mission statement?

3. Given the organization’s size and resources, can it address the prob- lem in a meaningful way?

4. Is the problem statement adequately supported by solid and repu- table quantitative and qualitative data on the nature, size, and scope of the need to be addressed?

5. Is it sweet and simple (remember KISS from a previous chapter)?

6. Is the problem statement persuasive without being wordy?

Reality Check Avoid the trap of circular reasoning, which commonly occurs in problem statements. To use the Founda- tion Center’s defi nition and example, circular reasoning occurs when “you present the absence of your solution as the actual problem. Then your solution is off ered as the way to solve the problem. For ex- ample, ‘The problem is that we have no pool in our community. Building a pool will solve the problem.’ ”

This statement does not communicate a problem: communities across the country thrive with no community pool. However, if it was stated that a community pool in the neighborhood would specifi cal- ly address certain challenges the community is facing, and if followed up by citing a similar community where a community pool has had a positive impact in ways that are documented, it could potentially build a compelling argument that would provide the context for the problem statement.

The program’s need is now established. Developing the program’s goals and objectives is next, which is Step Four.

Step 4 Defi ning Clear Goals and Objectives

IN THIS STEP GRANTSEEKERS LEARN the concept of writing clear goals and objectives. Grantseekers must also focus on the important differences between them. Using a worksheet and following the examples, grantseekers construct goals and a set of objectives for their own proposals.

Purpose of the Goals and Objectives Components:

The “So What?” Factor

Once the problem to be addressed by an organization is identifi ed and clearly articulated via the problem statement, the next step is to develop solid goals that clearly defi ne what the organization intends to accom- plish through its program and also to establish measurable objectives that will indicate the organization’s progress toward its goals. The goals and objectives will allow the organization and its funders to know whether the program is successful at the conclusion of the grant. Poorly defi ned goals and objectives, or goals without objectives, push projects into missed milestones, overworked staff, unhappy clients, and disillusioned funders. Goals and objectives should be clear statements of purpose that defi ne the end result of the project.1

Defi nition of Goals and Objectives

Words can be confusing, especially if the assumption is made that everyone understands what they mean. For this reason, let’s clarify one more time: A goal is what the program aspires to achieve and the objectives are how an organization will know if it is meeting its goal(s). This distinction is the foundation upon which successful goals and objectives are based. Equally

Winning Grants Step by Step40

important is the fact that both goals and objectives are directly tied to the problem statement (Step Three). Also, each goal will have one or more objec- tives. However, it is worthwhile to note that smaller projects may have only one focused goal and two or three objectives.

Everyone struggles in the beginning with the difference between goals and objectives. Use the following side-by-side comparison as an aid.4

Goals Objectives

Are broad statements

Provide focus, vision, and direction

Can be idealistic and do not neces-

sarily have to be reached during

the proposed grant period

Can be nonspecifi c and

nonmeasureable

Are realistic steps to achieve the goal(s)

Are always active and use strong action

verbs

Answer: What? Why? Who? How? When?

Can be validated

Are clear to everyone with a basic

knowledge

Are SMART:

Specifi c

Measurable

Achievable

Relevant

Time-bound

Defi nitions Goals. “Goals are things your organization hopes to achieve. Goals can be set at the organizational level, the program level, and the individual employee level.”2

Example: Youth in underserved communities in King County who complete the Swim 4 Life program will know how to swim.

Objectives. “Objectives are smaller steps that one must accomplish to reach a goal, and they’re always stated in a way that can be measured.”3

Example: In the Learn-to-Swim program within one year:

• 100 percent of participants will recognize the rules of water safety • 90 percent of participants will demonstrate basic water safety and drowning prevention skills • 80 percent of participants will develop self-confi dence as swimmers and the motivation to improve

physical fi tness

Step 4—Defining Clear Goals and Objectives 41

Example of Strong Goals and Objectives

Goals Objectives

Our theater is enjoyed by all our

communities

Fifty percent of our Asian/Pacifi c Islander

audience will increase their attendance

from one show per year to two shows by

end of the year.

There is a playground within walk-

ing distance for all children

Increase the access to playgrounds for chil-

dren in Eastown by two playgrounds each

year for the next fi ve years.

Asthma is no longer the number

one reason that children miss

school

All students in grades K–3 who are diag-

nosed with asthma decrease their inci-

dents of severe attacks by 15 percent in the

fi rst semester.

All adults can read confi dently to

their children

Eighty-fi ve percent of fi rst-time, new par-

ents in the Barrisville section of Anytown

can read and have child-appropriate books

in their homes within a year of their fi rst

child’s birth.

Outcome Focus Objectives

It is important to ensure that a grant proposal’s objectives focus on outcomes (the change) versus the process (how the change will be made). The “how” is addressed in the next step, which focuses on methods (also referred to as strategies). When the focus is on outcomes, the focus is on the results of an organization’s actions. It is important to be able to envision what will be different because of the actions of the organization. What is the organiza- tion hoping to accomplish? What will be different, improved, better? What can be measured?

An example of an outcome objective: In the next year, a minimum of eighty new parents who complete the program will increase their confi dence in their role as disciplinarian and teacher as evidenced by achieving at least a 90 percent on their fi nal parenting quiz.

Process objectives focus on activities. By focusing on the outcomes instead of the process, it allows an organization the fl exibility needed to reach its intended results. An organization can adjust and edit the methods when needed and as needed to reach its objectives, a process that leads ultimately to achieving its goals. An example of a process objective: To recruit 120 par- ents for our parent education courses.

Winning Grants Step by Step42

Because outcomes are considered powerful indicators of success, this workbook focuses more specifi cally on these objectives rather than process objectives. More and more funders, as well as individual donors, are looking to make an impact or positive change with their grants. A grantseeker’s outcome objectives as outlined in their proposal will assist funders in understanding how their investment in the organization will make a difference or impact.

The following chart contains some questions that may help grantseekers defi ne better outcomes.5

Process-Oriented Questions Outcome-Oriented Questions

What services do you off er? What community results do you hope to

accomplish through your services?

What is it that your organization

does?

What is it that your organization is striving to

achieve?

Describe the service needs your

agency meets?

What change in condition or behavior are you

attempting to eff ect in the people you serve?

Defi nitions Methods, also known as strategies or tactics, are the activities that an organization will use to deliver its services in order to reach its objectives. When working on a proposal, the focus begins on the goals. The order is as follows: 1. Goal is what the program will achieve. Goals are visionary and may not be measurable.

2. Objectives are how grantseekers will know if their program is meeting its goal(s). Objectives are measurable.

3. Methods defi ne the strategies or activities needed to accomplish the objectives. Methods are the “how to.”

Reality Check: Advocacy Creating systems change, advocating for a community, group of people or position, and/or community activism takes time and the path to success is not always clear or easy to quantify. Thus, because of the nature of this kind of work, it is important to include outcome objectives as well as process objectives. These process objectives are the small wins that allow everyone to measure the progress in moving toward the goals.

Example for Advocacy Work

• Outcome: Schools remove all vending machines from campus. • Process or small win: Have a proposition on the November ballot banning vending machines in schools. • Process or small win: Collect enough signatures to be on the November ballot.

Step 4—Defining Clear Goals and Objectives 43

Writing Outcome Objectives

Answering the following questions will help in clearly articulating the results the organization expects to accomplish:

• Based on the problem statement, what is (are) the key area(s) the orga- nization is seeking to change?

• Who (what segment of the population or community) will be involved in the change?

• How will the change be measured (an increase or improvement, or a decrease and reduction)? And by what degree (by how much)?

• When will this change take place? How many months or years or by what specifi c date?

• After you have written your objectives, it is helpful to run one last test to see if the objectives are “SMART”:6

• Specifi c: Do they clearly explain what the change the organization wants will be? Are they action oriented?

• Measurable: Do the objectives help everyone know precisely when the goal(s) have been reached?

• Achievable: This is the reality check. Based on available resources (knowledge, funding, staffi ng, partners, physical space, etc.) and access to the target population, will the organization be able to make the change it envisions within the defi ned time? And with the resources requested? It is important to strike a balance between being overly ambitious and aiming too low.

• Relevant: Are the objectives results-oriented and rewarding to the organization, its funder(s), and, most important, the commu- nity being served?

• Time-bound: What is the deadline for reach- ing the change envi- sioned? Is it tangible and tractable?

Tips for Writing Good Goals and Objectives

Do . . .

• Include at least one focused goal for the project and one or two out- come objectives.

Helpful Hint Objectives measure an increase or im- provement, or a decrease and reduction. Therefore, use phrases like the following examples to assist in framing organiza- tional outcome objectives appropriately: To reduce To increase To decrease To expand

Winning Grants Step by Step44

• Make sure that the goals and objectives tie back to the problem state- ment. This is critical.

• Include all relevant groups in the target population in the goal(s). Although when writing objectives, consider specifying an outcome for a specifi c population or community.

• Allow plenty of time to accomplish objectives. Things always take longer to implement than planned. It is better to undercommit and overperform than to overcommit and underperform.

Don’t . . .

• Overly commit what can be accomplished. Limit the number of goals to one to three per program and no more than three objectives per goal. The reason is this: an organization will need to keep track of all the objectives and methods tied to the goals, so the entire process needs to be manageable.

• Confuse outcome objectives and methods or activities. Collaborating with the YMCA to expand the program and keep costs low is a method. Expanding the Swim 4 Life program to the Cooperville Elementary School resulting in an additional 100 kids completing the program over the course of 2012 is an outcome objective, as it describes the result achieved through the intervention outlined in the method.

• Forget to budget for evaluation activities (Step Six) if measuring the objective(s) will have costs associated with them.

Use Worksheet 4.1A to prepare to write proposal goals and objectives by focusing on outcomes. Start by writing down the goal of the program. Then describe the objectives that tie to that goal. Use the fi lled-out Worksheet 4.1B as a guide. If an organization has more than one goal for its program, use a separate copy of Worksheet 4.1A for each goal. Limit the objectives to no more than three per goal.

WORKSHEET 4.1A:

Goals and Objectives Exercise

Worksheet 4.1B contains sample goals and objectives based on the Swim 4 Life Program. Grantseekers should refer to it as they complete this worksheet for

themselves.

GOAL:

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4

Direction of change

Area of change

Target population

Degree of change

Time frame

Follow this standard form as objective statements are developed: To (direction of change) + (area of change) + (target population) + (degree of change) +

(time frame).

On the Web

WORKSHEET 4.1B:

Objective Worksheet Completed for the Swim 4 Life Program

GOAL: All youth in underserved communities in the Gathenton School District will know how to swim and understand the rules of water safety.

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4

Direction of change Increase

Area of change Underserved youth in

the Gathenton School

District

Target population Students at Cooperville

Middle School in

Abbington

Degree of change 25% increase in stu-

dent participation over

previous year

Time frame One full school year

Step 4—Defining Clear Goals and Objectives 47

When this is completed, go through the Goals and Objectives Review Questions with the same approach as the problem statement. Remember, the goal is to be able to answer yes to each question in the review questions.

Goals and Objectives Review Questions

1. Are the goals stated as results? And do they relate to the problem statement?

2. Are the outcome objectives stated as specifi c results that relate to a program goal? Are they steppingstones to achieving success (the goal)? Can everyone understand them?

3. Can progress in meeting the objectives be measured and assessed?

4. Do the objectives describe the population and a specifi c time frame for change?

The organization’s problem statement is in order, and the “so what?” factor has been specifi cally addressed in the program’s goals and objectives. So let’s move on to Step Five where the development of the organization’s methods, or activities, will help in achieving the program’s objectives, thus leading to the accomplishment of the program’s goals.

Notes

1. Rhonda Goetz. January 2010. Defi ning Project Goals and Objectives. www .projectsmart.co.uk

2. Stan Hutton and Frances Phillips. 2001. Nonprofi t Kit for Dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, p. 131.

3. Stan Hutton and Frances Phillips. 2001. Nonprofi t Kit for Dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, p. 131.

4. Adapted from UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. Health Data, Train the Trainer Project. Performing a Community Assessment Curriculum. 2004. www.healthpolicy.ucla.edu/healthdata/tw_cba4.pdf

5. Adapted from Robert A. Penna and William J. Phillips. 2004. Outcome Frameworks. Rensselaerville Institute’s Center for Outcomes. Albany, NY: Fort Orange Press, p. 8.

6. Paul J. Meyer. 2003. “What Would You Do If You Knew You Couldn’t Fail? Creating S.M.A.R.T. Goals.” Attitude Is Everything: If You Want to Succeed Above and Beyond. Meyer Resource Group, Inc. www.pauljmeyer.com

http://www.healthpolicy.ucla.edu/healthdata/tw_cba4.pdf

http://www.pauljmeyer.com

http://www.projectsmart.co.uk

Step 5 Developing the Methods

THE METHODS AN ORGANIZATION USES to reach its objectives are the focus of this step. Grantseekers look at the elements of the methods compo- nent of a proposal and learn how to use a time line to more easily see what will happen. Using a worksheet and examples, organizations can write their methods for the objectives developed in Step Four.

Purpose of the Methods Component

The problem statement is clearly articulated, and the goals and objectives are set. The methods component of the proposal systematically walks funders through the strategies the organization proposes to carry out in order to accomplish its objectives. Methods answer this key question: how will an organization actually accomplish its work?

Content of the Methods Component

Methods—also frequently referred to as strategies—are detailed descriptions of the activities an organization will implement to achieve the ends specifi ed in its objectives. However they are referred to, this section of the proposal should clearly spell out the methods to be used and give the reasons for choosing them. Any research supporting the use of these methods—such as their previous success or, if the methods are untested, data that support the assertion that these methods might prove successful—should be included. This section should also address whether the methods selected are already in place within the organization and simply being replicated by the program, or whether they are new. Finally, this section should describe who will staff the program and their qualifi cations, and identify the client population to be served, along with a justifi cation of why this population was selected.

50 Winning Grants Step by Step

To develop the methods component, answer the following questions:

1. What are the elements that are infl exible (such as date of completion, dollars available, staffi ng needed)?

2. What activities need to be carried out in order to meet the objectives?

3. What are the starting and ending dates of these activities?

4. Who has responsibility for completing each activity?

5. How will participants be selected? (This question is not applicable to all projects.)

6. How was this methodology determined to be the best one to solve the problem presented? Does it build on models already in existence, or is it a different approach? If it is different, why is it different? And why did the organization select it?

The methods section should be realistic—the organization should be able to complete the proposed activities within the time frame stated in the proposal using the available resources. For proposals with multiple objec- tives and methods, it is a good idea to include a timeline showing when each method will start and fi nish. The accompanying Sample Timeline for the Swim 4 Life Program shows one way to chart a nonprofi t’s activities on a timeline.

Tips for Writing the Methods Component

• Align the organization’s methods to the program’s objectives and problem statement.

• Tie the methods to the resources being requested in the program bud- get. Each activity should match its corresponding cost exactly.

• Explain the rationale for choosing these methods; talk in terms of research fi ndings, best practices, expert opinion, and the organiza- tion’s past experience with similar programs.

• Spell out the facilities and capital equipment that will be available for the project.

• Build various activity phases on top of one another to move the effort toward the desired results. Include a timeline.

• Be sure to discuss who will be served and how they will be chosen.

• Do not assume that the funder knows about the nonprofi t, its target audience, or what it proposes to accomplish.

Step 5—Developing the Methods 51

Sample Timeline (Abbreviated Version)

Activity Month 1 2 3 4 5 6

Contact the point person at Cooper-

ville and set up planning meeting.

Hold fi rst meeting with point person

at Cooperville, the PE teacher, and a

representative of the PTA.

Hold follow-up meeting with the

point person at Cooperville and

the point person at Rockmore to

coordinate pool usage.

Create recruitment materials for

new site.

Update all recruitment materials to

incorporate Cooperville.

Develop and fi nalize the specifi c

outreach strategies for all sites that

specifi cally incorporate Cooperville.

Schedule an Interested Parents meet-

ing and student assembly at Cooper-

ville and recruit/confi rm at least fi ve

parents from the other two schools to

provide testimonials for both pro-

grams.

Finalize the evaluation tools for the

Cooperville site.

Recruit a minimum of 25 students for

the program.

Offi cially launch the project at Cooper-

ville with a public event that will fea-

ture Jane Swimmer, program founder

and hometown hero, as well as Tia

Jones, program manager.

Evaluate and document progress at

the new site.

X X X X

Winning Grants Step by Step52

Look over the Sample Methods Component for the Swim 4 Life program. Then develop the organization’s methods by completing Worksheet 5.1, which should list the key elements of the organization’s planned program. Finally, use the Methods Review Questions to review the organization’s methods in the same way the questions were deployed in the organization’s program statement and goals and objectives.

Sample Methods Component Our primary objective in 2013 for the Swim 4 Life Program will employ the methods as outlined below. These methods have been proven successful as they are the same methods we used to launch our program at our current two school sites: Arthur Schomburg Middle School and the Rockmore Education Complex High School. It should be noted that Cooperville Middle School is located in Abbington, where Rockmore is also located, and we fully intend to leverage the relationships we’ve already established.

OBJECTIVE

To increase the swimming competence and confi dence of the underserved youth in the Gathenton School District by adding Cooperville Middle School and increasing overall student participation by 25 percent within one full school year.

METHODS

• Swim 4 Life program manager will recruit a point person on staff at Cooperville who has a specifi c interest in the program.

• The Cooperville point person will work in collaboration with the program manager to • Create a small task force inclusive of the physical education teacher and a representative of the PTA • Hold a short series of meetings with the program manager, the Cooperville task force, and a point

person from the Rockmore task force to share best practices, lay out the recruitment plan, agree on the evaluation plan and specifi c benchmarks, and coordinate schedules for the use of the pools

• Create specifi c recruitment materials for the Cooperville site and update the general program materials to incorporate Cooperville as a new site

• Host an Interested Parents meeting and separate Interested Students assembly at Cooperville, making sure we recruit and confi rm at least fi ve parents and students from the two other program sites to provide testimonials about the program at the meeting and assembly

• Launch a time specifi c recruitment period targeting a minimum of twenty-fi ve kids • Once offi cially launched, the program manager will formally chart the progress of each participant,

noting the specifi c benchmarks along the way as established in the evaluation.

Step 5—Developing the Methods 53

WORKSHEET 5.1:

Methods Exercise

Task and

Subtasks

Person(s)

Responsible

Resources

Needed

Start and Finish

Dates

On the Web

Winning Grants Step by Step54

Methods Review Questions

1. Do the methods discussed in the proposal derive logically from the problem statement and the goals and objectives?

2. Do the methods present the program activities to be undertaken?

3. Has the grantseeker explained why they selected the specifi c methods or activities?

4. Has the grantseeker explained the timing and order of the specifi c activities?

5. Is it clear who will perform specifi c activities? And do their creden- tials and/or experience demonstrate that they are appropriate to carry out the activities of the program?

6. Given the organization’s projected resources, are the proposed activi- ties feasible?

If an organization is following along with each step, including testing each proposal component against the questions at the end of each, it is now in prime position to be successful in the next step: developing the evaluation component, which is Step Six.

Step 6 Preparing the Evaluation Component

EVERYTHING COMPLETED UP TO THIS POINT in the development of the organization’s proposal (problem statement, goals, objectives, and methods) naturally leads to this component, as evaluation answers critical questions that both the organization and the funder have, such as

• Was the program successful?

• Did it do what it was designed to do?

• What impact did the program have on the community or target population?

• What did the organization learn from this experience that can be leveraged?

• What didn’t work—and why or why not?

• What’s different in the community or the lives of those targeted as a result of the program?

Just as the preparation of the goals, objectives, and methods required clarity, focus, and strategy, it is now more important than ever to plan how the organization will evaluate what it proposes to do. This step explores learning how to write an authentic and effective evaluation plan so that the organization can effectively demonstrate the success of its program and mea- sure program impact—and also capture the lessons learned. An exercise will help grantseekers think about what their evaluation plans should contain.

56 Winning Grants Step by Step

Purpose of the Evaluation Component

Evaluation is a process that determines the impact, effectiveness, and effi ciency of a program. It reveals what worked and—equally important—what did not. Decisions made during this process can help the organization plan for the program’s future, and the process can produce an organized and objective report documenting the return on investment for funders and the realized benefi ts to the community the organization serves. How a program will be evaluated must be determined prior to implementation so that the organiza- tion can build evaluation measurements into the fi nal program plan—before the program or its expansion is launched. Always keep in mind that funders expect to hear from organizations how they defi ne and measure the success of a program, whether they explicitly request an evaluation or not.

Specifi c Virtues of Evaluation

First, a good evaluation component strengthens the proposal from the funder’s perspective. Grantseekers are asking potential grantmakers to invest in their organization and program—and they are asking the funding staff to be their advocate. They want the funder to bet on the fact that the world as the nonprofi t sees it will be improved in some specifi c way as a result of the proposed program. Essentially, proposed programs serve to test a hypoth- esis: “If we do this, then that will happen.” A solid evaluation component

Defi nitions Impact. “The fundamental intended or unintended long-term change occurring in organizations, com- munities, or systems as a result of program activities.”

Leverage. “A method of grantmaking practiced by some foundations. Leverage occurs when a small amount of money is given with the express purpose of attracting funding from other sources or of providing the organization with the tools it needs to raise other kinds of funds. Leverage may also be defi ned as building momentum from one eff ort to the next.”

Defi nition Return on Investment (ROI). “The amount of benefi t (return) based on the amount of resources (funds) used to produce it.”

Step 6—Preparing the Evaluation Component 57

in a proposal reassures a funder that the organization is interested, as the funder is, in learning whether this hypothesis is correct.

Second, through evaluation, the organization will learn about the program’s strengths and areas of weakness. The process alone of think- ing through the evaluation design can strengthen a program before it’s even implemented. From there, the organization can take the knowledge gained through an actual evaluation and share it with staff and volunteers to improve programs as they are being implemented. This knowledge may also be shared with others in the fi eld so that they, too, can learn the lessons of the program’s work.

The third benefi t is to the public—the impact. Dollars granted from foundations and corporate giving programs are dollars dedicated to chari- table good; therefore, with each grant an organization receives, it becomes a recipient of public trust once again. Because of that, the organization has an obligation to ensure that its programs are actually having a positive impact on the community as a whole or on the target audience that it purports to serve within the community. Evaluation is one of the strongest and most effective tools any nonprofi t has to verify and document that it is indeed fulfi lling its obligation to make a positive impact on the community it serves.

Internal or External Evaluation

Some foundations will allow organizations to designate from 5 to 10 per- cent (sometimes more) of the total program budget for evaluation; others will not. Therefore, organizations need to consider how they will evaluate their programs for the purpose of documenting results, key fi ndings, and lessons learned. There are some organizations that will spend time up front, crystallizing their evaluation components and coming to feel confi dent that they have both the staffi ng and the expertise in place to objectively and thor- oughly handle the evaluation internally. Other organizations will decide to engage an outside evaluator, for any number of reasons, such as (1) lacking expertise among the staff, (2) having the staff expertise but lacking the staff time to dedicate to evaluation, or (3) wanting the evaluation to be deemed as objective as possible. These are three of the most common reasons for hiring an outside evaluator. In any case, organizations should provide some background information in the proposal that indicates which direction it

Defi nition Hypothesis. “The assumed proposition that is tested in a research process.”

Winning Grants Step by Step58

intends to take. The proposal budget should also refl ect an expense line item for evaluation.

Content of the Evaluation Component

The ability to fully understand both the big picture of the program and the individual pieces that make up that big picture is a must. Evaluation design requires dedicated thinking. First, one needs to consider the organization’s defi nition of success—the “so what?” factor. Then one must determine the relationship between the expected outcomes and the activities described in the proposal. Finally, one needs to identify the most important aspects of the program, then identify why it is important to evaluate them.

Organizations conduct evaluations primarily to accomplish six specifi c goals:

1. Find out whether or not the hypothesis was correct: Did what the organization originally propose actually do what the organization expected that it would?

2. Determine whether the methods that were specifi ed were indeed used and the objectives met.

3. Determine whether an impact was made on the problem identifi ed.

4. Obtain feedback from the clients served and other members of the community.

5. Maintain some control over the project.

6. Make midcourse corrections along the way to increase the program’s chances of success.

When preparing the evaluation section of the proposal, answering the following questions will help to frame what will be stated:

1. What is the specifi c purpose of the organization’s evaluation?

2. How will the fi ndings be used?

3. What will the organization know after the evaluation that it does not know now?

4. What will the organization do after the evaluation that it cannot do now because of lack of information?

5. How will the lives of the people or community served by the organi- zation be better?

6. Did the organization use the funder’s investment wisely? Were the funds effectively managed or leveraged?

7. Was the program budget accurate?

Step 6—Preparing the Evaluation Component 59

Unlike previous editions of this workbook, the accompanying website cre- ates the platform to provide a plethora of information on program evaluation. Within the confi nes of the actual workbook, a broad overview is provided that can be of some assistance as grantseekers determine the parameters most appropriate for the program. Generally, there are two approaches to data collection: quantitative methods and qualitative methods.

Quantitative methods are, as the name implies, methods to quantify (measure or count) data. Using this method, data are collected that can be analyzed statistically, via averages, means, percentiles, and the like. Accord- ing to the Nonprofi t Good Practice Guide Glossary (www.npgoodpractice .org/Glossary), this approach “involves the use of numerical measurement and data analysis based on statistical methods. It is an assessment process that answers the question, ‘How much did we do?’” These analyses allow organizations to make statements about cause-and-effect relationships. Employ quantitative methods for questions focused on

• Understanding the quantities or frequency of particular aspects of a program (such as number of enrollees or number of dropouts)

• Determining whether a cause-and-effect relationship is present

• Comparing two different methods seeking to achieve the same outcomes

• Establishing numerical baselines (through such means as pretests, posttests, and quarterly or yearly follow-ups)

Qualitative methods, in contrast, are based on direct contact with the people involved with a program. These methods consist of interviews (group or individual), observation (direct or fi eld), and personal stories told both in writing and in photo or video, as well as review of selected docu- ments. According to the Nonprofi t Good Practice Guide Glossary (www .npgoodpractice.org/Glossary), this approach is “mainly concerned with the properties, the state, and the character (i.e., the nature) of phenomena. It implies an emphasis on processes and meanings that are rigorously exam- ined, but not measured in terms of quantity, amount, or frequency.” Employ qualitative methods for questions focused on

• Understanding feelings or opinions about a program among partici- pants, staff, or community members

• Gaining insight into how patterns of relationships in the program unfold

• Gathering multiple perspectives to understand the whole picture

• Identifying approximate indicators that clients are moving in the “right” direction

http://www.npgoodpractice.org/Glossary

Winning Grants Step by Step60

In other words, pretests and posttests are not the only measures of success. By taking the time up front to think clearly and strategically, an organization can come up with a creative and valuable evaluation design that incorporates both quantitative and qualitative methods.

Take a look at the Sample Evaluation Component prepared for the Swim 4 Life program:

Sample Evaluation Component Evaluation of age groups at RLC and after-school programs at Arthur Schomberg and Cooperville will off er opportunities to measure long-term outcomes. Staff will measure student performance by improvement in times for each stroke at various distances. Medical professionals from Any City University Hospital and educators from Some City College and Everytown University will assist in formulating an evaluation construct measuring changes in physical fi tness (fl exibility, aerobic endurance, and weight) and academic performance (attendance, drop-out rates, grades, and interest in going to college). Resulting data will be disseminated to the school administrators and district, reported to other stakeholders—including the XYZ Foundation if this request is approved—and used to continually improve the program. Expected long-term outcomes include increased scores on state mandated fi tness tests performed in students’ physical education classes.

To evaluate the overall eff ectiveness of the Swim 4 Life program at its three sites, we will have our instructors use pretest and posttest assessments, in addition to direct observation of students in the water so that baseline performance can be determined for all participants. Children’s progress in the Learn-to-Swim Program is evaluated based on eff ort made and skills achieved as evidenced by participants holding their breath under water, ability to dog paddle from the middle of the pool to the side of the pool, and ability to tread water for a minimum of one minute. The assessment process also tracks changes in attitude toward swimming as evidenced by qualitative written storytelling from a minimum of 25 percent of program participants. In addition, instructors will administer a multiple- choice exam on water safety at the end of each four-week session. After the fi rst six months of program implementation, the goal is to have participants answer an average of 75 percent of the questions correctly. School administrators, teachers, and parents will be sought for qualitative feedback on a scale of 1–100 percent relative to their satisfaction with the program and to infl uence its implementation strategies, administrative processes, and related activities. For those students with IEPs, we will conduct a parent satisfaction survey with the goal of showing a minimum 85 percent favorability rating of the program.

Answer the questions in Worksheet 6.1 to begin planning the evaluation section. When completing the evaluation section, review it with the Evalu- ation Review Questions.

Step 6—Preparing the Evaluation Component 61

WORKSHEET 6.1:

Evaluation Planning Questionnaire

1. What questions will the organization’s evaluation activities seek to answer?

2. What are the specifi c evaluation plans and time frames?

a. What kinds of data will be collected?

b. At what points?

c. Using what strategies or instruments?

d. Using what comparison group or baseline, if any?

3. If the intention is to study a sample of participants, how will this sample be constructed?

On the Web

Winning Grants Step by Step62

WORKSHEET 6.1:

Evaluation Planning Questionnaire (Continued)

4. What procedures will be used to determine whether the program was implemented as planned?

5. Who will conduct the evaluation?

6. Who will receive the results?

7. How is success being defi ned for this program or project?

On the Web

Step 6—Preparing the Evaluation Component 63

Evaluation Review Questions

1. Does the evaluation section focus on assessing the project results?

2. Does it describe how the evaluation will assess the effi ciency of pro- gram methods?

3. Does it describe who will be evaluated and what will be measured?

4. Does it state what information will be collected in the evaluation pro- cess?

5. Does it state who will be responsible for making the assessments?

6. Does it discuss how the information and conclusions will be used to improve the program?

7. Does it provide the organization’s defi nition of success?

If the program is successful and the organization is able to document that success through evaluation, it is probably going to want that program to continue. Step Seven addresses the need to plan now for program sustain- ability beyond the initial funding.

Step 7 Developing Sustainability Strategies

IN THIS STEP GRANTSEEKERS LEARN how to develop strategies to con- tinue the program beyond the initial grant funding. Other resources, and other funding strategies, are potentially available to keep programs run- ning, but the organization must position itself early to take full advantage of—that is, to leverage—the fi rst grant(s). Grantseekers identify, through exercises and examples, the potential sources of ongoing support that are best for the program.

Purpose of the Sustainability Component

The purpose of this component is to help grantseekers consider how the program will be funded past its immediate future—to begin with the end in mind, so-to-speak. Potential funders want to know that organizations are thinking beyond their funding; they want assurance that the organiza- tion is planning beyond the scope of their time-limited funding. How will the organization continue the good work upon which the community has come to depend? The old saying “last but not least” applies well here: this might be the last section of narrative in the proposal, but it is by no means the least important.

Content of the Sustainability Component

The sustainability component needs to refl ect whether the proposal is seek- ing program, capital or equipment, or capacity-building funding. Then it must address how the program will continue once the grant comes to a close. When a program ends prematurely, it typically leaves unfi nished business. In other words, it fails to achieve its intended goals and therefore does not

66 Winning Grants Step by Step

successfully address the need outlined at the beginning of the proposal. And let’s not forget the ultimate impact that this has on the clients, constituents, and community who come to rely on the program or service. For that reason, funders pay much more attention to this section than most grantseekers would prob- ably suspect because they will have a vested interest in the project’s success beyond their funding. Therefore, this section of the proposal should provide a framework that shows how the nonprofi t plans to continue the program beyond the funder’s investment, as well as who on the organization’s staff will be responsible for making this plan happen.

In capital or equipment proposals (major equipment purchases or building renovations and expansion) funders will want to know what the associated costs are for operating the new equipment, for maintaining the new building, or for increasing services if building expansion results in program expansion. They will want this information because these are all costs that the organization will incur beyond the funding being requested. Organizations will also need to show that the sources of funding meet these additional costs.

In the case of a capacity-building grant, funders want to know how the nonprofi t will support the capacity it has grown. For example, a request might be made for a capacity-building grant to increase the organization’s fundraising ability via the creation of a development plan. Once the plan is created—and the grant is expended—how does the organization plan to pay for the actual implementation of the new development plan?

Consider future funding from one or more of these sources:

• Continuation grants from foundations and corporations. A nonprofi t can seek continuing support from those foundations and corporations that fund ongoing programs. However, as was stated earlier, many funders prefer to support new and expanding programs—not con- tinuation funding for existing programs. A bright spot is that there are also funders who, if cultivated and stewarded properly, will continue to support organizations beyond their initial investment. Once again, both the funder research along with the relationship building, as outlined in Step Two, have a direct impact on the outcome of continu- ation funding.

• Fees for service. If a nonprofi t opts to ask clients to pay fees, the fee scale and a revenue plan should be shown in the proposal.

• Sales of items or activities. A nonprofi t might be able to set up an income-producing situation, such as a gift shop or thrift store. In addition, it might be able to sell publications, concert recordings, or educational activities. Revenues generated from these sales might

Step 7—Developing Sustainability Strategies 67

cover some costs of the program. If this route is taken, a clear expense and revenue projection should be a part of the proposal. (Please note: Organizations need to check with both legal counsel and accounting counsel to ensure that any revenue-generating ventures launched are set up and monitored in accordance with IRS guidelines.)

A typical mistake that grantseekers make in their proposals is not taking this component as seriously as they should and not fully understanding that grant funding does in fact come to an end. Saying something to the effect of “future funding will come from a mix of sources such as other grants and individual support” is not a sustainability plan.

Tips for Writing the Sustainability Component

Many funders ask specifi cally for this component in their grant guidelines; others do not. Whether or not this component is required, grantseekers should include some information on sources of support for the project’s future.

The more specifi c grantseekers are in this sec- tion, the more confi dence they will inspire in poten- tial funders that the project will continue beyond their grant, thereby maximizing the impact of their investment.

Take a look at the Sample Sustainability Com- ponent to see what the Swim 4 Life has planned for the sustainability of its program.

Helpful Hint Toot your own horn! If an organization has examples to share of other instances in which it successfully continued programs beyond initial funding, this would be the place to share such information, because it speaks to the organization’s credibility not only in launching programs but also in maintaining them.

Sample Sustainability Component Our model is built to be self-sustaining. Swim 4 Life’s overhead is extremely low (10 percent), since we leverage the resources of the Gathentown School District by using its pools and our program’s target audience is its school children. The Swim 4 Life partnership with both the YWCA of Greater King County, Any State, as well as the Some City School Program, further leverage resources already available and with a track record of over a decade each of fi nancial stability. Both programs have indicated a desire to enter into a long-term agreement with Swim 4 Life, pending our ability to scale up to meet the needs of more kids. Finally, we hired a half-time development director in June 2010 and increased her to full-time status in June 2011 after seeing our revenue from individuals increase from zero to $60,000 in one year.

The programs currently off ered by the Swim 4 Life program are expected to be the fi rst of many throughout King County, Any State, as the county continues to seek partnerships with our program in collaboration with other larger, established social service organizations. There are additional schools

Winning Grants Step by Step68

Answering the questions in Worksheet 7.1 will assist in starting to develop the future funding component of your proposal. Be sure to check the work by answering the Sustainability Review Questions.

in parts of the city that have underused swim facilities and that lack safe and accessible programs; we believe strongly in our model and our ability to bring it to scale throughout the Gathentown School District. In response to numerous requests, the program staff are now pursuing Learn-to-Swim classes for teachers and other classifi ed district personnel targeted for 2013, which would create a new revenue stream to support the children’s programs. In addition, this would help fulfi ll the mission to empower youth by creating bonding experiences with teachers who model healthy activities.

The partnership with the Gathentown School District off ers the Swim 4 Life program the opportunity to outreach to students in some of the most underserved communities in King County—those who are most in need of the benefi ts of structured and supervised physical activity—while keeping operating costs low. Since the district provides the pool facilities and program participants, the Swim 4 Life program is liable only for the wages of instructors and lifeguards, thus resulting in an exceptionally cost-eff ective model.

Step 7—Developing Sustainability Strategies 69

WORKSHEET 7.1:

Future Funding Questionnaire

Risks and Opportunities

Sources of Future Financial

Resources Internal Requirements

Do we intend to continue this project?

What sources can we use? What internal plans do we have for obtaining future funding?

For how long?

What resources (direct and indirect) are needed?

On the Web

Winning Grants Step by Step70

Sustainability Review Questions

1. Is it the organization’s intent to have the program continue after the initial grant funding is gone?

2. If yes, does the sustainability component of the proposal present a plan for securing future funding for the program?

3. Does it discuss future funding strategies or earned-income strategies?

4. If the organization is requesting a multiyear grant, did it show that the organization will have a decreasing reliance on grant support each year? (Grantmakers are more inclined to make a multiyear grant to nonprofi ts that assume greater fi nancial responsibility for the project each year, rather than asking the funder to maintain the same level of funding each year.)

It is now time to develop the bu dget using Step Eight.

Step 8 Developing the Program Budget

THIS STEP PROVIDES THE BASIC TOOLS to develop an effective pro- gram budget. It also introduces key terms and defi nitions that will help in understanding the various elements of a budget. Finally, there are a number of examples and tools included both here and online that will be helpful in creating a program budget.

General Budget Overview

When applying for grants typically two types of budgets may be requested— an organizational operating budget and a program budget.

An organizational operating budget details the income and expenses for the fi scal year for the grantseeking organization. An organization may have several projects or programs that it is responsible for implementing and managing throughout the year. A program budget would essentially fall under the purview of the organizational operating budget.

The program budget is one of the most important components of a grant proposal. It provides insight into how a single program plan will be fi nancially executed during the life of the grant or program. The budget also gives funders the opportunity to understand the depth and breadth of the pro- grammatic effort from a fi nancial perspective. One of the fi rst things that funders want to know is what the budget entails and how its money will make an impact if it funds the program or organization. While many organizations have the skills to implement the program plan, it may not necessarily know how to fi nancially explain or manage its program.

Helpful Hint Be sure to research what an acceptable in- direct cost rate should be. Some funders have already established their allowable indirect cost rate for any grants they fund. For instance, if a funder will only allow an indirect cost rate of 12 percent, but the organization’s indirect cost rate is 20 per- cent, the program will have to off -set the 8 percent loss in overhead costs in other areas of the budget.

72 Winning Grants Step by Step

For the purpose of this workbook, only the program budget will be spe- cifi cally addressed.

Basics of a Program Budget

Developing a budget for a grant proposal can be somewhat similar to developing a personal budget. For instance, while personal expenses might include mortgage or rent, utility bills and personal loans, the program budget includes expenses such as salaries, marketing, and other cost items necessary to successfully run the program.

The following is a list of simple stages that are necessary to develop a program budget.

Stage 1: Review, research, and organize budget requirements and information

Stage 2: Develop and document the program budget

Stage 3: Review, update, and review again

Stage 4: Develop the budget justifi cation

Incorporating these specifi c stages into a budget development process will ensure a comprehensive budget that is refl ective of thoughtfulness and planning. Funders will pay close attention to a grantseeker’s efforts to adhere to their budget requirements, document projected revenues, and research relevant expenses for their proposed program.

Stage 1: Review, Research, and Organize

The fi rst stage is a two-part process that starts the budget formulation pro- cess. The fi rst part involves reading the grant application for understanding and clarity, while the second part demonstrates how to research and organize the information to be included in the budget. Let’s begin by understanding the grant application budget review process.

Review the Grant Application for Specifi c Budget

Requirements

Before investing too much time in developing the budget and selecting a budget tool, it is important to read through the grant application and deter- mine what is required. Funders often provide or specify a document or tool that should be used to capture the budget, as well as identify or list specifi c information to be included. As a potential grantee, it is important to follow the specifi c instructions provided in the grant application, supplementing

Step 8—Developing the Program Budget 73

it with any information (if allowed by the funder) that will make the orga- nization’s fi nancial needs more clear.

Important items to consider in the grant application guidelines before developing the budget may include

• A budget template with instructions including whether or not it is mandatory to use the form

• Instructions on the specifi c budget categories or level of the budget details and how those details should be recorded

• Items that should not be included in the budget

• If a budget narrative should be included and in what format

• Clarity around the percentage of “indirect” or “overhead” an organi- zation is allowed to include in the budget. This will vary greatly from funder to funder, as well as for public funding at the local, state, and federal levels.

While this stage might appear tedious for some, it is absolutely neces- sary to get a funder’s attention, as well as to demonstrate an organization’s understanding of the importance of having its fi nancial house in order. By following directions, an organization further demonstrates its level of com- mitment to its program.

Now that the budget instructions and specifi c requirements have been properly read and digested, it’s time to begin researching and organizing specifi c budget details.

Research and Organize Budget Information

The process of researching, collecting, and organizing the budget data is often underestimated when developing the budget. What if an organization has never used the services of a printer for printing marketing material?

How does the organization know how much it will cost to perform that task? This stage demonstrates the process to collect the information required to determine revenue and expense estimates that will be included in the budget.

Before actually beginning to develop the budget, there are several actions that should occur:

• Identifying the types of revenues and expenses that are included in the organization’s budget

• Researching, developing, or collecting estimates for revenues and expenses

Helpful Hint Using a spreadsheet to document the in- formation researched will help to track and organize the information collected.

Winning Grants Step by Step74

• Organizing the data to easily facilitate the budget development pro- cess (next step)

• Remembering that budgets consist of good faith estimates—a best guess based on solid research.

Thinking that perhaps this process is time consuming? That would be a correct assumption. It typically is, but organizations that invest in this stage will be one step closer to presenting a budget that is fair and reasonable and a step closer to winning the grant!

Stage 2: Develop the Budget

Now that understanding the budget requirements for the grant proposal is in hand and budget information is organized, it is time to actually develop the budget. The initial action here is to select spreadsheet software, such as Microsoft Excel, to document the budget items. The next step is to fi ll in the budget using the information gathered from Stage 1. It is more likely than not that the funder will provide an online proposal budget spreadsheet, so the more organizations are familiar with spreadsheet software, the easier it will be to navigate the online (and paper) budget spreadsheets.

Selecting a Spreadsheet Software Tool

A number of electronic tools are available to document a budget. The tool selected should be based on the complexity of the budget in addition to long- term needs in terms of compatibility with other software tools. While word processing software like Microsoft Word and WordPerfect can assist with documenting the budget, they do not have the same fl exibility as spread- sheet software like Microsoft Excel and Lotus, as two examples. Spreadsheet software allows the documenting of the data, the application of formulas to the numbers, and the creation of fi gures and graphs using the data in the spreadsheet. Finally, for those who are not “numbers” people, spreadsheet software will help in quickly checking for errors in math.

Establish the Budget Period

Every budget has to have a beginning and ending period called the budget period. This budget period for a program will be one of these three: (1) the

organization’s fi scal year, (2) the program year, or (3) the grant period. For instance, the budget period may cover January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012.This information should be clearly stated on the budget spreadsheet. Also,

Key Note For general operating grant requests, the pro- gram year and fi scal year will be the same.

Step 8—Developing the Program Budget 75

be sure to note whether the budget covers multiple years (based on the grantee request).

Estimate Revenues and Expenses

In Stage 1, all revenues and expenses that should be included in the budget should be identifi ed. At this point, most revenues and expenses will be esti- mates and should be documented as such. There are instances when actual revenue and expense amounts

are known and, if so, those should be included as actuals. Revenue is income identifi ed and/or already committed for the program

such as memberships, fee-for-service, other grants, and other fundraising endeavors such as special events and individual giving. Depending on the program, your budget may contain several different revenue streams. A list of potential revenue sources includes other foundation support, government funding, and individual funds. In addition, items like in-kind donations of supplies, services, and human capital and other volunteer services should also be listed as revenue sources.

The revenue sources included in the budget will be based on the program and should be estimated according to the expected or known revenue stream. For instance, if the revenue is based on memberships or fee-for-service, the amount can be calculated as follows:

Revenue = quantity of the memberships/fee-for-service × price of membership/fee-for-service or

Revenue = Amount assessed for membership fees and/or services rendered

Example: Revenue Budget Table for Swim 4 Life

Revenues Projected

Individual Fundraising $60,000

Corporate Funding $45,000

Some City School Program Funding $45,000

YWCA $45,000

In-Kind Goods $60,000

In-Kind Services $55,000

Interest $800

Total $310,800

Expenses are the costs of those items required to sustain the program. They are a critical piece of the budget because they identify the costs

Helpful Hint Keep in mind that some grants may cover multiple years, thus the need for a mul- tiyear budget. Make sure the budget is consistent from year to year and includes adjustments, like cost-of-living, general service, and product increases.

Winning Grants Step by Step76

necessary to manage and sustain a program. Expenses can be recorded in two categories—direct and indirect costs.

Direct Costs

According to the Nonprofi t and Philanthropy Good Practice guide from the Johnson Center at Grand Valley State University, direct cost: “Includes all items that can be categorically identifi ed and charged to the specifi c proj- ect, such as personnel, fringe benefi ts, consultants, subcontractors, travel, equipment, supplies and materials, communications, computer time, and publication charges.”

They are typically itemized and can be traced directly to the project they support. In Stage 1, we discussed researching, developing, and collecting revenue and expense estimates. This section further highlights why this stage is necessary.

Since these costs are directly related to the project, they should be easy to identify. Here is a short list of potential expenses that may be listed as direct costs or expenses:

• Staff and travel

• Supplies and materials

• Equipment

Calculating direct costs should be kept fairly simple, especially if develop- ing program budgets is a new experience for the organization. For instance, Swim 4 Life employs nine people: one director, one program assistant, and seven part-time staff. For simplicity, all of the employees are salaried. After salaries are researched in the market for the different roles, documentation may look like the following table:

Example: Estimated Salary Table for Swim 4 Life

Role # of Staff Monthly Wages Yearly Total*

Executive Director 1 $4,500 $40,000

Program Assistant 1 $3,125 $25,000

Half-time staff 7 $2,208 (cumulative) $26,500

Total $91,500

*Yearly total calculation = # Staff × Monthly Wages × 12 Months. Salary information should be collected from some market research database.

The “Total” amount listed in the table is the number that will be included in the Salary row of the budget spreadsheet.

In general, this is the process that should be followed when estimating all direct costs associated with a program. While the actual background

Step 8—Developing the Program Budget 77

research is not demonstrated in this example, the information in the table was derived from a refer- ence data source. Again, this process can be time consuming, but it is necessary.

Indirect Costs

Indirect costs—also known as overhead costs—are costs that are shared within an organization or with another program or project. Using the same refer- ence tool from the Johnson Center, indirect costs are:

“Costs that have been incurred for common or joint objectives of a university or nonprofi t organization and the sponsored program, and which, therefore, cannot be identifi ed specifi - cally in reference to a particular project, such as building operations and maintenance, laboratory space, library service, utilities, and administra-

tive services.” Here is a short list of potential indirect costs or expenses that may be listed as direct costs.

Indirect costs may include

• Utilities

• Information technology support

• Audit or legal staff

• Rent

• Administrative support

• Equipment rental

This estimate is usually determined by using an indirect cost rate.

Helpful Hint In some instances, personnel costs are split between programs because staff may spend only a portion of their time on a particular project. If this is the case, the personnel costs should be determined by using the percentage of time spent on the program budget in question.

Key Note Many established nonprofi ts already have an indirect rate that can be applied to the budget.

Helpful Hint Let’s assume the organization’s indirect cost rate equals 20 percent. Since this rate was already established within the organization, Swim 4 Life’s indirect costs can be calculated. So if Swim 4 Life’s direct costs total $200,000, the indirect cost amount that will be included in the budget is $200,000 × 20 percent or $40,000.

Key Note Keep in mind that the indirect cost rate calculation is only useful when there are some expenses that are shared among programs or projects and the organization is trying to determine only those programs’ indirect costs.

Winning Grants Step by Step78

In-Kind Support/Donated Goods and Services

Many organizations operate programs using a combination of paid employ- ees and purchased goods and services, and volunteers and donated goods and services. The volunteer time and donated goods and services are con- sidered support and are a vital part of the budget process and should be included as both revenues and expenses where applicable. The following (short) list of items can be considered when including in-kind contributions:

• Volunteer or staff time of those unaffi liated with the program and therefore not included in the staff budget line

• General volunteers

• Donated services, including food, printing, marketing, accounting, and other services

• Donated items including offi ce equipment, vehicles, and other tan- gible items used for the program

• Donation of offi ce or facility space (rent, utilities, and renovations)

There are a number of factors that should be considered when estimat- ing the costs of these items. For instance, volunteer and staff time estimates can be calculated using the average amount an organization would pay someone providing the same or like service multiplied by the number of hours performing the service, as shown in the formula below:

Volunteer/staff time estimate = $ of service if purchased (in the marketplace) × number of hours volunteered

On the other hand, new product and service costs should be calculated based on the “market value” of that new product or service. Used products should be estimated based on the depreciated or resale value of the item. The depreciated value is the value of an item once you remove the accu- mulated depreciation.

In-kind contributions should not be ignored or taken lightly during the budget process. There are a number of benefi ts to including these items in your budget, including

• Reduces the overall cash outlay for program expenses

• Expands resource capacity to sustain an organization’s program

• Opens the door for community partners to learn and support the organization’s program or cause

• Demonstrates to the funder the value of the donor and volunteer contributions

Step 8—Developing the Program Budget 79

As mentioned earlier, in-kind contributions are typically shown as rev- enues and expenses to create a net-zero effect. For example, if a volunteer contributes $2,000 worth of her time, that amount should be shown as $2,000 in volunteer support revenue and $2,000 in volunteer support expenses.

It is important that in-kind contributions are net-zero when balancing the budget because there should not be non-cash income covering cash expenses.

There are a number of resources available to assist with developing an organization’s budget. However, do be mindful of the type of organization in which funding is being sought. For instance, when seeking funding from the Federal Government, CIRCULAR NO. A-122 is the reference most used to establish principles for determining costs of grants, contracts, and other agreements with nonprofi ts. Private funding sources use myriad sources, and it is up to the grantseeker to read and understand the grant guidelines issued by individual funders.

Record Budget Information

Once the budget categories have been identifi ed and researched and revenues and expenses fi nalized, it is time to record this information. The information should be listed in an easy to follow format, preferably using a spreadsheet tool selected early in the process.

Be sure to follow the grant application guidelines with regard to the format in which this information should be recorded. Not following instructions is the surest way for a proposal to be declined.

Stage 3: Review, Update, and Review Budget Again

This stage in the budget development process is a fairly commonsense yet an often missed step—review the budget for formula and number errors and logic. Essentially, grantseekers should take the time to review the bud- get from the perspective of the funder. Revenue and expense items that appear out of line with the overall budget should be identifi ed and resolved. Grantseekers should also look for budget items that are “questionable” or outside of what is customary for similar programs. Once the fi nal review has occurred, a clear and concise explanation of the items in the budget should be provided in the budget justifi cation.

Winning Grants Step by Step80

Stage 4: Develop the Budget Justifi cation

Now that the budget spreadsheet is complete and the numbers reviewed and verifi ed, a budget justifi cation should be developed to explain how the numbers were derived.

The Budget Justifi cation

After the budget is developed, a detailed narrative of the signifi cant items in the budget—called a budget justifi cation—should be written. In its simplest form, this document provides a narrative explanation of the revenues and expenses that require greater explanation of how expenses and revenues were derived and why they are needed. It also shows that there was suffi cient thought put into why the grantee believes the revenues and expenses are what is noted in the budget and explain any signifi cant variances. Here is an example of what Swim 4 Life’s budget justifi cation may look like:

Sample Budget Justifi cation The total budget required to support Swim 4 Life’s initiative listed in the grant proposal is $460,800. Additional details of the budget are described below:

EXPECTED SOURCES OF FUNDING

Swim 4 Life has outlined several funding sources that will ensure the sustainability of the services it provides to the community. The following is a list of committed funding for the year:

YWCA $45,000

Corporate Sponsorship $45,000

Some City School Program $45,000

Individuals $60,000

Total $195,000

In addition to the above we have in-kind goods and services revenue of $115,000 and interest of $800. We are looking to a number of private sector funders to provide an additional $150,000 needed to run an eff ective program in the service community.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SALARY—$40,000

The executive director is essential to the success of Swim 4 Life, thus requiring a salary that takes into consideration the responsibility involved in leading a high visibility program. The amount covers the salary and benefi ts for one full-time director to manage the program for one year. Responsibilities will include leading the day-to-day operations of the program, managing a full-time program assistant and several volunteers, developing and managing program initiatives and performance, and ensuring that all fi scal responsibilities are met.

Step 8—Developing the Program Budget 81

Again, the budget justifi cation is typically documented in a narrative format and presented as a supplement to the budget. While it does not have to be a dissertation of explanations, it should be clear and concise and explain those items in the budget that require further clarifi cation.

The Budget: Final Thoughts

Now that the basics for developing the program budget have been described, there are a few points that should always be remembered:

• Read and understand the type of budget the funder is requiring for the grant application.

• Provide a true and honest picture of expected revenues and expenses.

• Justify, in writing, any budget items that standout as unusual or costly.

Remember, the presentation of the budget is just as important as the presentation of the overall program that will be supported by the grant.

Program Budget Dos and Don’ts

The following is a list of Dos and Don’ts when developing the grant appli- cation’s program budget.

Do . . .

• Understand that a budget is an important part of the grant application process

• Read the grant application for budget requirements, including formats and specifi c instructions

• Identify elements to include in the budget based on the program’s needs

• Collect and record data to substantiate revenues and expenses listed in the budget

• Provide a budget justifi cation to explain any major funding variances or requests

• Itemize revenues and expenses

Don’t . . .

• Overlook the importance of developing a logical and reasonable budget based on the funder’s instructions

Winning Grants Step by Step82

• Include items that are not specifi cally requested in the grant application

• Lump all revenues and expenses together; rather, itemize for clarity

• Forget to review and check the fi nal document before submitting

Use Worksheet 8.1 to prepare a budget for the program. On the com- panion website, grantseekers will fi nd two sample Excel template with the formulas already entered as tools for practice. One template is for a one-year budget; the second is for a three-year budget. There is also a sample Excel budget for the Swim 4 Life program on the website. For best results, grant- seekers should start by creating a budget using Worksheet 8.1, followed by experimenting with the online spreadsheet. Simply enter projected revenues and expenses and add categories if necessary and appropriate. Asking the Budget Review Questions at the end of this step will highlight those areas in the budget that need further attention.

Step 8—Developing the Program Budget 83

WORKSHEET 8.1:

Revenue and Expense Budget

Cash

Required

In-Kind

Contributions

Total

Budget

REVENUE Foundations Government Corporations Individual contributions Donated printing and supplies Volunteer services Other (specify):

Total revenue

EXPENSES Salaries (prorated if less than full-time)

_______________ _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

Payroll taxes and benefi ts (percentage of salaries)

Bookkeeping contractor Other (specify):

Total personnel Offi ce rent (percentage for program) Supplies Printing Utilities Telephone Copy services Postage Travel Membership dues Other (specify):

Total nonpersonnel Total expenses

On the Web

Winning Grants Step by Step84

Budget Review Questions

1. Is the budget consistent with the proposal’s program plan (methods)?

2. Is there a budget narrative that explains items that may not be imme- diately clear?

3. Does the budget include in-kind revenues and expenses?

4. Does the budget address the question of how overhead costs will be recovered?

5. Is the budget realistic? In other words, can the organization accom- plish the intended objectives with the proposed budget?

6. Has the organization kept the budget worksheet, so that it has a record of how costs were determined for the expense items?

Now it’s time to focus on the organization background statement, which is Step Nine.

References

National Institute of Health, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/glossary.htm Burke Smith, N., and Tremore, J. 2008. Everything Grant Writing Book (2nd ed.).

Avon, MA: Adams Media. Greater Washington Society of CPAs, http://www.nonprofi taccountingbasics

.org/reporting-operations/budgeting-terms-concepts

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/glossary.htm

http://www.nonprofitaccountingbasics.org/reporting-operations/budgeting-terms-concepts

Step 9 Writing the Organization Background Component

IN ADDITION TO THE PLANNING SECTIONS of the proposal, grantseekers need to develop an organization background component. This step provides an overview of the purpose of an organization background statement and of what it should contain to best establish a nonprofi t’s credibility. Using examples and a worksheet, grantseekers will learn how to present their organization’s strengths to funders.

Purpose of the Organization Background Statement

What are the mission, values, and other distinguishing characteristics of the organization? And what is it about this particular organization that enables it to successfully execute on what it promises to deliver? The organization background component answers these two questions and more. This is the section of the proposal that highlights all the positive qualities of the orga- nization, which means this section can get rather lengthy if restraint is not employed. Try to limit this component to no more than three pages. A good organization background statement describes the nonprofi t well enough to assure prospective funders that this nonprofi t can successfully undertake the proposed program.

Funders may refer to this section as the “Introduction” or the “Applicant Description,” but the same basic information is expected regardless of its name. This section of the proposal should allow the reviewer to get a strong impression that the organization

• Meets an unmet need or fi lls an essential role in the community

• Is fi scally secure

• Is well managed

Winning Grants Step by Step86

• Provides important community services

• Understands the community it serves

• Refl ects that community in its board and staff

• Has the respect of the community

Content of the Organization Background Component

Organizations should include the following:

• A description of the organization and its mission and vision, and how it came to be—its history.

• The demographics of the community served by the organization, followed by the ways in which both the board members and the staff refl ect those demographics. This information is growing steadily in importance to funders, as they want to ensure that the nonprofi t is in the best position to truly understand and connect with the community it seeks to serve.

• A description of the organization’s position and role in the com- munity. Who are the organization’s collaborating partners in the community?

• A discussion of the ways the organization is unique in comparison to others providing similar services.

• Descriptions of innovative programs or special services the organization has provided. Has it received any awards or special recognition?

• A very brief history of funding by other sources.

The primary goal in crafting this section of the proposal is to establish cred- ibility with potential funders. Organizations need to use sound judgment as to what is appropriate given the specifi c proposal—and the funder. The guiding question should be, “What is the key information that this funder needs about the organization and its qualifi cations to solidify the case for sup- port?” Similarly, when requesting funding for a highly technical project that makes use of new ways to engage clients via the Internet, information about the organization’s past experience in web-based communications, as well as the qualifi cations of specifi c staff members who would be responsible for the project, would be critical to reinforcing the nonprofi t’s capacity to under- take the proposed project successfully. If proposing a collaborative project, thought should be given to using examples of other collaborative projects in which the organization participated as well as the successful outcomes derived from those collaborations.

Step 9—Writing the Organization Background Component 87

Testimonials and statistics relating to the work of the nonprofi t may be incorporated, although they should be kept at a minimum. The organization background component should be primarily an informative and interesting narrative describing the qualifi cations of the organization. Understand that the funder would probably prefer a summary of the highlights in the non- profi t’s history that relate to the project needing funding. In this instance, don’t be afraid to use bullet points to highlight items in what would other- wise become very dense narrative.

Don’t eat up valuable proposal space with information on the organiza- tion’s structure or specifi c details about board members and staff unless such detail is requested. Supporting documents, such as an organization chart and résumés of key staff, can provide this information and add credibility to the proposal, and it should be provided in the proposal’s appendixes (see Step Eleven). However, some funders specify what appendixes they will, and will not, accept—so incorporating this information into the background statement might be warranted. Should this be the case, keep it brief. Sum- marize how many staff and board members the organization has and also the number of active volunteers engaged with it.

If the organization is too new to have any accomplishments, try focusing on the qualifi cations of the staff and board to provide some sense of credibility for the start-up endeavor. As a start-up, it will be critical to clearly state the unmet needs or unique problem the organization is being created to meet.

Tips for Writing the Organization Background Component

Background Statement

Start with when and why the organization was founded. Its mission state- ment should be front and center in the fi rst or second paragraph. From there, move away from the philosophy of the organization and begin explaining what it does.

This is one of the few sections of a proposal that can be created as a standard component and used repeatedly. Grantseekers will be required to make small edits to tailor the background statement for specifi c funders on occasion or to highlight items of special interest to a particular funder. Otherwise, this section is fairly standard for most proposals.

Read the following Sample Organization Background Component. Then, using Worksheet 9.1, gather the information for this section of your organization’s proposal. Next, write the narrative, using the Sample Orga- nization Background Component as a guide. Finally, review the work using the Organization Background Review Questions. Organizations should be able to answer “yes” to each question.

Winning Grants Step by Step88

Sample Organization Background Component Swim 4 Life was established as a 501(c)3 organization in 2008 by 2000 Olympic swimming hopeful Jane Swimmer, who emerged as one of the brightest female swim stars in the United States at the 2000 Games. The mission of Swim 4 Life is to empower youth in underserved communities, through high- quality programs, to utilize the discipline of swimming to improve physical fi tness, nurture self-esteem, and acquire the confi dence to advance their lives.

Jane was an eleven-time U.S. National Champion and two-time USA Swimmer of the Year. In 2005, she started for-profi t swim schools at various community centers in two other counties in Any State. Inspired by the results achieved at her for-profi t schools, Ms. Swimmer began to explore the idea of bringing a high-quality program to youth in underserved communities that would off er the same standard of excellence found in the best private club programs, such as her own. However, she continued to focus on the for-profi t schools until January 2007, when she conducted a pilot water safety program at the West Hanover Swim School with fi fty middle and high school students who were bussed in from ABC Youth (ABCY), a nonprofi t organization that provides enrichment programs in the Gathentown School District. The results clearly demonstrated that the program could be replicated eff ectively in a nonprofi t setting.

Because the school lacked the capacity to accommodate growth of Swim 4 Life programs, and considering the cost of recruiting and transporting youth across the city to the selected site, it was determined that the optimal pools to use for program sites would be those located in the communities where the target population lived. The fi rst site chosen was Arthur Schomburg Middle School in South Spring, where a pool that had been out of service for fi fteen years was about to re-open. In 2008, a second site was added at the Rockmore Education Complex, a high school near downtown Abbington. The Adapted Learn-to-Swim program began at the high school in summer 2008 to meet the needs of students with disabilities.

As of 2006, the Gathentown Unifi ed School District must comply with a statewide mandate to include aquatics programs in all high school physical education curricula for 9th and 10th grade students. However, because of poor staff training and long-term cutbacks in funding for physical education, the district was ill-prepared to teach students to swim despite its large investment in building nine new high schools with competition-size pools.

Too often, youth in the communities our program targets lack the opportunities, guidance, and/ or family support equal to that of their surrounding counties to provide them the foundation to help guide them in the right direction. By providing these kids with valuable access to swimming via the Swim 4 Life program, we endeavor to empower these kids to learn the values of self-discipline, decision making, hard work, and dedication that have a real chance of forever changing their lives. The aim is to inspire children to explore their potential through swimming and give all children the same opportunity to enjoy the sport.

The organization uses swimming to reach out to children who are at risk of failure in school, gang affi liation, unhealthy lifestyles, including childhood obesity, and other physically, mentally, and emotionally unhealthy outcomes. More than 450 youth have participated in its short history, and 85 percent of those in the non-adapted classes have passed a water safety survival test. Programs are delivered by two full-time and seven part-time employees, with a seven-member board of directors providing oversight and governance.

Step 9—Writing the Organization Background Component 89

WORKSHEET 9.1:

Organization Background Exercise

[Organization Name] Accomplishments Personnel

Location

Legal status

Date of founding

Mission

Target population

Programs

Partnerships

How unique

Special recognition

Summary of need statement

Financial

Board and staff

On the Web

Winning Grants Step by Step90

Organization Background Review Questions

1. Does the organization background section give the nonprofi t cred- ibility by stating its history, specifi c qualifi cations, purpose, programs, target population, total number of people served, and major accom- plishments?

2. Does the background suggest sources of community support for the proposed program?

3. Does this section highlight any awards received? This can include winning government funding through a competitive process.

Now it’s time to pull the entire proposal together with the proposal summary, which is Step Ten.

Step 10 Writing the Proposal Summary

THE PROPOSAL IS NOW NEARLY COMPLETE. The proposal summary does what its title suggests—it summarizes the entire proposal. In this step grantseekers learn the basics of constructing a solid and compelling sum- mary. Using a worksheet and following examples, grantseekers also write a summary for their own proposals.

Purpose and Content of the Summary

A proposal summary (also referred to as an executive summary) is a clear, one- or two-page abstract of the full proposal. Its purpose is to encapsulate the strongest key elements of the grantseeker’s proposal, which will then lead the funder to engage in reading the full proposal.

All proposals of more than fi ve pages in length should contain a sum- mary, and in most cases funders require a summary as a part of the proposal. Positioned as the opening element of the proposal, it is typically the section written last to ensure that all critical proposal elements are incorporated. A proposal summary should contain the following elements:

• Identifi cation of the applicant (the organization)

• The specifi c purpose of the grant

• The applicant’s qualifi cations to carry out this purpose (the program)

• The anticipated end result

• The total program or project budget and how much the applicant is requesting from the grantmaker to be used toward that amount

Grantseekers should endeavor to include each of the elements outlined in the previous section in short paragraphs.

A crisp and well-articulated summary assists the funder in understand- ing the need for the program, its goals, and objectives. A good proposal summary paints a picture of the full proposal and successfully entices the

Winning Grants Step by Step92

funder to read more. Grantseekers should always keep in mind that funders receive dozens—and in many cases hundreds—of grant proposals to review during any given funding cycle.

There are many different approaches to employ when writing the pro- posal summary. Some will start with the compelling problem the program is designed to address, whereas others will start by introducing the organi- zation, highlighting its reputation and standing, and presenting its overall qualifi cations. When in doubt, consider following the same order used in the proposal.

If writing the proposal summary is a struggle, know that even the most seasoned grantwriters sometimes struggle with this section because it demands brevity. It requires the writer to capture the most essential elements of each component of the proposal, in a condensed style—yet in a way that will capture the reader’s attention and distinguish this proposal from the rest.

Tips for Writing the Summary

• Decide what the key points are in each section of the proposal’s com- ponents. Include only those key points in the summary.

• Stress the key points important to the funder. Make sure the summary highlights the potential funder’s priorities.

Study the following Sample Summary for the Swim 4 Life. Then com- plete Worksheet 10.1 to pull together the material for the summary. Finally, review the work by asking the Summary Review Questions. Grantseekers should be able to answer yes to each question.

Sample Summary Swim 4 Life was established as a 501(c) nonprofi t organization in 2008 by 2000 Olympic swimming hopeful Jane Swimmer, who emerged as one of the brightest female swim stars in the United States at the 2000 Games. The mission of the Swim 4 Life program is to empower youth in the underserved communities throughout King County, through high-quality programs, to utilize the discipline of swimming to improve physical fi tness, nurture self-esteem, and acquire the confi dence to advance their lives. This mission is fulfi lled through programs currently operated at Arthur Schomburg Middle School in South Spring and the Rockmore Education Complex high school near downtown Abbington. More than 450 youth have participated since operations began in 2007.

The overall goal of the program is to empower children in disadvantaged neighborhoods through swimming with the confi dence and baseline skills to save their lives, improve their academic performance, and increase the potential for an improved quality of life. One of the program’s primary objectives to achieve the goal is to teach a minimum of 150 children to swim every year so that they

Step 10—Writing the Proposal Summar y 93

have the opportunity to enjoy the sport and be “water-safe,” thus gaining a much needed confi dence boost. More than 450 youth have participated in the program’s short history, and 85 percent of those children passed a water safety survival test. Programs are delivered by two full-time and seven part-time employees, with a seven-member board of directors providing oversight and governance.

The Rockmore Education Complex is located in the city of Abbington, the most densely populated city in the state, with 8,552 people occupying every square mile, compared with a state average of 2,093 people per square mile. It has the highest crime rate in the state, and the poverty rate is 46 percent, nearly twice that of all other cities in the state, with the exception of South Spring, which has a 31 percent crime rate. Fifty-one percent of children under the age of eighteen live in poverty, compared with 31 percent in the rest of the city. Young people in this community clearly live under stressful conditions and could benefi t greatly from structured and supervised physical activity, as well as safe opportunities for fun and positive engagement.

The Swim 4 Life program currently operates programs at one middle school (Schomberg); in Fall 2008 it began regular programs at one high school (RLC), while a third program started at both sites in the Fall of 2009. The goal of the program is to expand to one additional school in 2012: Cooperville Middle School, which is also located in Abbington. Our program at one school even provides swim instruction specifi cally for students with disabilities. Through our partnership with the Gathenton School District, we are off ered the opportunity to replicate the programs throughout the cities of Rockmore and South Spring in King County, contributing to improved health and fi tness of thousands of youth who have been excluded from learning the sport of swimming because of limited access to safe pools.

The entire Swim 4 Life Program budget is $468,800, of which $150,000 remains to be raised. Your gift of $25,000 will go a long way toward helping us meet our objective of program expansion, thus serving 25 percent more kids. Thank you for your consideration of our request.

Winning Grants Step by Step94

WORKSHEET 10.1:

Summary Questionnaire

1. What is the identity of the organization, and what is its mission?

2. What is the proposed program or project (title, purpose, target population)?

3. Why is the proposed program or project important?

4. What will be accomplished by this program or project during the time period of the grant?

5. Why should the organization do the program or project (credibility statement)?

6. How much will the program or project cost during the grant time period? How much is being requested from this funder?

On the Web

Step 10—Writing the Proposal Summar y 95

Summary Review Questions

1. Does the summary clearly identify the applicant(s)?

2. Does it describe the specifi c need to be addressed and the specifi c objectives to be achieved?

3. Does it mention the total program or project cost and the amount of funding requested?

4. Is it brief (no more than two pages maximum)?

5. Does it thank the funder for considering the applicant’s request for funding?

It is now time to assemble the entire proposal package, which is Step Eleven.

Helpful Hint Be consistent. Now is not the time to intro- duce new information. Everything in this section should already be part of the full proposal.

Step 11 Putting the Package Together

IN THIS STEP GRANTSEEKERS LEARN the importance of presenting their proposal with a clear but brief cover letter, in addition to the attachments that funders may require for inclusion. This step takes on a particular signifi cance in light of the seismic shift in the funding world from paper grant submissions to online submissions via email and online portals for grant submissions.

Purpose and Content of the Cover Letter

First, it should be clarifi ed that in this time of grantseeking, a cover letter is more likely to take the form of an email because, as is being referenced in several places throughout this workbook, many proposals are likely to be submitted electronically. Organizations need to craft a brief, yet informative cover letter that will serve as the fi rst piece of information the funder reads. This letter should accomplish the following:

• Briefl y introduce the organization making the request.

• Highlight the support of the board of directors for the project.

• Specifi cally mention the fi nancial request—how much and for what.

Make it the goal to keep the cover letter to a two or three paragraph maximum length. Keep the details in the proposal and don’t take up time with an unnecessarily lengthy cover letter. Start the letter with a very brief introduction of the organization and inform the funder of the amount and purpose of the request. Use the next paragraph to very briefl y highlight the proposal and any salient points. The closing paragraph should thank the funder for consideration of the request and should also clearly indicate who to contact within the organization should the funder have questions. This should be the same person the funder will contact with responses. Typically, the person who signs the cover letter—which should be the organization’s execu- tive director, board president, or both—is not the contact person who follows

Winning Grants Step by Step98

up on the request. Therefore, it is vital to clearly indicate the contact person by name and title, as well as provide that individual’s direct email address and phone extension. Grantseekers should take care to minimize confusion by making it as simple as possible for funders to reach the right person in the organization.

This fi nal paragraph should also be used to invite a meeting, phone call, or site visit.

Use the following Sample Cover Letter as an example.

Sample Cover Letter Wendy Wonder President XYZ Foundation 0000 Nocounty Avenue, Suite 2330 Anytown, Any State 02009

Dear Ms. Wonder: On behalf of the board of directors and staff , I am honored to submit the following proposal requesting consideration of a grant for $25,000 to Swim 4 Life to assist us in expanding from two to three program sites in the Gathenton School District in King County, Any State. This program is an innovative swimming instruction program established by Jane Swimmer, a former U.S. Olympic swimming hopeful and hometown hero.

Established in 2008, the mission of the Swim 4 Life program is to empower youth in the underserved communities throughout King County, through high-quality programs, to utilize the discipline of swimming to improve physical fi tness, nurture self-esteem, and acquire the confi dence to advance their lives. More than 450 youth have participated since operations began.

Because of your commitment to encouraging young people to reach their fullest potential, we sincerely hope that the XYZ Foundation will join us as our partner in this important program. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (111) 111–1111. We deeply appreciate your consideration of our request and look forward to hearing from you in September if not before.

Sincerely, Shawn Jones, Executive Director

Purpose and Content of the Appendixes

Appendixes, or attachments, are a necessary and important addition to any grant proposal. These are documents that are not components of the proposal per se, yet they provide valuable information that the funder will need when considering a request. Most funders, regardless of size, and certainly nearly all public funders (local, state, and federal government grants), supply a list

Step 11—Putting the Pack age Together 99

of required appendixes. When no list is provided, consider including the following documents:

• The organization’s IRS 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status determination letter or fi scal agent’s letter, if there is a sponsor, to establish nonprofi t status

• The organization’s most recent audited fi nancial statement

• A list of the organization’s board members, their work and school affi liations, and any other applicable information

• The organization’s overall budget for the current fi scal year

• The organization’s latest annual report (if it prepares an annual report)

• A list of all other funders who have received or are receiving propos- als for the program, the amounts of these requests, and the current status of each request

In addition to these items, a funder might request profi les of the key staff members assigned to implement or oversee the proposed project or a list of current funders or both. Some funders may also require an attach- ment section for a letter proposal. Many of the items in the previous list are generally included with these shorter proposals. Letters of intent, however, will probably require a much reduced appendixes section that includes only the IRS determination letter and possibly a list of members of the board of directors and the organization’s budget.

Packaging the Proposal

A simple, clutter-free, and neatly packaged proposal creates the perception of a well-organized, successful organization. This holds true for an email proposal submission. When submitting via email, grantseekers should always convert the proposal and attachments to PDF format. PDF stands for portable document format, and it not only makes documents present more professionally, but it also prevents the documents from being edited in any way and it locks formatting in place. As a general rule, organizations should never submit documents electronically that are not in PDF format.

Review all appendixes to ensure that

• They are nicely copied on fresh paper or that each computer fi le is in PDF format.

• The pages are numbered and appropriately identifi ed.

• The proposal is nicely formatted, with no typos (don’t rely on spell- check but run it anyway).

Winning Grants Step by Step100

• The name of the foundation, staff person, and address information are correct (and don’t hand address the envelope or label). In the case of an electronic document, verify that the appropriate formatting remains in place.

• The cover letter is printed on organization’s letterhead. For an elec- tronic proposal submission, a cover letter will probably not be an option. If an organization is submitting a proposal via email, the email copy should be succinct.

• If the submission is via email, make sure all documents are properly labeled and that the appropriate recipient is known and the email address is correct.

Grantseekers should consider creating a table of contents and numbered appendixes for the proposal. This should be done for both an electronic and paper proposal submission.

Specifi c to Paper Proposal Submissions

If the funder is requesting a paper submission, carefully read the funder ’s guidelines to confi rm the number of proposal copies that should be sub- mitted. Funders might request an original and several copies of a full proposal, so make sure to follow their instructions. If more than one copy of the proposal is requested, clearly mark which proposal is the original. Organizations should also be prepared for requests to submit proposals on a thumb drive.

In an effort to cut down on use of paper products in general, proposals (other than letter proposals with only a few appendixes) should be neatly arranged and held together with a large binder clip, rather than a folder. Start with the full proposal, the budget, and then the appendixes in the order listed in the guidelines. Leave the cover letter outside the binder clip for the original proposal only. Each copy of the proposal can be fully binder-clipped, with the cover letter copy inside the clip. Grantseekers can paperclip each section of the proposal if desired (narrative proposal, budget, appendixes), as that might make accessing the proposal overall easier for the funder.

Placing a proposal in a three-ring notebook, having it spiral-bound, or spending unnecessary money to have it color copied does not add value. Presentation is important, but only from a neatness and orderliness standpoint.

Step 11—Putting the Pack age Together 101

Specifi c to Electronic Submissions

Electronic submissions can sometimes have technological challenges. For that reason, take care to submit electronic proposals sooner rather than closer to the deadline date. Always keep in mind that technology is known to pick the most inopportune moments to fail. If the funder has a portal, be sure to double-check whether it is one that will allow applicants to save submis- sions in progress, or whether the full submission must be completed in one sitting. This distinction is critical, as one allows grantseekers to edit as they go, save their work, and come back to complete the submission. The other does not allow this functionality and will require a dedicated amount of time and attention to detail.

Use the checklist in Worksheet 11.1 to make sure the proposal is complete and ready to mail.

Winning Grants Step by Step102

WORKSHEET 11.1:

Final Proposal Checklist

Place a checkmark next to each step after it is completed.

____ Determine which program or project ideas have the best chance of being funded.

____ Form a planning team that includes clients aff ected by the program or project, community leaders, key staff and volunteers, and other organizations with similar or complementary projects.

____ Design a program or project plan.

____ Conduct thorough research to determine funding sources most likely to be interested in the program or project. Note funder deadlines.

____ Visit the website of each prospective funder to review its grant guidelines, annual report, grantee list, and so forth. If a funder has no website, email or call to request information helpful in preparing the proposal (annual report, grant guidelines, and so on).

____ Read all other grantmaker materials (Form 990, media coverage, and so on) to ensure that the proposal falls within the funder’s interest areas as demonstrated by previous grants made.

____ Prepare the proposal core components by stating the need or problem to be addressed, the objectives and the methods for meeting the need, the ways the project will be evaluated and funded in the future, and the budget.

____ Determine the features of the program or project that may set it apart from other projects and will appeal to the funder.

____ Make sure those features are highlighted for the funder.

____ Prepare the fi nal proposal components: the introduction, summary, and cover letter.

____ Ensure the proposal is clear and well written by having at least one person review it and provide feedback.

____ Include all appendixes requested by the funder.

____ Review grant guidelines and confi rm the number of proposal copies to be submitted and any specifi c formatting requests in order to meet the requirements.

____ Give copies of the proposal to members of the planning team and other individuals or groups who should be aware of the program or project.

____ Email or call the funder within two weeks after mailing the proposal.

On the Web

Step 11—Putting the Pack age Together 103

Sending the Proposal

For a proposal to be successful it must refl ect the work of a fully devel- oped and articulated program plan, which is 70 percent of the up-front work and is sometimes easily overlooked. Only then is the proposal written (the other 30 percent), clearly and concisely, for a targeted funder who has been thoroughly researched and vetted and with whom a relationship has been established.

Please pay particular attention to the Resources for Grantseekers in Resource C in this workbook and on the Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition website to fi nd out more about how to research funders and learn about various preferences and values. When the organization’s proposal is packaged and mailed to prospective funders, go through Step Twelve (the next step in this workbook) to review some suggested strategies for main- taining contact with those funders and moving the proposal through their grantmaking process.

Reality Check It is essential to follow the funder’s guidelines for packaging a proposal, just as with all other parts of the application process. Nearly all funders—foundations, corporations, and government—will stipulate that they do not want staples in proposals. In many cases funders are tasked with making multiple copies for others to review; staples make their jobs much harder. Whatever requirements funders have specifi ed in their grant guidelines is exactly what should be submitted. Do not given the funder any reasons to disqualify the proposal.

105

Step 12 Sustaining Relationships with Funders

NOW IS THE PERFECT TIME to take inventory: a compelling program plan addressing a pressing community problem was created. From there, a solid grant proposal using the steps as outlined in this workbook was crafted. Then said proposal was submitted as directed in the funder’s grant guidelines. Mission accomplished? Well, not quite yet.

Following Up on the Proposal

In many cases, funders will provide a timeline for their grantmaking process. Imbedded within this timeline will be language outlining that the funder requires a certain number of weeks or months to review all proposals. There may even be a request that organizations not call during that specifi c period—a request that should be honored. In addition, more funders are incorporating site visits into the grantmaking process, and they want to save all discussion and questions for that time. For funders with online grant proposal submis- sion processes—either via email or via a specialized portal—grantseekers are likely to receive an e-notifi cation of some sort that will confi rm receipt. However, if submitting by mail, it is recommended that organizations take the time to make a follow-up call to confi rm receipt.

Managing a Site Visit

A site visit is exactly what its name implies: the funder comes to the organi- zation’s site (or the site of the proposed program) to visit with leaders, staff, board members, and those the organization serves. Not every organization requesting funding gets a site visit, as it is primarily a part of the vetting process for proposals that are in the advanced stage of consideration. Grant- seekers should also understand that a site visit is by no means an assurance

106 Winning Grants Step by Step

of program funding. What it does mean is that there is enough of a match between the grantmaker, the organization, and the proposed program that the funder believes it warrants further investigation.

When a site visit is requested, the key staff assigned to the program are essential to the process because they (ideally) were the people who cre- ated the program plan, and they are the ones (again, ideally) who will be responsible for the hands-on implementation of the project. They should be present during the visit, as should the executive director and the person who can answer fi nancial or budgetary questions. If the program targets a specifi c group of people, representation in the form of one or more individu- als from the population to be served or engaged is always welcome, as they can provide the most useful testimony for the program, its signifi cance, and its power for change.

If a nonprofi t is selected for a site visit, use the following to-do list to prepare:

• Confi rm the participation of all key persons involved with the program.

• Send the full proposal to everyone participating, and request that they (re)familiarize themselves with it.

• If the funder has provided questions in advance of the site visit, share those as well.

• Meet with everyone in advance of the actual site visit to ensure that everyone is on the same page in terms of knowledge about the program and its goals, objectives, and methods and that everyone understands who will be answering which questions and moderating the visit.

• Make sure beverages are available for the visit, but keep it basic: no need for catering or any other special event details.

If the funder requests a tour of some sort, decide what the important elements are for the funder ’s representatives to see and plan the tour in advance—again informing everyone who will be a part of it what is hap- pening and when. Make sure everything is in order and try to schedule the tour for a time when they can see the programs in action; check with staff to make sure it won’t be disruptive to have visitors or violate clients’ confi dentiality or privacy in any way.

Keeping the Funder Informed

Keeping prospective funders up to date on which of these other grantmak- ers is funding the program or has declined a request at this time is always

Step 12—Sustaining Relationships with Funders 107

recommended. As new grant requests are submitted, it is in the best interest of the organization to notify all foundations that are currently considering funding for the program. Refer back to each individual funder’s guidelines to be sure of each funder’s requests regarding being open to phone calls and email communication during the review process.

Responding to the Funder’s Decision

It is inevitable: funding decisions will be made. When decisions are received, organization staff will be either sighing for relief or sighing for temporary defeat. In either case, grantseekers need to move forward with their rela- tionship building.

When the Proposal Is Funded

There is nothing like getting that call, letter, or email announcing that the grant is being awarded. It is a wonderful feeling of accomplishment, regardless of the size of the grant. An email to the funder is certainly in order as soon as word is received regarding the request being approved. As busy as funders are, they all want to hear about how the programs—and organizations—they’ve funded are progressing. In most foundations with paid staff, the grantmaking process requires staff to advocate for the pro- grams they recommend for funding. Make no mistake: staff at funding institutions advocate on behalf of the organizations being recommended for grants, so consider them partners and keep them apprised on a quarterly basis (minimum) with a brief note, an email, a call, a personalized newslet- ter, or whatever form of communication is most effective and appropriate.

Following an email to the funder, which should happen within the same day as notifi cation, a formal letter of thanks should also be sent to the funder and signed by the executive director.

As a general rule, most funders anticipate some sort of public recogni- tion of its grants. Standard forms of recognition include a feature in the grantee’s newsletter and inclusion on a donor list on the recipient’s website or in the annual report. Consider the level of recognition in proportion to the amount of funds received; that should guide the selection process for the appropriate recognition level. A large grant may warrant special recogni- tion at an organization’s annual event or ceremony of some sort, or a media announcement. Ultimately, if anything beyond a newsletter mention and inclusion in a donor list is being considered, it should be discussed with the funder in advance of making any decisions. Organizations should not make any assumptions about funder recognition, particularly if the grant award letter does not provide specifi c guidance on the subject.

Winning Grants Step by Step108

If the funding institution (or the grant) is to remain anonymous, the funder will clearly stipulate that fact in its grant award letter. Of course in such situations the funder’s name should not be mentioned anywhere publicly, and care should be taken in all internal records to mark the grant- maker as anonymous.

When a grant is awarded, the nonprofi t will

• Receive initial notifi cation of the award. This is being done increas- ingly via email, though it may also happen via phone call.

• Receive offi cial confi rmation in the form of a grant agreement letter.

• Have the organization’s executive director and other appropriate staff (such as the person responsible for program implementation and the person responsible for organization fi nances) review this document to ensure that the nonprofi t will be able to comply with all of its stipula- tions, as it is a legally binding agreement.

• Return the signed Grant Agreement Letter within three to fi ve days of receipt.

• Provide quarterly, semiyearly, or yearly progress reports. Each funder has different requirements, but these will be spelled out clearly in the Grant Agreement Letter. Timely reports are especially critical if the nonprofi t hopes to be eligible to reapply to this funder for further support.

Notify the funder of all major changes or issues identifi ed in the pro- gram as soon as possible. Staffi ng changes, a particular method that is not working, and participant recruitment that is well below what was originally targeted—these are all examples of situations about which your funding partner should be informed.

When the Proposal Is Not Funded

There will be dozens—and in some cases hundreds—of other organiza- tions that receive a letter of declination. So what happened? Why was the organization’s program not selected? On average, a typical foundation can make grants in response to approximately 8 to 10 percent of the total requests it receives in every funding cycle. Sometimes the approval rate is even smaller than that, especially for the largest foundations in the United States.

An organization’s declination letter is likely to be very general and provide only vague reasons for the denial. So grantseekers might want to follow up with the funder via email to see if any additional feedback can

Step 12—Sustaining Relationships with Funders 109

be shared as to why the organization’s proposal was not funded. Consider asking the following three questions via email:

• Were there any parts of the funder’s guidelines that were missed? (Find out up front if the proposal was disqualifi ed for any reason.)

• Was additional information or further clarity needed in the program plan or grant proposal to make it more competitive?

• Is it recommended that the organization resubmit a proposal for this program at another time? If so, when?

Be sure to thank the funder for considering the request. Let civility be the rule, and remember that there is always the next cycle.

The reality is this: there are many stellar programs that do not get funded. There are compelling grant proposals that do not get funded. The demand for foundation and corporate (and government) grants is simply too high, and competition for these dollars grows more challenging each and every year.

That being said, organizations should be on a mission to be organized, truthful, respectful, consistent, and persistent in their grantseeking endeav- ors. It is vital to keep in mind that a denial from a funder does not mean a program lacks merit, nor does it mean that a program will never get funded.

There are more reasons than pages in this workbook that might explain why a proposal is not funded; just continue building the funder relationships. Consider keeping all the funders identifi ed as a match for the organization’s programs, even if those very funders have denied funding requests in the past, on the organization’s mailing list; also invite them to events, and continue to share organization successes with them via periodic updates through emails and other communications.

Final Thoughts

The takeaways from Winning Grants Step by Step, Fourth Edition, are two- fold. First, the goal is to provide the time-tested, nuts and bolts of proposal development and a framework for how they should come together. Some of the material from the fi rst three editions remains as relevant now as it was then—it works. Second, the goal is to provide some additional context for the grantseeking process itself. As is mentioned in several places in this workbook, a well-written, well-organized grant proposal is a critical component of the funding equation, but there is more to do to ultimately “win” that grant.

Providing organizations with the knowledge that grantseeking is a process that in many cases spans months—and in some cases years—of cultivation and

Winning Grants Step by Step110

relationship building is an important piece of the funding equation. Finally, what most differentiates this edition from the fi rst three is the undeniable role technology now plays in the “winning grants” process. From prospect research to proposal submission to the actual grant award itself, which may come in the form of a wire transfer directly into the organizations’ account rather than a paper check, there is no denying the increasing infl uence of technology in the grantseeking process.

111

Bibliography

Adapted from UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. Health Data, Train the Trainer Project. Performing A Community Assessment Curriculum. 2004. www .healthpolicy.ucla.edu/healthdata/tw_cba4.pdf

Burke, T., Smith, N., and Tremore, J. 2008. Everything Grant Writing Book (2nd ed.). Avon, MA: Adams Media.

Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. 2012. The Trustees of Indiana University. http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu

Center on Philanthropy and Public Policy at the University of Southern California. 2013. http://cppp.usc.edu/

Greater Washington Society of CPAs. 2013. http://www.nonprofi taccounting basics.org/reporting-operations/budgeting-terms-concepts

Heyman, D. R. 2011. Nonprofi t Management 101: A Complete and Practical Guide for Leaders and Professionals. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hutton, S., and Phillips, F. 2011. Nonprofi t Kit for Dummies (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Meyer, P. J. 2003. “What Would You Do If You Knew You Couldn’t Fail? Creating S.M.A.R.T. Goals.” Attitude Is Everything: If You Want to Succeed Above and Beyond. Meyer Resource Group, Incorporated.

National Institute of Health. 2013. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/glossary.htm Nonprofi t and Philanthropy Good Practice at the Johnson Center and Grand

Valley State University. 2011. http://www.npgoodpractice.org/glossary Organizational Research Services for Annie E. Casey. “Theory of Change: A

Practical Tool for Action, Results and Learning.” 2004. www.aecf.org /upload/publicationfi les/cc2977k440.pdf

Goetz, R. January 2010. Defi ning Project Goals and Objectives. www.projectsmart .co.uk

The Foundation Center. 2013. http://foundationcenter.org The Grantsmanship Center. 1972–2010. www.tgci.com Theory of Change. Theory of Change Community, LLC. 2012. www

.theoryofchange.org

http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu

http://cppp.usc.edu

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/glossary.htm

http://www.npgoodpractice.org/glossary

http://www.projectsmart.co.uk

http://foundationcenter.org

http://www.tgci.com

http://www.nonprofitaccountingbasics.org/reporting-operations/budgeting-terms-concepts

http://www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfiles/cc2977k440.pdf

http://www.projectsmart.co.uk

http://www.theoryofchange.org

http://www.healthpolicy.ucla.edu/healthdata/tw_cba4.pdf

113

Resource A: What Is a Foundation?

THERE ARE ESSENTIALLY two types of foundations: private and public. As defi ned by Foundation Center (http://foundationcenter.org/getstarted /tutorials/ft_tutorial/what.html), a private foundation

• Is a nongovernmental, nonprofi t organization

• Has a principal fund or endowment

• Is managed by its own trustees and directors

• Maintains or aids charitable, educational, religious, or other activities serving the public good

• Makes grants, primarily to other nonprofi t organizations

• Is required to fi le a 990-PF form with the IRS annually

The three private foundation types are (1) independent or family foun- dations, (2) corporate foundations, and (3) operating foundations.

1. The term family foundation does not have any legal meaning, but the Council on Foundations defi nes a family foundation as one in which “the donor or the donor’s relatives play a signifi cant role in governing and/ or managing the foundation.” The Foundation Center refers to independent and family foundations as those receiving endowments from individuals or families (and, in the case of family foundations, they continue to show measurable donor or donor-family involvement).

2. A corporate foundation is also referred to as a company-sponsored foundation. A corporate foundation is established by a corporation but tends to operate separately from the company and to have its own dedi- cated staff. In most cases it is a separate legal entity that maintains close ties to the parent company, and the members of the foundation and company boards sometimes intentionally overlap. These foundations tend to give to a broad spectrum of organizations; however, some establish giving policies that refl ect the parent company’s interest. Others allow the employees of the

http://foundationcenter.org/getstarted/tutorials/ft_tutorial/what.html

Resource A—What Is a Foundation?114

corporation to have decision-making authority over some—if not all—of the foundation’s grantmaking. Often, corporate foundations provide grant support in the areas where their corporation has a base of operation.

3. An operating foundation uses its resources to conduct research or provide a direct service. It is not uncommon for this type of foundation to engage in fundraising as a means of generating the revenue it needs to make grants.

A public foundation (also known as a public charity) as defi ned by the Foundation Center

• Is a nongovernmental, nonprofi t organization

• Receives funding from numerous sources and must continue to seek money from diverse sources in order to retain its public charity status

• Is managed by its own trustees and directors

• Operates grants programs benefi ting unrelated organizations or indi- viduals as one of its primary purposes

• Makes grants, primarily to other nonprofi t organizations

• Is required to fi le a 990 form with the IRS

Here are three examples of public foundations: Community Foundation. A community foundation is a tax-exempt, non-

profi t, autonomous, publicly supported, nonsectarian philanthropic institu- tion with a long-term goal of building permanent, named component funds, established by many separate donors, for the broad-based charitable benefi t of the residents of a defi ned geographic area, typically no larger than a state.

Donor-Advised Fund. A donor-advised fund (DAF) “is a charitable giv- ing vehicle set up under the tax umbrella of a public charity, which acts as sponsor to many funds. A donor-advised fund offers the opportunity to cre- ate a fl exible vehicle for charitable giving as an alternative to direct giving or creating a private foundation. Donors receive administrative support, a cost savings and tax advantages by conducting their grantmaking through a donor-advised fund.” Once the primary domain of community founda- tions, DAFs are now offered at major fi nancial institutions such as Fidelity Investments, which has the largest DAF program in the country. DAFs are the fastest growing charitable vehicle. Unfortunately for grantseekers, nonprofi ts typically cannot apply for these funds, as the grants are recom- mended by the advisers to the funds.

Women’s Funds. As stated in the Women’s Funding Network (www .womensfundingnetwork.org):

In the 1970s and early 1980s, following the creation of the Ms. Foundation, the idea of “women’s funds”—organizations focused on

http://www.womensfundingnetwork.org

Resource A—What Is a Foundation? 115

granting money to women and girls—gained momentum. New funds were created from regional funds like the New York Women’s Foundation to family foundations such as the Sister Fund and the Daphne Foundation. By 2000, Women’s Funding Network numbered 94 funds with $200 million in collective assets. In the past decade, women’s funds formalized their shared values, including a commitment to a democratic vision of philanthropy, and distilled a “social change” philosophy that prioritizes investments capable of making lasting and proven changes in the lives of women and girls, by fi xing systems not symptoms.

Women’s funds are located in communities nationwide, and each has its own grant guidelines.

117

Resource B: How to Research Funders

MOST OF THE RESOURCES an organization needs to conduct effective prospect research for funding institutions that best match the organization’s programs can be found online.

The Foundation Center (http://foundationcenter.org) is rich with infor- mation and probably should be the place to begin, as it remains one of the primary sources of information on the fi eld of philanthropy. The Center’s online description of its role in philanthropy is as follows:

Established in 1956 and today supported by close to 550 foundations, the Foundation Center is the leading source of information about philanthropy worldwide. Through data, analysis, and training, it connects people who want to change the world to the resources they need to succeed. The Center maintains the most comprehensive database on U.S. and, increasingly, global grantmakers and their grants—a robust, accessible knowledge bank for the sector. It also operates research, education, and training programs designed to advance knowledge of philanthropy at every level. Thousands of people visit the Center’s web site each day and are served in its fi ve regional library/learning centers and its network of 450 funding information centers located in public libraries, community foundations, and educational institutions nationwide and beyond.

The Foundation Center does provide some of the more basic foundation information for free, including each private foundation’s IRS Form 990-PF. (This form, which assesses compliance with the Internal Revenue Code, lists the organization’s assets, receipts, expenditures, and compensation of directors and offi cers, and it lists grants awarded during the previous year.)

It should be noted that this information is merely baseline data that will provide the following: contact information, type of foundation, IRS exemp- tion status, fi nancial data, and employer identifi cation number (EIN).

http://foundationcenter.org

Resource B—How to Research Funders118

Accessing the more comprehensive data such as previous grants, annual report information, and board and staff leadership is available for a fee through a Foundation Center resource, the Foundation Directory Online (http://fconline.fdncenter.org). According to the website of the Foundation Directory Online, it offers “the most comprehensive, in-depth informa- tion available on U.S. grantmakers and their grants, drawn from reliable sources, including IRS 990s, grantmaker websites and annual reports, plus data provided directly by grantmakers—ensuring the most accurate, timely information possible.”

That said, a better option might be to go directly to the source, which is each foundation’s individual website. Many foundations of all shapes and endowment sizes, as well as those foundations with no endowment, have websites containing extensive information about its leadership, theory of change, funding areas, previous grantees, and—in most instances—its grant guidelines.

There are also several respected philanthropic centers based on univer- sity campuses that provide a plethora of information, including prospect research tools and tips. Three such universities are

• The Nonprofi t and Philanthropy Good Practice at the Johnson Center at Grand Valley State University. http://www.npgoodpractice.org/

• The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. http://www .philanthropy.iupui.edu/

• Center on Philanthropy and Public Policy at the University of Southern California. http://www.usc.edu/schools/price/research /centers/cppp.html

If Internet access is an issue, grantseekers should locate the closest Cooperating Collection. Cooperating Collections are free funding infor- mation centers in libraries, community foundations, and other nonprofi t resource centers that provide a core collection of Foundation Center publications and a variety of supplementary materials and services in areas useful to grantseekers.

Should it turn out that access to a Cooperating Collection is also a chal- lenge, go to the local library. Most public libraries will have Internet access, as well as some level of access to the Foundation Center.

Prospect research, when done correctly, should lead to the following:

• The identifi cation of prospect foundations and corporations—those whose interests most closely match what the organization is seeking

• A comprehensive understanding of the specifi c interests of each pros- pect to better target each proposal accordingly

http://fconline.fdncenter.org

http://www.npgoodpractice.org

http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/

http://www.usc.edu/schools/price/research/centers/cppp.html

http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/

http://www.usc.edu/schools/price/research/centers/cppp.html

Resource B—How to Research Funders 119

• The identifi cation of any connections between the organization and one or more prospect foundations or corporations; the connection might be through someone who is on the organization’s board of directors or staff or who is a volunteer or donor

Here are some steps to online funder research:

1. Identify the search criteria to be used in advance of starting the research. These can include key words, subject matter, geographic area, target audience, gender, race and ethnicity, and any other criteria that fi t the organization’s interests. Doing this in advance will help grantseekers in refi ning and targeting the research.

2. Determine the subject areas and type of support indexes (new program, capital, general operating, and so on). Those foundations and corporations that fund within the type of support being sought and that also express an interest in one or more of the subject areas are likely to be the strongest prospects. Keep an eye out for funders located in the organization’s geographic area, as they are the ones most likely to give close consideration to the grantseeker’s proposal.

3. Study the information on each prospect identifi ed to learn everything possible about it, as this will allow the grantseeker to further deter- mine whether there is truly a match.

4. Once funding sources that best match the organization’s funding needs are identifi ed, visit the foundation websites and get to know them even more. Review their annual reports, success stories of previ- ous grants made, staff biographies, and everything else they are shar- ing with the public. Visiting each prospect funder’s website to check guidelines is also a critical step because guidelines do change over time—and sometimes the changes are signifi cant—but the changes may not have made their way yet into the online directory.

5. With all the information obtained from prospect funder websites, get a much clearer sense of how to target the proposals to “speak” to each funder in a language to which its program offi cer is likely to relate. Grantseekers will also have a grasp on how much they can reasonably request from each funder.

6. It is strongly advised that grantseekers create a prospect grid that lists every prospect identifi ed; the organization’s program that most closely aligns with each prospect’s funding interests as outlined in its grant guidelines; the proposed request amount; deadline dates; and all other pertinent information. Pass this prospect list around to the

Resource B—How to Research Funders120

organization’s board and staff to determine whether anyone has a personal contact on the board or staff of any of these prospect funders.

Here are a few additional, more creative, ways to identify funder prospects:

1. Visit the websites of nonprofi t organizations that are similar in their mission, geographic area, or target audience and take a look at their donor pages. What foundations support these other organizations? Once those foundations are identifi ed, use an Internet search engine to fi nd out more about these potential funders.

2. Grantees should survey their surroundings. Are there any corpo- rate headquarters close by? Or maybe franchise outlets of popular chains (of restaurants, retail stores, conveniences stores, and the like)? Contact their corporate headquarters, and fi nd out about their cor- porate contribution programs—for both funding grants and in-kind support.

3. Look on the donor walls of the local hospitals, universities, and museums. Make note of the foundations and corporations that sup- port these institutions, and then look them up online to fi nd out more. Who knows? Grantseekers just might fi nd a match, especially if the organization is of t he same type.

4. Go to the Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers (www.givingforum.org) to locate the local regional association of grantmakers, and then visit that local association’s website to see what resources and leads it might provide.

5. See whether a meeting can be set up with the donor relations staff person at the local community foundation. The goal is to fi nd out more about the donor-advised funds at the community foundation and see if there are funds where the donor advisors’ interests poten- tially match the grantseeker’s programs.

http://www.givingforum.org

121

Resource C: Resources for Grantseekers

Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers. www.givingforum.org Foundation Search America. www.foundationsearch.com Funders Online. www.fundersonline.org Fundsnet Services Online. www.fundsnetservices.com Give Spot. http://www.givespot.com/resources/grantseekers.htm Giving to Northwestern University: Resources for Grantseekers. http://giving

.northwestern.edu/resources/grantseekers The Grantsmanship Center. www.tgci.com International Human Rights Funders Group: Resources for Grantseekers.

http://www.ihrfg.org/resources/grantseekers JRS Biodiversity Foundation: Resources for Grantseekers. http://www.jrsbdf

.org/v3/GrantMakingResources.asp Non Profi t Philanthropy and Good Practice. http://www.npgoodpractice.org/ Philanthropic Ventures Foundation: Resources for Grantseekers. http://www

.venturesfoundation.org/grant-seekers/resources-for-grantseekers Rockefeller Foundation: Links to Resources for Grantseekers. http://www

.rockefellerfoundation.org/grants/resources-grantseekers San Diego Grantmakers: Grantseeker Resources. http://www.sdgrantmakers

.org/GrantseekerResources.aspx

Resources for Individual Grantseekers

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation: Grantseeking Resources for Individuals. http://www.gatesfoundation.org/grantseeker/Pages/individuals-seeking -grants.aspx

Foundation Center: Links for Individual Grantseekers. http://foundationcenter .org/getstarted/individuals/

Grant Space: Resources for Individual Grantseekers. http://grantspace.org /Tools/Knowledge-Base/Individual-Grantseekers

Prospect Resource Tools

DonorSearch. http://donorsearch.net/

http://www.givingforum.org

http://www.foundationsearch.com

http://www.fundersonline.org

http://www.fundsnetservices.com

http://www.givespot.com/resources/grantseekers.htm

http://www.tgci.com

http://www.ihrfg.org/resources/grantseekers

http://www.npgoodpractice.org

http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/grants/resources-grantseekers

http://www.sdgrantmakers.org/GrantseekerResources.aspx

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/grantseeker/Pages/individuals-seeking-grants.aspx

http://foundationcenter.org/getstarted/individuals/

http://grantspace.org/Tools/Knowledge-Base/Individual-Grantseekers

http://donorsearch.net

http://giving.northwestern.edu/resources/grantseekers

http://www.jrsbdf.org/v3/GrantMakingResources.asp

http://www.venturesfoundation.org/grant-seekers/resources-for-grantseekers

http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/grants/resources-grantseekers

http://www.sdgrantmakers.org/GrantseekerResources.aspx

http://foundationcenter.org/getstarted/individuals/

http://grantspace.org/Tools/Knowledge-Base/Individual-Grantseekers

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/grantseeker/Pages/individuals-seeking-grants.aspx

Resource C—Resources for Grantseekers122

The Foundation Center: Find Funders. http://foundationcenter.org /fi ndfunders/

GuideStar. www.guidestar.org

Logic Models

About.com: What Is a Logic Model? http://nonprofi t.about.com/od /foundationfundinggrants/f/logicmodel.htm

Center for Civic Partnerships: Logic Models/Top Tips. http://www .civicpartnerships.org/docs/tools_resources/Logic%20Models%209.07.htm

Child Welfare Information Gateway: Evaluation Toolkit & Logic Model. http://www.childwelfare.gov/preventing/evaluating/toolkit.cfm

Innovation Network: Point K—Tell Me More. http://www.innonet.org /?section_id=64&content_id=185

Nonprofi t Webinars: A Guide to Logic Models. http://nonprofi twebinars.com /past_webinars/10122011-a-guide-to-logic-models-grant-writing/

Theory of Change. www.theoryofchange.org

Online Application Examples

The California Community Foundation. https://www.calfund.org/page .aspx?pid=860

The Cleveland Foundation. http://www.clevelandfoundation.org /GrantMaking/ApplyForAGrant/default.html

Eugene and Agnes Meyer Foundation. www.meyerfoundation.org/apply -for-funding

The Skoll Foundation. www.skollfoundation.org W. K. Kellogg Foundation. www.wkkf.org

Measuring Social Change, Social Justice

The Center for Effective Philanthropy: Assessment and Social Justice Funding. http://www.effectivephilanthropy.org/blog/2010/05/assessment-and -social-justice-funding/

Innovation Network: Measuring Social Change, Lessons from the Field. http://www.innonet.org/index.php?section_id=6&content_id=592

Social Edge: A Program of the Skoll Foundation. http://www.socialedge .org/discussions/success-metrics/measuring-social-impact/

Program Evaluation

Delaware Association of Nonprofi ts. http://www.delawarenonprofi t.org /infocentral/programeval.php

Florida Atlantic University: Nonprofi t Resource Center. http://wise.fau .edu/~rcnyhan/images/program.html

http://foundationcenter.org/findfunders/

http://www.guidestar.org

http://www.civicpartnerships.org/docs/tools_resources/Logic%20Models%209.07.htm

http://www.childwelfare.gov/preventing/evaluating/toolkit.cfm

http://www.innonet.org/?section_id=64&content_id=185

http://www.theoryofchange.org

https://www.calfund.org/page.aspx?pid=860

http://www.clevelandfoundation.org/GrantMaking/ApplyForAGrant/default.html

http://www.meyerfoundation.org/apply-for-funding

http://www.skollfoundation.org

http://www.wkkf.org

http://www.effectivephilanthropy.org/blog/2010/05/assessment-and-social-justice-funding/

http://www.innonet.org/index.php?section_id=6&content_id=592

http://www.socialedge.org/discussions/success-metrics/measuring-social-impact/

http://www.delawarenonprofit.org/infocentral/programeval.php

http://wise.fau.edu/~rcnyhan/images/program.html

http://foundationcenter.org/findfunders/

http://nonprofit.about.com/od/foundationfundinggrants/f/logicmodel.htm

http://www.civicpartnerships.org/docs/tools_resources/Logic%20Models%209.07.htm

http://www.innonet.org/?section_id=64&content_id=185

http://nonprofitwebinars.com/past_webinars/10122011-a-guide-to-logic-models-grant-writing/

http://www.effectivephilanthropy.org/blog/2010/05/assessment-and-social-justice-funding/

http://www.socialedge.org/discussions/success-metrics/measuring-social-impact/

http://www.delawarenonprofit.org/infocentral/programeval.php

http://wise.fau.edu/~rcnyhan/images/program.html

http://www.meyerfoundation.org/apply-for-funding

http://www.clevelandfoundation.org/GrantMaking/ApplyForAGrant/default.html

https://www.calfund.org/page.aspx?pid=860

Resource C—Resources for Grantseekers 123

Free Management Library: Basic Guide to Program Evaluation (Including Outcomes Evaluation). http://managementhelp.org/evaluation /program-evaluation-guide.htm

GrantSpace: Knowledge Base. http://grantspace.org/Tools/Knowledge-Base /Grantmakers/Program-evaluation

The James Irvine Foundation: Evaluation. http://irvine.org/evaluation /tools-and-resources

Budget Information

The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. http://www.mott.org /grantsandguidelines/ForGrantees/accounting/indirectvsdirect

Nonprofi t Accounting Basics: Reporting and Operations. http://www .nonprofi taccountingbasics.org/reporting-operations/budgeting-terms -concepts

Small Business Chron: How to Calculate Overhead for a Nonprofi t. http://smallbusiness.chron.com/calculate-overhead-nonprofi t-13808.html

Government Grant Opportunities

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. http://12.46.245.173/cfda/cfda.html Grants.gov. www.grants.gov National Endowment for the Arts. www.arts.endow.gov USA.gov for Nonprofi ts. http://www.usa.gov/Business/Nonprofi t.shtml U.S. Department of Education (ED). www.ed.gov/fund/landing.jhtml U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). www.hud.gov

/grants/index.cfm

Board Resources

Board Match Plus. www.boardmatchplus.org BoardSource. www.boardsource.org

Research and Data Resources

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. http://www.cbpp.org/ Economic Policy Institute. www.epi.org National Center for Charitable Statistics. http://nccs.urban.org The Opportunity Agenda. http://opportunityagenda.org/ The Urban Institute. www.urban.org

Other Resources

Alliance for Nonprofi t Management. www.allianceonline.org American Association of Grant Professionals. http://go-aagp.org

http://managementhelp.org/evaluation/program-evaluation-guide.htm

http://grantspace.org/Tools/Knowledge-Base/Grantmakers/Program-evaluation

http://irvine.org/evaluation/tools-and-resources

http://www.mott.org/grantsandguidelines/ForGrantees/accounting/indirectvsdirect

http://www.nonprofitaccountingbasics.org/reporting-operations/budgeting-terms-concepts

http://12.46.245.173/cfda/cfda.html

http://www.grants.gov

http://www.arts.endow.gov

http://www.usa.gov/Business/Nonprofit.shtml

http://www.ed.gov/fund/landing.jhtml

http://www.hud.gov/grants/index.cfm

http://www.boardmatchplus.org

http://www.boardsource.org

http://www.cbpp.org

http://www.epi.org

http://nccs.urban.org

http://opportunityagenda.org

http://www.urban.org

http://www.allianceonline.org

http://go-aagp.org

http://managementhelp.org/evaluation/program-evaluation-guide.htm

http://grantspace.org/Tools/Knowledge-Base/Grantmakers/Program-evaluation

http://irvine.org/evaluation/tools-and-resources

http://www.mott.org/grantsandguidelines/ForGrantees/accounting/indirectvsdirect

http://www.nonprofitaccountingbasics.org/reporting-operations/budgeting-terms-concepts

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/calculate-overhead-nonprofit-13808.html

http://www.hud.gov/grants/index.cfm

Resource C—Resources for Grantseekers124

Association of Fundraising Professionals. www.afpnet.org CharityChannel.com. www.CharityChannel.com Chronicle of Philanthropy. www.philanthropy.com CompassPoint. www.compasspoint.org Council on Foundations. www.cof.org Idealist. www.idealist.org Philanthropy News Network.www.pnnonline.org Women’s Funding Network. www.wfnet.org

http://www.afpnet.org

http://www.CharityChannel.com

http://www.philanthropy.com

http://www.compasspoint.org

http://www.cof.org

http://www.idealist.org

http://www.pnnonline.org

http://www.wfnet.org

125

Index

Advocacy, 42 Appendixes, in proposal submission, 98–99 Applicant description, 85–86

Background statement, 85–86 Board resources, 123 Budget: and grant application requirements,

72–73; information resources for, 123; and location in proposal, 10; overview of, 71–72. See also Program budget

Capacity building funding, 5, 6, 66 Capital funding, 5, 66 Center on Philanthropy, 118 Center on Philanthropy and Public Policy,

118 Checklist, for proposal submission, 102 Circular reasoning, avoidance of, 37 Collaboration, defi nition of, 33 Community foundation, defi nition of, 114 Continuation grants, 66 Cooperating Collections, 118 Corporate foundation, defi nition of, 113–114 Cover letter, for proposal submission, 97–98

Data: organizing of, 73–74; requirements for, 10; resources for, 123

Direct costs, 76–77

Donated goods/services. See In-kind contributions

Donor-advised fund, defi nition of, 114

Earned income, 6 Electronic applications, 29 Electronic submission, of proposal, 101 Email inquiries, to funders, 23 Endowments, 5 Equipment funding, 5, 66 Evaluation component: content of, 58–60; and

internal vs. external, 57–58; purpose of, 56–58; questionnaire for, 61–62; resources for, 122; review questions for, 63; sample of, 60

Executive summary, 10. See also Proposal summary

Expenses, estimating of, 75–76, 83 External evaluation, 57–58

Family foundation, defi nition of, 113 Feedback, need for, 10 Fees for service, 66 Financial needs: categories of, 4–6; sources

of, 3–4 Fiscal year, 74–75 Follow-up, on proposal submission, 105 Forum of Regional Associations of

Grantmakers, 120 Foundation Center, 113, 117

Index126

Foundation Directory Online, 118 Foundations: and prospect research, 4; types

of, 113–115 Full proposal, 8 Funders: and email inquiries, 23; and follow-

up on proposal, 105–106; information about, 21–22; and letter of inquiry, 24–26; meeting with, 28–29; and relationship building, 22–23; researching of, 117–120; and response to decision, 107–109; site visits and, 105–106; and telephone contact, 24

Funding: categories of, 4–6; sources of, 3–4 Fundraising campaigns, types of, 3 Future funding. See Sustainability component

General operating support. See Operating funding

Goals: defi nition of, 39–41, 42; exercise for, 45–46; review questions for, 47; tips for writing of, 43–44

Government funding, 3, 79, 123 Grant application, and budget requirements,

72–73 Grant, awarding of, 107–109 Grant guidelines, and need to follow, 9 Grant period, 74–75 Grantseekers, individual, resources for, 121 Guidelines, and need to follow, 9

Hypothesis, defi nition of, 57

Impact, defi nition of, 56, 57 In-kind contributions, 78–79 Income-producing opportunities, 66–67 Indirect costs, 71, 73, 77 Individual grantseekers, resources for, 121 Internal evaluation, 57–58

Jargon, avoidance of, 10, 32

Letter of inquiry: defi nition of, 8; questionnaire for, 27; review questions for, 29–30; sample of, 24–26

Letter of intent. See Letter of inquiry Leverage, defi nition of, 56 Logic models, 14–15, 122 Long proposal, 8

Methods component: content of, 49–50; exercise for, 53; purpose of, 49; review questions for, 54; sample of, 52; and sample timeline, 51; tips for writing of, 50

Methods, defi nition of, 42 Multiyear budgets, 75

Need statement. See Problem statement Nonprofi t and Philanthropy Good Practice,

76, 118

Objectives: defi nition of, 39–41, 42; exercise for, 45–46; and outcome focus objectives, 41–43; review questions for, 47; tips for writing of, 43–44

Ongoing support. See Sustainability component

Online applications, 29, 122 Operating budget, 71. See also Program

budget Operating funding, 4–5, 14 Organization background component:

background statement and, 85–86; content of, 86–87; exercise for, 89; review questions for, 90; sample of, 88; tips for writing of, 87

Index 127

Outcome focus objectives, 41–43 Overhead, 71, 73

Paper submission, of proposal, 100 PDF format, need for, 99 Personnel costs, 77 Planning funding, 5 Planning, in grantseeking process, 11 Private foundation, defi nition of, 113 Problem statement: content of, 32–33;

purpose of, 31; questionnaire for, 36; review questions for, 37; sample of, 34–35; tips for writing of, 33–34

Process objectives, 41–42 Program budget: basics of, 71–72; budget

period and, 74–75; direct costs and, 76–77; and estimating revenue and expenses, 75– 76, 83; and grant application requirements, 72–73; in-kind contributions and, 78–79; indirect costs and, 71, 73, 77; justifi cation for, 80–81; location of in proposal, 10; organizing data and, 73–74; review of, 79; review questions for, 84; software for, 73–74, 79; tips for developing, 81–82

Program funding, 5 Proposal, decision about, 107–109 Proposal process, overview of, 6–8 Proposal submission: appendixes in, 98–99;

checklist for, 102; cover letter for, 97–98; electronic submission and, 101; follow-up on, 105; packaging of, 99–101, 103; paper submissions and, 100

Proposal summary: content of, 91–92; questionnaire for, 94; review questions for, 95; sample of, 92–93; tips for writing of, 92

Proposals: and logic models, 14–15; overview of process for, 6–8; and questionnaire for proposal idea, 16–18; review questions for, 19; tips for writing of, 9–11; types of, 8

Prospect resource tools, 121–122 Public foundation, defi nition of, 114

Questionnaires: for evaluation component, 61–62; for letter of inquiry, 27; for problem statement, 36; for proposal idea, 16–18; for proposal summary, 94; for sustainability component, 69

Requirements, for grant funding, 2 Research grants, 6 Return on investment (ROI), defi nition

of, 56 Revenue, estimating of, 75–76, 83 Revenue-generating ventures, 66–67 Review questions: for evaluation

component, 63; for goals/objectives, 47; for grantseeking process, 1–2; for letter of inquiry, 29–30; for methods component, 54; for organization background component, 90; for problem statement, 37; for program budget, 84; for proposal idea, 19; for proposal summary, 95; for sustainability component, 70

Site visit, by funder, 105–106 SMART objectives, 40, 43 Social change/social justice, resources

for, 122 Special project funding, 5 Spreadsheet, 73, 74, 79 Statement of need. See Problem statement Strategies, defi nition of, 42 Support: categories of, 4–6; sources of, 3–4 Sustainability component: content of, 65–67;

purpose of, 65; questionnaire for, 69; review questions for, 70; sample of, 67–68; tips for writing of, 67–68

Index128

Tactics, defi nition of, 42 Tailoring of proposal, 10–11, 15 Technology, need for access to, 2, 3 Telephone contact, with funders, 24 Timeline, sample of, 51 Tips: for methods component, 50; for

organization background component, 87; for problem statement, 33–34; for program budget, 81–82; for proposal summary, 92;

for sustainability component, 67–68; for writing goals, 43–44; for writing objectives, 43–44; for writing proposals, 9–11

Volunteers. See In-kind contributions

Website, need for, 2 Women’s funds, defi nition of, 114–115

Winning Grants Step by Step: The Complete Workbook for Planning, Developing, and Writing Successful Proposals
Copyright
Contents
Website Contents
List of Figures, Samples, and Worksheets
Acknowledgments
The Author
How to Use This Workbook
Introduction: An Overview of the Grantseeking Process

Categories of Support
The Proposal Process
Types of Proposals
Tips for Writing Proposals

Step 1: Developing the Proposal Idea

Logic Models in Program Design
Proposal Development Review Questions

Step 2: Developing Relationships with Funders

Making the Initial Approach
Developing the Relationship

Sending Email Inquiries to Funders
Contacting a Funder by Telephone
Writing a Letter of Inquiry
Meeting with a Funder

Letter of Inquiry Review Questions

Step 3: Writing a Compelling Problem Statement

Purpose of the Problem Statement
Content of the Problem Statement
Problem Statement Review Questions

Step 4: Deﬁning Clear Goals and Objectives

Purpose of the Goals and Objectives Components: The “So What?” Factor
Definition of Goals and Objectives
Outcome Focus Objectives
Writing Outcome Objectives
Tips for Writing Good Goals and Objectives
Goals and Objectives Review Questions
Notes

Step 5: Developing the Methods

Purpose of the Methods Component
Content of the Methods Component
Tips for Writing the Methods Component
Methods Review Questions

Step 6: Preparing the Evaluation Component

Purpose of the Evaluation Component

Specific Virtues of Evaluation
Internal or External Evaluation

Content of the Evaluation Component
Evaluation Review Questions

Step 7: Developing Sustainability Strategies

Purpose of the Sustainability Component
Content of the Sustainability Component
Tips for Writing the Sustainability Component
Sustainability Review Questions

Step 8: Developing the Program Budget

General Budget Overview
Basics of a Program Budget
Stage 1: Review, Research, and Organize

Review the Grant Application for Specific Budget Requirements
Research and Organize Budget Information

Stage 2: Develop the Budget

Selecting a Spreadsheet Software Tool
Establish the Budget Period
Estimate Revenues and Expenses
Direct Costs
Indirect Costs
In-Kind Support/Donated Goods and Services
Record Budget Information

Stage 3: Review, Update, and Review Budget Again
Stage 4: Develop the Budget Justification

The Budget Justification

The Budget: Final Thoughts
Program Budget Dos and Don’ts
Budget Review Questions
References

Step 9: Writing the Organization Background Component

Purpose of the Organization Background Statement
Content of the Organization Background Component
Tips for Writing the Organization Background Component

Background Statement

Organization Background Review Questions

Step 10: Writing the Proposal Summary

Purpose and Content of the Summary
Tips for Writing the Summary
Summary Review Questions

Step 11: Putting the Package Together

Purpose and Content of the Cover Letter
Purpose and Content of the Appendixes
Packaging the Proposal

Specific to Paper Proposal Submissions
Specific to Electronic Submissions

Sending the Proposal

Step 12: Sustaining Relationships with Funders

Following Up on the Proposal
Managing a Site Visit
Keeping the Funder Informed
Responding to the Funder’s Decision

When the Proposal Is Funded
When the Proposal Is Not Funded

Final Thoughts

Bibliography
Resource A: What Is a Foundation?
Resource B: How to Research Funders
Resource C: Resources for Grantseekers

Resources for Individual Grantseekers
Prospect Resource Tools
Logic Models
Online Application Examples
Measuring Social Change, Social Justice
Program Evaluation
Budget Information
Government Grant Opportunities
Board Resources
Research and Data Resources
Other Resources

Index