450 WK 5

Step12.2Winning_Grants_Step_by_Step_The_Complete_Workbook_..._----_Pages_126_to_146.pdf

Home >Human Resource Management homework help >450 WK 5

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

O'Neal-McElrath, Tori, and Mim Carlson. Winning Grants Step by Step : The Complete Workbook for Planning, Developing and Writing Successful Proposals, John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ashford-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1469450. Created from ashford-ebooks on 2021-10-28 02:24:52.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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/

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

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

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 3 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .