Post an introduction about yourself to your colleagues. Describe your previous grant-writing experiences and explain what, in your opinion, are the most challenging aspects of grant writing. If you have not had previous grant-writing experience, what are

18 techdirections AUGUST 2014

S CHOOL districts across the country are chal- lenged by mounting budget cuts that leave both administrators and

teachers scrambling to fill budgetary gaps while providing students with a quality educational experience. And given the nation’s focus on de- veloping STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) skills, CIOs, principals, and teachers are expected to maintain state-of-the-art technology-infused classrooms that meet the learning needs of tech- savvy students.

Based on my experiences as both a grant writer and reviewer, I would like to share some tips to help you write a winning technology proposal that can bring in valuable funding for technology in your classroom or lab.

A Variety of Sources With district and state funds

shrinking in some areas, grants are becoming an increasingly important means for funding technology in schools and classrooms. Technology-

Tips for Writing a Winning Grant Proposal

By Ron Flavin

Ron Flavin is president of Ron Flavin, Inc., a growth and funding consulting firm. He is an expert in the field of government grants and incen- tives and has particular expertise in securing government grants to support STEM programs and school-based technology.

focused grants are offered by state and federal governmental agencies, charitable foundations, and compa- nies. The size of grants can range from $250 up to millions of dollars, depending on the funder and the program.

In addition to securing more than $138 million in grants, I also regularly work as a professional proposal re- viewer for state, federal, and private funders, so I am thoroughly knowl- edgeable about the entire process. In my experience, only about 3% to 5% of all grant proposals are awarded funding. And with the increased de- mand, there is increased competition for funds, which makes the grant- seeking process much more challeng- ing. Now more than ever, only the “best of the best” proposals will get funded. The loss of just a single scor- ing point can make the difference between success and failure.

Regardless of whether the funder is a governmental agency, a founda- tion, or a corporation, the grant-seek- ing process is essentially the same. The funder or funding agency pub- lishes a request for proposals (RFP) that outlines the basics, such as size of awards, focus areas, eligible uses of funds, proposal requirements, due dates, and the criteria by which proposals will be chosen for funding. The first step in the grant-seeking process is to carefully read through the RFP.

Make Sure the Funder Is a Good Fit

First, be sure to review the fund- ing agency’s giving priorities to be certain that your project is a fit. Usually, the funder will have general giving priorities and then outline specific types of projects that it is seeking to fund. Carefully review the guidelines to verify both that your program or school is eligible to ap- ply for funding and that your funding objective is a fit with the funder’s interests.

If there is not a match, don’t waste your time developing a proposal because it will not get reviewed. Funders receive hundreds—and sometimes thousands—of grant proposals each year and will not con- sider proposals that are outside the scope of their funding priorities.

Be certain to follow the instruc- tions outlined in the RFP or funding announcement. This seems obvi- ous, but in reality, not following the given instructions is the number one reason that grant proposals do not get funded. In many cases, an ap- plicant ignores a question or does not provide a requested attachment. If a question does not apply to your school, program, or situation, never leave it blank. Instead, at the very least write “not applicable’”or pro- vide a brief explanation as to why the question does not apply.

As you present the need state-

TE/CTE 19www.techdirections.com

ment or discuss the issue you want to address with the project, remem- ber that “lack of technology” is never the problem. Funders will not be swayed by the fact that students don’t have iPads or other technolo- gies in the classroom. Rather, they want to know about the challenges students face and how those chal- lenges are impacting their lives and academic performance. The goal when writing a need statement is to present a clear, concise statement that relates directly to the problem the project is trying to resolve. Quan- tify the problem using recent, local, relevant data.

When describing technologies or innovation, always focus on the ben- efits not the features. Tablets, smart devices, videoconferencing, mobile applications, and other technological innovations offer an amazing array of exciting new features. However, funders aren’t interested in the fea- tures but rather, how the technolo- gies engage students and directly support improved learning or attain- ment of the project’s goals.

For example, interactive video- conferencing technologies can bridge gaps by providing access to a vast array of global content and resourc- es. Be creative, but always keep the focus on the benefits the items you are seeking will provide for students and how they support the learning or engagement process.

Provide Measurable Outcomes

Provide measurable outcomes for the goals of your grant seeking. Out- comes must always be Specific, Mea- surable, Attainable, Realistic, and Time-specific (SMART). A success- ful grant proposal always includes clearly-stated outcomes that can be measured and quantified. If you can- not quantify (measure) the outcome, then it’s not measurable and you should head back to the drawing board. Here are some examples of measurable outcomes:

We will conduct five outreach sessions.

The program will provide tech- nology training for 100 disadvan- taged youth.

At least 75% of program partici- pants will achieve a passing score on a particular standardized test as the result of having access to the funded equipment.

Include a plan to evaluate your project. Funders are interested in outcomes, so you need to demon- strate how and when you are going to measure your progress. For ex- ample, if you say that your program will provide technology training for 100 disadvantaged youth, then you need to explain how you will track the number served (sign-in sheets, activity logs, etc.). Additionally, you will need to show how you will mea-

sure (e.g., survey, pre- and post-test, etc.) improvements in participants’ knowledge or skill level after they participate in the training.

You will also need to tell the re- viewers how you will sustain your program or a project related to the technology beyond the grant-funded period. Foundations and other funders are like venture capitalists in that they are interested in making in- vestments in programs and projects that will be around for the long term and have a lasting impact.

Building sustainability into your project plan from the start is critical to successful grant seeking. Be as specific as possible when describing your plans for sustaining the project. If the funder allows attachments or appendices you can include let- ters committing to sustaining the program from a program advisory board, your administration, possible project partners, and other funders.

Be Specific In seeking grant funds for your

classroom technology program, never use a boiler-plate proposal or take a shotgun approach. Every fund- ing program has its own unique pri- orities and areas of focus. During the review process, reviewers score each section of the proposal based on how well it addresses a specific focus or priority outlined in the RFP.

A template or boiler plate will most likely not be aligned to the proposal requirements, and when key information is not where it is ex- pected to be, critical points are lost. A strategic, highly-targeted technol-

ogy grant-seeking approach will be much more effective than a random shotgun approach.

Here are a few more tips for win- ning over grant proposal reviewers:

Use bullet points and tables wherever possible.

Use recent data and cite sourc- es.

Make the proposal more readable by including plenty of whitespace between paragraphs and sections.

Use bold type or other format- ting (e.g., italics, underline, larger font, etc.) to identify review criteria (e.g., Project Management, Evalua- tion Plan, etc.) and key concepts.

Never make the reviewer “hunt’” for important information or review criteria.

While nothing can guarantee with 100% certainty that a grant proposal will get funded, follow these sugges- tions and you and your program will be far ahead of the competition.

A strategic, highly focused approach is essential to successfully navigating the technology grant- seeking maze.

Copyright of Tech Directions is the property of Prakken Publications and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.