Category Archives: grants

Online Learning Center Teaches Grant Writing

Our Online Learning Center is now live! Learn grant writing when it’s convenient for you.

Here’s how it works:  You register for a one hour seminar or a full course. Then we send you more information about how to access the material.  If it’s a seminar, you can participate live (or not) and you’ll also have access to the recorded web session for six months to review at your convenience.  If it’s a course, the online session materials will be released according to the schedule on the curse page (over a period of about a month), but it’s all recorded, so you can go through the materials on your time, when it’s convenient for you. You’ll have access to all the online sessions for 6 months.

Like learning in the middle of the night?  No problem. Want to review the materials a little each day on your lunch hour? That’s perfect.

Here are the seminars that are planned for the next several weeks.  Remember, the dates and times are for the live event, but you don’t have to be available then to take advantage of the seminars:

  • Secrets of Successful Grant Writers – June 29th – 12 noon PST.
  • Writing an Effective Evaluation Section – July 7th – 12 noon PST
  • Logic Models – July 20th – 3:00 p.m. PST
  • Timelines – July 27th – 3:00 p.m. PST

 Here are the courses that are planned for this summer (with links to the course information pages):

With each course, you get the course materials (a recorded Webex session, links, handouts,etc.), access to an exclusive course discussion group, access to the instructor through weekly teleconference for questions, and for some courses you also get individual teleconference consultation time with the instructor.

Check out the Online Learning Center for more information and to register.

————————————

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com

Online Learning Center Teaches Grant Writing

Our Online Learning Center is now live! Learn grant writing when it’s convenient for you.

Here’s how it works:  You register for a one hour seminar or a full course. Then we send you more information about how to access the material.  If it’s a seminar, you can participate live (or not) and you’ll also have access to the recorded web session for six months to review at your convenience.  If it’s a course, the online session materials will be released according to the schedule on the curse page (over a period of about a month), but it’s all recorded, so you can go through the materials on your time, when it’s convenient for you. You’ll have access to all the online sessions for 6 months.

Like learning in the middle of the night?  No problem. Want to review the materials a little each day on your lunch hour? That’s perfect.

Here are the seminars that are planned for the next several weeks.  Remember, the dates and times are for the live event, but you don’t have to be available then to take advantage of the seminars:

  • Secrets of Successful Grant Writers – June 29th – 12 noon PST.
  • Writing an Effective Evaluation Section – July 7th – 12 noon PST
  • Logic Models – July 20th – 3:00 p.m. PST
  • Timelines – July 27th – 3:00 p.m. PST

 Here are the courses that are planned for this summer (with links to the course information pages):

With each course, you get the course materials (a recorded Webex session, links, handouts,etc.), access to an exclusive course discussion group, access to the instructor through weekly teleconference for questions, and for some courses you also get individual teleconference consultation time with the instructor.

Check out the Online Learning Center for more information and to register.

————————————


Federal Grant Selection Processes: Random or Fair?

I thoroughly understand that federal grant makers want applicants to be concise in their writing.  I also understand that having page limitations and formatting requirements helps to level the playing field so everyone is bound by similar restrictions.

Over the years I have witnessed formatting requirements and page limitations become more and more restrictive in an effort to prevent an unfair advantage to those who are more skilled at the manipulation of text through MS Word and other word processing programs.

The problem is that these restrictions have now reached the point of being so ridiculous that while the playing field may be level, it has become nearly impossible in some competitions to provide enough information to help the readers make a truly informed choice. Yes, the playing field is level now….we all have the same opportunity to be randomly chosen, almost by chance, because we cant really differentiate ourselves anymore.

Don’t misunderstand.  There is still a clear line of differentiation between good grant narratives and poor ones. But that’s not where the problem lies.  In today’s competitive grant environment, when all of the funded grants in a competition will score at least 96 out of 100 points (anything above 90 – 92 would be considered excellent), a single point can make the difference between success and failure. If there are 100 proposals that can be considered excellent, and only 50 are being funded, it’s critical to give readers enough information to fairly differentiate between those proposals.  Without enough that information, it’s like a lottery. Sure, there is a “process” for selection, but that process yields the same result as if the the funded proposals had been selected by chance from among the high quality applications.

I’m working on a grant now that has a 25 page limit (double-spaced) for the narrative. In that 25 pages, we are asked to “thoroughly address” 7 scoring criteria and 22 sub-criteria. The bottom line is that some will completely fail at the task; however, there will be hundreds of proposals that score well (over 94), but the page limitation is so restrictive that no one will be able to thoroughly address all the criteria.

So it’s a crap shoot. If you get lenient readers who really like your core ideas, you’re in.  If you get very detail oriented readers who focus on the detail rather than the big picture, you’re done.

And all it will take is a single point to make the difference.

If you’re funded, you’ll get the money (which is great!), as well as the praise of your colleagues for your grant writing skills.  If you’re not funded, you’ll spend time trying to figure out what you did wrong, when in reality your proposal might have been better than some that were funded.

This is a way to select applicants to fund, but is it the best way?

If applicants were allowed to just say what they need to say in response to the scoring criteria, readers would actually have enough information to make an informed decision.  There could be suggested page limitations,and savvy writers would know that submitting too much is not in your best interest because you’ll just lose the readers’ attention. That would really force applicants to think carefully about their proposals.

In the current competition I’m working on, there will be millions of dollars worth of professional time invested in the grant preparation process.  Most of that investment will be taxpayer money because public agencies (school districts) are competing for this grant. The sad part is that most of that investment will be wasted because the majority of the grants that are submitted will not be funded.  All of those hours could have been spent helping kids.

If this kind of speculative investment must be made to compete for funding, at least make it a fair process and give the readers enough information to make an informed choice.Otherwise, just save all the time and money that folks spend on proposal preparation and just flip a coin.

————————————-

Get grant writing tips:

Visit GrantGoddess.com

Get the Grant Tips iPhone App

Buy the book, 101 Tips for Aspiring Grant Writers

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com

Federal Grant Selection Processes: Random or Fair?

I thoroughly understand that federal grant makers want applicants to be concise in their writing.  I also understand that having page limitations and formatting requirements helps to level the playing field so everyone is bound by similar restrictions.

Over the years I have witnessed formatting requirements and page limitations become more and more restrictive in an effort to prevent an unfair advantage to those who are more skilled at the manipulation of text through MS Word and other word processing programs.

The problem is that these restrictions have now reached the point of being so ridiculous that while the playing field may be level, it has become nearly impossible in some competitions to provide enough information to help the readers make a truly informed choice. Yes, the playing field is level now….we all have the same opportunity to be randomly chosen, almost by chance, because we cant really differentiate ourselves anymore.

Don’t misunderstand.  There is still a clear line of differentiation between good grant narratives and poor ones. But that’s not where the problem lies.  In today’s competitive grant environment, when all of the funded grants in a competition will score at least 96 out of 100 points (anything above 90 – 92 would be considered excellent), a single point can make the difference between success and failure. If there are 100 proposals that can be considered excellent, and only 50 are being funded, it’s critical to give readers enough information to fairly differentiate between those proposals.  Without enough that information, it’s like a lottery. Sure, there is a “process” for selection, but that process yields the same result as if the the funded proposals had been selected by chance from among the high quality applications.

I’m working on a grant now that has a 25 page limit (double-spaced) for the narrative. In that 25 pages, we are asked to “thoroughly address” 7 scoring criteria and 22 sub-criteria. The bottom line is that some will completely fail at the task; however, there will be hundreds of proposals that score well (over 94), but the page limitation is so restrictive that no one will be able to thoroughly address all the criteria.

So it’s a crap shoot. If you get lenient readers who really like your core ideas, you’re in.  If you get very detail oriented readers who focus on the detail rather than the big picture, you’re done.

And all it will take is a single point to make the difference.

If you’re funded, you’ll get the money (which is great!), as well as the praise of your colleagues for your grant writing skills.  If you’re not funded, you’ll spend time trying to figure out what you did wrong, when in reality your proposal might have been better than some that were funded.

This is a way to select applicants to fund, but is it the best way?

If applicants were allowed to just say what they need to say in response to the scoring criteria, readers would actually have enough information to make an informed decision.  There could be suggested page limitations,and savvy writers would know that submitting too much is not in your best interest because you’ll just lose the readers’ attention. That would really force applicants to think carefully about their proposals.

In the current competition I’m working on, there will be millions of dollars worth of professional time invested in the grant preparation process.  Most of that investment will be taxpayer money because public agencies (school districts) are competing for this grant. The sad part is that most of that investment will be wasted because the majority of the grants that are submitted will not be funded.  All of those hours could have been spent helping kids.

If this kind of speculative investment must be made to compete for funding, at least make it a fair process and give the readers enough information to make an informed choice.Otherwise, just save all the time and money that folks spend on proposal preparation and just flip a coin.

————————————-

Get grant writing tips:

Visit GrantGoddess.com

Get the Grant Tips iPhone App

Buy the book, 101 Tips for Aspiring Grant Writers

Grants Are Like Box Lunches

Have you ever received a box lunch at a conference? You file past tables stacked with boxes and with signs like “Ham and Cheese,” “Turkey,” or “Vegetarian.” You choose a box, a drink from an ice-filled tub, and then grab some plastic utensils and a napkin. It’s like a picnic for thousands of people.

I like box lunches because they’re like opening a present. Plus, I like to eat, and I especially like to eat things prepared for me by someone else. A box lunch usually has a sandwich, a salad like macaroni or potato, a treat like a cookie in a wrapper, maybe some kind of chips or other, and if you’re lucky you even get a pickle. Box lunches are good fun.

Grants are like box lunches because the funder gives you an empty box (RFP instructions) and you get to fill it with tasty goodies and hope someone chooses it off the table and wants to eat it. If you want your grant to be delectable, do the following things:

  1. Be sure to communicate what’s in the box effectively. Be creative and upbeat but use concise language. Don’t say “pig parts and coagulated milk” when you mean “ham and cheese.” That’s unappetizing writing.
  2. Be organized and complete. Give the readers everything they need from napkins to a fork for their potato salad. If it’s too hard to eat it, it won’t get eaten.
  3. Be sure you use the best ingredients, including a quality program with lots of specific details, a budget the reflects your program, and an evaluation that will ensure results are measured. You don’t want to say you’re selling turkey sandwiches and then have no turkey between the bread.

The key is to fill your grant with things that the funder is hungry to see in it. If they’re looking for a ham and cheese, don’t give them a turkey or a vegetarian or they will probably wind up throwing it away uneaten.

In order to build a grant that readers will want to eat, be sure to read the rfp and fill the box with what the hungry lunch crowd wants to eat. Give them a pickle and a cookie, and they’ll eat your grant up.

—————–

This post was written by non-profit consultant and grant writing expert, Derek Link.

Related Posts:

Some Grants Are Like Peanut Butter

Grants Are Like Donuts

Grants Are Like Sausage

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com

Grants Are Like Box Lunches

Have you ever received a box lunch at a conference? You file past tables stacked with boxes and with signs like “Ham and Cheese,” “Turkey,” or “Vegetarian.” You choose a box, a drink from an ice-filled tub, and then grab some plastic utensils and a napkin. It’s like a picnic for thousands of people.

I like box lunches because they’re like opening a present. Plus, I like to eat, and I especially like to eat things prepared for me by someone else. A box lunch usually has a sandwich, a salad like macaroni or potato, a treat like a cookie in a wrapper, maybe some kind of chips or other, and if you’re lucky you even get a pickle. Box lunches are good fun.

Grants are like box lunches because the funder gives you an empty box (RFP instructions) and you get to fill it with tasty goodies and hope someone chooses it off the table and wants to eat it. If you want your grant to be delectable, do the following things:

  1. Be sure to communicate what’s in the box effectively. Be creative and upbeat but use concise language. Don’t say “pig parts and coagulated milk” when you mean “ham and cheese.” That’s unappetizing writing.
  2. Be organized and complete. Give the readers everything they need from napkins to a fork for their potato salad. If it’s too hard to eat it, it won’t get eaten.
  3. Be sure you use the best ingredients, including a quality program with lots of specific details, a budget the reflects your program, and an evaluation that will ensure results are measured. You don’t want to say you’re selling turkey sandwiches and then have no turkey between the bread.

The key is to fill your grant with things that the funder is hungry to see in it. If they’re looking for a ham and cheese, don’t give them a turkey or a vegetarian or they will probably wind up throwing it away uneaten.

In order to build a grant that readers will want to eat, be sure to read the rfp and fill the box with what the hungry lunch crowd wants to eat. Give them a pickle and a cookie, and they’ll eat your grant up.

—————–

This post was written by non-profit consultant and grant writing expert, Derek Link.

Related Posts:

Some Grants Are Like Peanut Butter

Grants Are Like Donuts

Grants Are Like Sausage

Some Grants Are Like Peanut Butter

Here we go again….. Non-profit consultant and expert grant writer, Derek Link, shares yet another food-related grant writing analogy.  What do you do when the words just get stuck in your head?

In all the time I’ve been writing grants, I find that some grants flow easily out of my brain to my computer and others get stuck to the roof of my mouth like a spoonful of peanut butter. I sit at the computer during those times like my old German Short-Haired Pointer “Tucker” eating peanut butter, just gumming and gumming and gumming but not able to free up the narrative.

It’s hard sometimes to figure out why I’m stuck with a grant, but often it’s because I don’t have a clear picture of the program I am writing. Oh, I know what the program is about, but I just can’t explain how it’s going to work. Here are a few things I try to get the narrative “peanut butter” off the roof of my mouth.

  1. Develop a logic model for the project. This forces you to outline your thinking in a sequential (and logical) way.
  2. Do a little reading about the topic area you are writing about. Sometimes that gives me the spark I need.
  3. Talk more to the client about the program design and get them to expound on how they see it working.
  4. Try to write the abstract. If you can’t write a summary of the project, this may explain the parts of it that you’re stuck on.
  5. Revisit your goals and objectives. Sometimes your objectives are just activities and if they are, you’ll get stuck because you won’t have anything new to write about in the program section.

So when you’ve eaten a big gob of peanut butter and its stuck to the roof of your mouth and you’re sitting at the computer trying to get unstuck, try one of these five ideas. Hope it helps!

——————–
 
Related Posts:
 
Facing the Blank Page (Or, Beginning to Write)
 
Try a Change of Perspective
 
Some Thoughts from the Coach on Setting Your Intent
 
A Few Words from the Coach about Focus
 
 
Want more tips?  Visit GrantGoddess.com!

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com

Some Grants Are Like Peanut Butter

Here we go again….. Non-profit consultant and expert grant writer, Derek Link, shares yet another food-related grant writing analogy.  What do you do when the words just get stuck in your head?

In all the time I’ve been writing grants, I find that some grants flow easily out of my brain to my computer and others get stuck to the roof of my mouth like a spoonful of peanut butter. I sit at the computer during those times like my old German Short-Haired Pointer “Tucker” eating peanut butter, just gumming and gumming and gumming but not able to free up the narrative.

It’s hard sometimes to figure out why I’m stuck with a grant, but often it’s because I don’t have a clear picture of the program I am writing. Oh, I know what the program is about, but I just can’t explain how it’s going to work. Here are a few things I try to get the narrative “peanut butter” off the roof of my mouth.

  1. Develop a logic model for the project. This forces you to outline your thinking in a sequential (and logical) way.
  2. Do a little reading about the topic area you are writing about. Sometimes that gives me the spark I need.
  3. Talk more to the client about the program design and get them to expound on how they see it working.
  4. Try to write the abstract. If you can’t write a summary of the project, this may explain the parts of it that you’re stuck on.
  5. Revisit your goals and objectives. Sometimes your objectives are just activities and if they are, you’ll get stuck because you won’t have anything new to write about in the program section.

So when you’ve eaten a big gob of peanut butter and its stuck to the roof of your mouth and you’re sitting at the computer trying to get unstuck, try one of these five ideas. Hope it helps!

——————–
 
Related Posts:
 
Facing the Blank Page (Or, Beginning to Write)
 
Try a Change of Perspective
 
Some Thoughts from the Coach on Setting Your Intent
 
A Few Words from the Coach about Focus
 
 
Want more tips?  Visit GrantGoddess.com!

Grants Are Like Donuts

Non-profit consultant and grant writing expert, Derek Link, loves donuts….maybe a little too much. Here are some useful thoughts on sustainability and balanced funding:

Organizations sometimes consume grants like I eat donuts, fast and furious. Grants come in lots of flavors just like donuts. There’s federal maple bars and state chocolate covered, even foundation cream filled, and each is delicious!

Grants are sweet and taste good when you get them, but like donuts, they’ll always run out and leave you wanting more. Building a budget only on grant money is dangerous to your fiscal health, just like building a diet on donuts can be hazardous. Grants can leave your budget bloated with costs you can’t easily erase when the grant is gone. Just try to get rid of a valuable employee! Just as donuts can leave you with some extra pounds and health problems, grants can lead to budget problems.

Here are 3 things to remember about grants:

  1. Plan for sustainability from day one of each grant.
  2. Build sustainability into the grant as much as possible in terms of equipment costs, training for existing staff, and organizational capacity building.
  3. Pay attention to developing all legs of the fund raising stool while the grant is funded.

So treat grants like you should treat donuts, as part of a healthy balanced budget (diet). A few donuts won’t hurt, but making them the central part of your budget could lead serious shortfalls as grant funding runs out.

————————

Get the tools you need to round out your fund development menu.  Become a member of GrantGoddess.com!

Grants Are Like Donuts

Non-profit consultant and grant writing expert, Derek Link, loves donuts….maybe a little too much. Here are some useful thoughts on sustainability and balanced funding:

Organizations sometimes consume grants like I eat donuts, fast and furious. Grants come in lots of flavors just like donuts. There’s federal maple bars and state chocolate covered, even foundation cream filled, and each is delicious!

Grants are sweet and taste good when you get them, but like donuts, they’ll always run out and leave you wanting more. Building a budget only on grant money is dangerous to your fiscal health, just like building a diet on donuts can be hazardous. Grants can leave your budget bloated with costs you can’t easily erase when the grant is gone. Just try to get rid of a valuable employee! Just as donuts can leave you with some extra pounds and health problems, grants can lead to budget problems.

Here are 3 things to remember about grants:

  1. Plan for sustainability from day one of each grant.
  2. Build sustainability into the grant as much as possible in terms of equipment costs, training for existing staff, and organizational capacity building.
  3. Pay attention to developing all legs of the fund raising stool while the grant is funded.

So treat grants like you should treat donuts, as part of a healthy balanced budget (diet). A few donuts won’t hurt, but making them the central part of your budget could lead serious shortfalls as grant funding runs out.

————————

Get the tools you need to round out your fund development menu.  Become a member of GrantGoddess.com!

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com