Grant Writing Deadline Purgatory

I’m floating in grant writing deadline purgatory right now.  Actually, I’m not totally in grant writing purgatory. I am skating on the edges of it, but I’m close enough to see it, inhale the stale smell of it, and feel its panic.

When you are fully engulfed in grant writing deadline purgatory, you have done most of what you can do to complete a grant proposal, but you are stopped from fully completing it due to some situation beyond your control.  Unfortunately, the situation gremlins that can keep you in purgatory are numerous.  You may be waiting for a client or some stakeholder to get you some last minute feedback on the narrative.  You might be waiting for some final letters of support or signatures on a Memorandum of Understanding. You may be waiting for someone to clarify some budget issues for you. Sometimes, you’re all ready to submit, but the online electronic portal for submittal is down and you are waiting for it to go live again.

When you’re in grant writing deadline purgatory, you hover.  You try to find something to do with yourself.  You watch the clock. You wonder why you ever got into this line of work. You speculate on what life would be like if you were a mail carrier or flight attendant, or you fantasize about what all the people on the outside (outside your office incarceration) are doing.  You wait.

Today, as I said, I am skating on the edges of grant writing deadline purgatory.  I have three grants due Monday that are in various stages of completion. Two are in some level of deadline purgatory, and I’m waiting for others.  The third won’t be in purgatory until tomorrow, so there’s still plenty I can do today.

——————————

Click here to get your free copy of our e-book 12 Secrets of Successful Grant Writers.

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

Grant Writing Deadline Purgatory

I’m floating in grant writing deadline purgatory right now.  Actually, I’m not totally in grant writing purgatory. I am skating on the edges of it, but I’m close enough to see it, inhale the stale smell of it, and feel its panic.

When you are fully engulfed in grant writing deadline purgatory, you have done most of what you can do to complete a grant proposal, but you are stopped from fully completing it due to some situation beyond your control.  Unfortunately, the situation gremlins that can keep you in purgatory are numerous.  You may be waiting for a client or some stakeholder to get you some last minute feedback on the narrative.  You might be waiting for some final letters of support or signatures on a Memorandum of Understanding. You may be waiting for someone to clarify some budget issues for you. Sometimes, you’re all ready to submit, but the online electronic portal for submittal is down and you are waiting for it to go live again.

When you’re in grant writing deadline purgatory, you hover.  You try to find something to do with yourself.  You watch the clock. You wonder why you ever got into this line of work. You speculate on what life would be like if you were a mail carrier or flight attendant, or you fantasize about what all the people on the outside (outside your office incarceration) are doing.  You wait.

Today, as I said, I am skating on the edges of grant writing deadline purgatory.  I have three grants due Monday that are in various stages of completion. Two are in some level of deadline purgatory, and I’m waiting for others.  The third won’t be in purgatory until tomorrow, so there’s still plenty I can do today.

——————————

Click here to get your free copy of our e-book 12 Secrets of Successful Grant Writers.

Grant Writing is like a Bicycle Built for Two

So this morning I am walking to the coffee shop to drink coffee and use free wifi when a guy pedals past me on a bicycle built for two .…alone.
My first thought was that his girlfriend may be lying somewhere scratched and angry up the road but when I didn’t find her I began to feel sorry for the guy.
I wondered to myself if this wasn’t some sort of e-harmony  experiment gone awry.  Their online disclosures may have missed his fantasy for whisking her away on his bicycle; perhaps she had balked and rebuked his penchant for pedantic pedaling.
In any case, my mind soon turned to grant writing, as it frequently does, and I thought about clients I’ve had who after learning about the bicycle built for two that we needed to pedal together in order to get the work of the grant done, had similarly balked at sharing the load.
Completing a grant application successfully is a partnership between the writer and the client not unlike riding a bicycle built for two.  The client should steer the process to make sure that the grant goes where they want it to go.  They also need to pedal along with the writer –  there’s work for both to do.
So long as both parties pedal hard and long, the bike will take them to the desired destination: grant submission and with a little good fortune, full funding!
So writers and clients need to jump on that bicycle together, pedal hard, and steer well.  Don’t leave your grant writer sweating and pedaling along solo or the grant may not reach its destination successfully.  The writer, like the solitary guy on his bike this morning, may get tired, and let’s face it, the journey is more enjoyable with someone to chat with along the way.
By Derek Link, Non-Profit Consultant and Expert Grant Writer
———————————-
Download our free Top Ten Grant Writing Tips webinar!

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

Grant Writing is like a Bicycle Built for Two

So this morning I am walking to the coffee shop to drink coffee and use free wifi when a guy pedals past me on a bicycle built for two .…alone.
My first thought was that his girlfriend may be lying somewhere scratched and angry up the road but when I didn’t find her I began to feel sorry for the guy.
I wondered to myself if this wasn’t some sort of e-harmony  experiment gone awry.  Their online disclosures may have missed his fantasy for whisking her away on his bicycle; perhaps she had balked and rebuked his penchant for pedantic pedaling.
In any case, my mind soon turned to grant writing, as it frequently does, and I thought about clients I’ve had who after learning about the bicycle built for two that we needed to pedal together in order to get the work of the grant done, had similarly balked at sharing the load.
Completing a grant application successfully is a partnership between the writer and the client not unlike riding a bicycle built for two.  The client should steer the process to make sure that the grant goes where they want it to go.  They also need to pedal along with the writer –  there’s work for both to do.
So long as both parties pedal hard and long, the bike will take them to the desired destination: grant submission and with a little good fortune, full funding!
So writers and clients need to jump on that bicycle together, pedal hard, and steer well.  Don’t leave your grant writer sweating and pedaling along solo or the grant may not reach its destination successfully.  The writer, like the solitary guy on his bike this morning, may get tired, and let’s face it, the journey is more enjoyable with someone to chat with along the way.
By Derek Link, Non-Profit Consultant and Expert Grant Writer
———————————-
Download our free Top Ten Grant Writing Tips webinar!

Grant Writing – Don’t Chase the Money

You have seen this here before – Chase your dream (your vision, your mission), not the money.  I know it sounds counter-intuitive to you, especially if you are a non-profit executive or school administrator who is just trying to keep your programs alive, but it’s important.  Not only is a focus on the money rather than your mission the surest way to get pulled off-track with your work, but most savvy funders can see right through the ruse. You end up doing more work for less return.

It just makes more sense to stay focused on your mission than  to keep trying to fit the square peg of the funding source in front of you into the round hole that is your organization’s mission-driven need.

No matter how hard I try to educate my clients, I saw it again last week,  As I met with a client to discuss the details about a grant the said they wanted to pursue, it became obvious that this grant opportunity is not aligned with the organization’s current priorities.  Yes, they could go for it.  They might even get it, but then they’d have to implement a program that is not aligned with where they say they want to go…..and all this for a couple of million dollars that they wouldn’t be allowed to spend on what they really need anyway..

Let’s say you need $100 to get to New York next month for a family reunion and someone offered to give you $200, but only if you would go to Santa Cruz next month. Would you take it?  Only if you really wanted to go to Santa Cruz instead of New York anyway. If not, you’d probably be focused enough to know that spending next month in Santa Cruz would take you off track from your plan to get to New York for the family reunion and you wouldn’t take that deal.  You’d keep looking for someone who could help you get to New York.

You should keep the same level of focus with your grant research. Keep your mission and vision front and center, and look for the funding sources to help you get there.

—————————–

Would you like a free 30-day trial membership at GrantGoddess.com? Send an email requesting a free 30-day trial with your first and last names and email address.

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

Grant Writing – Don’t Chase the Money

You have seen this here before – Chase your dream (your vision, your mission), not the money.  I know it sounds counter-intuitive to you, especially if you are a non-profit executive or school administrator who is just trying to keep your programs alive, but it’s important.  Not only is a focus on the money rather than your mission the surest way to get pulled off-track with your work, but most savvy funders can see right through the ruse. You end up doing more work for less return.

It just makes more sense to stay focused on your mission than  to keep trying to fit the square peg of the funding source in front of you into the round hole that is your organization’s mission-driven need.

No matter how hard I try to educate my clients, I saw it again last week,  As I met with a client to discuss the details about a grant the said they wanted to pursue, it became obvious that this grant opportunity is not aligned with the organization’s current priorities.  Yes, they could go for it.  They might even get it, but then they’d have to implement a program that is not aligned with where they say they want to go…..and all this for a couple of million dollars that they wouldn’t be allowed to spend on what they really need anyway..

Let’s say you need $100 to get to New York next month for a family reunion and someone offered to give you $200, but only if you would go to Santa Cruz next month. Would you take it?  Only if you really wanted to go to Santa Cruz instead of New York anyway. If not, you’d probably be focused enough to know that spending next month in Santa Cruz would take you off track from your plan to get to New York for the family reunion and you wouldn’t take that deal.  You’d keep looking for someone who could help you get to New York.

You should keep the same level of focus with your grant research. Keep your mission and vision front and center, and look for the funding sources to help you get there.

—————————–

Would you like a free 30-day trial membership at GrantGoddess.com? Send an email requesting a free 30-day trial with your first and last names and email address.


Grant Writing with Authority (Cite Your Sources)

Have you ever been reading a narrative in which someone states something as fact and you wonder to yourself, “How do they know that?”

That is not a question that a grant writer wants the grant readers to be asking. It’s important to cite sources of data and research and do it using the proper format. Yes, readers care about the sources, and they care that the grant writer takes the time to properly record the source material for facts and resources that are presented.

There are different ways to cite different materials and sources so it’s valuable to have a resource for finding the proper format. I did a quick Google search in researching this post and I came up with a very nice table giving formats for everything from books to online sources. The article by Steve Volk of Oberlin College  provides a nice compilation of citation styles and there is even a link in the article to another online source.

Here are some good reasons why citing sources adds authority to grant writing:

  1. It helps the reader connect to the grant narrative, especially if they hold the source/research author in high esteem (so be sure to use the best sources).
  2. It helps the grant reader see that the program plan is based on research and not a pipe dream.
  3. It helps the reader understand that the design is based on the most current research.

An effective grant is one that presents a believable plan to the reader even though the grant is for a new program that does not exist yet. This often means that the program is one that someone has implemented before and that is modified for a new location and unique circumstances. Telling the reader that the program is based on successful models that have been validated by research adds strength to the program design and builds confidence in its feasibility. Citing relevant sources and research is part of the glue that holds the program together in the minds of the readers and will raise the scores and the likelihood of an award.

By:  Derek Link, Non-profit Consultant and Expert Grant Writer
 
————————————
 
Need to see a successful grant sample to get a good idea of how to best present your proposal?  Check out GrantSample.com.

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

Grant Writing with Authority (Cite Your Sources)

Have you ever been reading a narrative in which someone states something as fact and you wonder to yourself, “How do they know that?”

That is not a question that a grant writer wants the grant readers to be asking. It’s important to cite sources of data and research and do it using the proper format. Yes, readers care about the sources, and they care that the grant writer takes the time to properly record the source material for facts and resources that are presented.

There are different ways to cite different materials and sources so it’s valuable to have a resource for finding the proper format. I did a quick Google search in researching this post and I came up with a very nice table giving formats for everything from books to online sources. The article by Steve Volk of Oberlin College  provides a nice compilation of citation styles and there is even a link in the article to another online source.

Here are some good reasons why citing sources adds authority to grant writing:

  1. It helps the reader connect to the grant narrative, especially if they hold the source/research author in high esteem (so be sure to use the best sources).
  2. It helps the grant reader see that the program plan is based on research and not a pipe dream.
  3. It helps the reader understand that the design is based on the most current research.

An effective grant is one that presents a believable plan to the reader even though the grant is for a new program that does not exist yet. This often means that the program is one that someone has implemented before and that is modified for a new location and unique circumstances. Telling the reader that the program is based on successful models that have been validated by research adds strength to the program design and builds confidence in its feasibility. Citing relevant sources and research is part of the glue that holds the program together in the minds of the readers and will raise the scores and the likelihood of an award.

By:  Derek Link, Non-profit Consultant and Expert Grant Writer
 
————————————
 
Need to see a successful grant sample to get a good idea of how to best present your proposal?  Check out GrantSample.com.

Low Performing Schools – SIG School Series, Part I

Something important is happening in education and you’re paying a lot of for it. A brand new school reform program is about to commence and $416 million of your tax money is footing the bill in California alone.

This new Educational Reform Effort is entitled the School Improvement Grants (SIG) program authorized under Section 1003(g)  of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the money is allocated from the United States Department of Education to state departments of education throughout the country. Because most of our work is in California, we’ll be talking about how it plays out in California. The California Department of Education (CDE) administers the grant competition in California and makes a final allocation of the funding.

On June 24, 2010, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell  announced in a news release  that the Federal Government had approved California’s application for SIG funding to reform 188 of the persistently lowest achieving schools in the state. These schools are to be reformed using one of four models:

  • Turnaround Model: The LEA undertakes a series of major school improvement actions, including replacing the principal and rehiring no more than 50 percent of the school’s staff; adopting a new governance structure; and implementing an instructional program that is research-based and vertically aligned from one grade to the next, as well as aligned with California’s adopted content standards.
  • Restart Model: The LEA converts a school or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator; a charter management organization; or an education management organization that has been selected through a locally determined, rigorous review process, using state educational agency provided guidance. A restart model school must enroll, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend the school.
  • School Closure Model: The LEA closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving. These other schools should be within reasonable proximity to the closed school and may include charter schools or new schools for which achievement data are not yet available.
  • Transformation Model: The LEA implements a series of required school improvement strategies, including replacing the principal who led the school prior to implementation of the transformation model, and increasing instructional time.

(Source – California Department of Education: News Release, “State Schools Chief Jack O’Connell Announces California Wins Federal Funding to Turn Around Persistently Lowest-Achieving Schools”, 6/24/10)

In the interest of full disclosure, we at Creative Resources and Research worked with one school district to develop its grant application and we helped another school district by reviewing its application for them to fine-tune it.

Over the years, after working with hundreds of schools attempting to complete school improvement and reform processes, we have been fascinated (and often frustrated) at the frightening level of dysfunction within low performing schools and districts. Working closely with a couple of districts applying for SIG funds, we started wondering about the other eligible schools.

Where are these schools? Do all of the schools share common characteristics? These questions led to more interesting questions such as, are there factors revealed in non-academic data that might have important implications for school reform? How do these lowest performing schools compare with schools at the other end of the performance spectrum? How different are the lowest performing schools from those 450 or so “Distinguished”  schools? What are the similarities and differences between these two groups and what might those differences tell us is important in terms of reforming California schools? What needs to change at the lowest performing schools to turn the Persistently Lowest Performing Schools into “Distinguished” schools?

This series of posts about SIG will seek answers to some of these questions or at least to pose new questions that require further research and examination. Our next post in the series will be “Who Are the Lowest Performing Schools?”

———————————-

Improve your grant writing skills.  Become a member of GrantGoddess.com!

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

Low Performing Schools – SIG School Series, Part I

Something important is happening in education and you’re paying a lot of for it. A brand new school reform program is about to commence and $416 million of your tax money is footing the bill in California alone.

This new Educational Reform Effort is entitled the School Improvement Grants (SIG) program authorized under Section 1003(g)  of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the money is allocated from the United States Department of Education to state departments of education throughout the country. Because most of our work is in California, we’ll be talking about how it plays out in California. The California Department of Education (CDE) administers the grant competition in California and makes a final allocation of the funding.

On June 24, 2010, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell  announced in a news release  that the Federal Government had approved California’s application for SIG funding to reform 188 of the persistently lowest achieving schools in the state. These schools are to be reformed using one of four models:

  • Turnaround Model: The LEA undertakes a series of major school improvement actions, including replacing the principal and rehiring no more than 50 percent of the school’s staff; adopting a new governance structure; and implementing an instructional program that is research-based and vertically aligned from one grade to the next, as well as aligned with California’s adopted content standards.
  • Restart Model: The LEA converts a school or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator; a charter management organization; or an education management organization that has been selected through a locally determined, rigorous review process, using state educational agency provided guidance. A restart model school must enroll, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend the school.
  • School Closure Model: The LEA closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving. These other schools should be within reasonable proximity to the closed school and may include charter schools or new schools for which achievement data are not yet available.
  • Transformation Model: The LEA implements a series of required school improvement strategies, including replacing the principal who led the school prior to implementation of the transformation model, and increasing instructional time.

(Source – California Department of Education: News Release, “State Schools Chief Jack O’Connell Announces California Wins Federal Funding to Turn Around Persistently Lowest-Achieving Schools”, 6/24/10)

In the interest of full disclosure, we at Creative Resources and Research worked with one school district to develop its grant application and we helped another school district by reviewing its application for them to fine-tune it.

Over the years, after working with hundreds of schools attempting to complete school improvement and reform processes, we have been fascinated (and often frustrated) at the frightening level of dysfunction within low performing schools and districts. Working closely with a couple of districts applying for SIG funds, we started wondering about the other eligible schools.

Where are these schools? Do all of the schools share common characteristics? These questions led to more interesting questions such as, are there factors revealed in non-academic data that might have important implications for school reform? How do these lowest performing schools compare with schools at the other end of the performance spectrum? How different are the lowest performing schools from those 450 or so “Distinguished”  schools? What are the similarities and differences between these two groups and what might those differences tell us is important in terms of reforming California schools? What needs to change at the lowest performing schools to turn the Persistently Lowest Performing Schools into “Distinguished” schools?

This series of posts about SIG will seek answers to some of these questions or at least to pose new questions that require further research and examination. Our next post in the series will be “Who Are the Lowest Performing Schools?”

———————————-

Improve your grant writing skills.  Become a member of GrantGoddess.com!