How is Your Organization’s Governance Equilibrium?

This is the second in a three-part series on Organizational Equilibrium, written by Non-Profit Consultant, Derek Link. Part 1 (How is Your Organization’s Fiscal Equilibrium?) was posted on February 16, 2010.

Governance as defined on http://dictionary.com is, “a method or system of government or management.” Non-profit organizations are governed by a Board of Directors who by design set policy, monitor accountability, assist with fund raising, and give direction to the Executive Director. Good governance is a team effort but bad things can happen when the governance of an organization is out of balance; that is, if there are imbalances in power, control, or understanding.

I worked in an organization once which had a publicly elected Board. This creates an interesting conundrum for the executive of the organization because they must be astute politically in order to survive changes in the Board. One particular Board member who was elected was an extremely difficult person to work with. She was smart and gifted verbally so she was able to deter all of the other Board members from standing up to her. She was also mean and enjoyed being in a position of power. She would go on the attack in Board meetings and even on an individual basis with executives of the organization. She eventually lost her seat but not before she had wreaked havoc on the leadership of the organization to the extent that several senior executives left the organization rather than suffer her unpredictable decision-making and verbal abuse.

My point in this is to say that non-profit Boards get to select their members according to the dictates of their bylaws. This puts non-profit organizations in a unique position to select Board members that can bring necessary skills, talents, and connections to the organization. This feature of non-profit organizations is a strength and can lead to excellent governance that is balanced, agile, and intelligent.

The opposite can also be true. If a Board becomes a closed society unto itself and refuses to include members outside a circle of friends, colleagues, or even a circle of thought, governance can stagnate and the same mistakes may be made over and again. Opportunities for change, growth, or reform may be lost.

Another issue with governance can be a Board that depends too much on its Executive Director and cedes responsibility for its role – a Board that becomes the proverbial “rubber stamp”.

I’ve seen “rubber stamps” in publicly elected Boards and with non-profit Boards. Non-profit organizations are frequently established by one or two people who plan to run the operation and then recruit a Board mostly because they must have one, not because they seek to build strong governance. So the founders may seek people who aren’t going to rock the boat.

Governance that relies on a strong leader can function well over time if the Executive Director is a skilled, moral and values-driven individual and, if they don’t leave. Of course as time passes everyone will move on for one reason or another so if governance of an organization has depended on one person, it can leave the organization in disarray.

I’ve found over the years in organizations reliant on one person for governance that there tends to be a pervasive fear in the organization about the person’s health, age, ability to take better offers, and so on.

Keeping the long view in mind is important so try not to depend too much on one individual for governance leadership. Stable governance of an organization is produced by equilibrium of a strong Board and strong leadership.Non-profit organizations are in the enviable position to recruit Board members that create this equilibrium.

—————-

Part 3 in this series (How is Your Organization’s Operational Equilibrium?) will be posted on February 20, 2010.

Grant Writing Secret – The Power of Language Mimicry

The persuasive power of mimicry has been well established in the fields of sales and marketing, yet professionals in education and the social services rarely use the strategy to get an advantage.  It can be a very powerful tool for success in grant writing.

Language mimicry in grant writing is all about using the same language of the scoring criteria in your responses to the criteria. I’m not talking about merely restating the criteria, but using the exact language of the criteria somewhere in your response.

Here’s a very basic example: If the scoring criterion is, “The degree to which the applicant identifies and addresses gaps in services,” you would not discuss “services that are missing.” You would specifically use the language “gaps in services.”  You would also claim  that your project “addresses these gaps in services to a very high degree,” or that it represents a “superior approach to addressing gaps in services.” Of course, the detail is important, but using the language of the criteria signals to readers that you are focusing on those criteria.

Unfortunately, what many people do instead of mimicking the language is to simply restate the criteria. “Our project has identified gaps in services and addresses them,” is an example of simply restating the criterion.

There are several reasons why this strategy gives you a leg up:

  1. Grant readers become fatigued after reading several grants. Fatigue begins to set in with the third grant read in a sitting.  As they become fatigued, they start to look for key words.  What are those key words?  The key words in the scoring criteria. the later in the day your proposal is read, the more important those key words become.
  2. Not all grant readers are experts in the disciplines of the competition. This is most commonly seen in the area of evaluation.  The criteria may include a requirement that your evaluation use both qualitative and quantitative data, and you may have given examples of both qualitative and quantitative data.  However, most grant readers are not evaluators and I have seen examples of readers not being able to identify listed data sources as qualitative and quantitative.  You need to write “The qualitative data we will collect for evaluation purposes are…..” and “The quantitative data we will collect….”
  3. In federal competitions, readers from other states may not understand programs in your state. For example, the criteria may say that the projects must include services for youth in schools going through a program improvement process.  Your state may have a particular name for that process that does not include the words “program improvement.”  You cannot assume the readers will just know.
  4. The psychological research in the area of mimicry tells us it works. When you mimic the language of the scoring criteria, the readers view you as more professional and more responsive to the RFP, in the same way that physically mimicking the person you are talking to in a meeting gives the impression that you are more interested and focused on that person’s needs.

Language mimicry is not the only thing you need to pay attention to in the grant writing process.  It is not even the most important thing to remember. However, it is one of those secrets that separates a good grant writer with a moderate level of success from the great ones with phenomenal success.  Which one do you want to be?

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

Grant Writing Secret – The Power of Language Mimicry

The persuasive power of mimicry has been well established in the fields of sales and marketing, yet professionals in education and the social services rarely use the strategy to get an advantage.  It can be a very powerful tool for success in grant writing.

Language mimicry in grant writing is all about using the same language of the scoring criteria in your responses to the criteria. I’m not talking about merely restating the criteria, but using the exact language of the criteria somewhere in your response.

Here’s a very basic example: If the scoring criterion is, “The degree to which the applicant identifies and addresses gaps in services,” you would not discuss “services that are missing.” You would specifically use the language “gaps in services.”  You would also claim  that your project “addresses these gaps in services to a very high degree,” or that it represents a “superior approach to addressing gaps in services.” Of course, the detail is important, but using the language of the criteria signals to readers that you are focusing on those criteria.

Unfortunately, what many people do instead of mimicking the language is to simply restate the criteria. “Our project has identified gaps in services and addresses them,” is an example of simply restating the criterion.

There are several reasons why this strategy gives you a leg up:

  1. Grant readers become fatigued after reading several grants. Fatigue begins to set in with the third grant read in a sitting.  As they become fatigued, they start to look for key words.  What are those key words?  The key words in the scoring criteria. the later in the day your proposal is read, the more important those key words become.
  2. Not all grant readers are experts in the disciplines of the competition. This is most commonly seen in the area of evaluation.  The criteria may include a requirement that your evaluation use both qualitative and quantitative data, and you may have given examples of both qualitative and quantitative data.  However, most grant readers are not evaluators and I have seen examples of readers not being able to identify listed data sources as qualitative and quantitative.  You need to write “The qualitative data we will collect for evaluation purposes are…..” and “The quantitative data we will collect….”
  3. In federal competitions, readers from other states may not understand programs in your state. For example, the criteria may say that the projects must include services for youth in schools going through a program improvement process.  Your state may have a particular name for that process that does not include the words “program improvement.”  You cannot assume the readers will just know.
  4. The psychological research in the area of mimicry tells us it works. When you mimic the language of the scoring criteria, the readers view you as more professional and more responsive to the RFP, in the same way that physically mimicking the person you are talking to in a meeting gives the impression that you are more interested and focused on that person’s needs.

Language mimicry is not the only thing you need to pay attention to in the grant writing process.  It is not even the most important thing to remember. However, it is one of those secrets that separates a good grant writer with a moderate level of success from the great ones with phenomenal success.  Which one do you want to be?

How is Your Organization’s Fiscal Equilibrium?

This is the first post in a series of three on Organizational Equilibrium, written by Non-Profit Consultant Derek Link.

In the present economy, many non-profit organizations would probably say their fiscal equilibrium is a bit off center. Some might even say they’re wobbling like a top spinning slowly down and dangerously out of balance.

If ever there was a time for your fiscal feedback loops to be utilized and re-evaluated, this is probably it. If your fiscal stool had only one leg, you’re probably already on the floor or headed that direction. Sources of funding have dried up rapidly as discretionary income of individuals and organizations has slowed to a trickle.

A wise fiscal plan for a non-profit does not count on one source of income. It’s wise to cultivate multiple sources including grants, donors, planned giving, annual campaigns, special events, merchandising, etc. Weaving together a sustainable intelligent fund raising design creates equilibrium, and paying attention to feedback loops – like timely statistics on income from all sources – can give you valuable information to ensure that efforts to raise money are targeted toward all possible sources.

Diversification of fund raising is crucial at times when donors are struggling (as they are now), and government is giving away lots of grants (as they are now). It’s wise to have strategies for both donor appeals and grant writing. Paying attention to feedback and planning ahead can give your organization something to grab onto when traditional fund raising methods are slow or closed completely.

Another key to financial stability is to have an audit conducted each year by an accountant who knows the non-profit world and can offer sound advice and feedback. This feedback loop not only provides an external review of your fiscal practices, it also adds an important level of accountability.

So in order to stabilize your fiscal equilibrium pay attention to feedback you’re getting right now. There may be changes and adaptations your organization needs to make in order to maximize your organization’s income during this turbulent economic time. By paying attention to your fiscal feedback loops, your organization can survive and thrive while less agile organizations fold up their tent and move along.

——–

Parts 2 (How is Your Organization’s Governance Equilibrium?) and 3 (How is Your Organization’s Operational Equilibrium?) of this series will be posted on February 18th and 20th.

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

How is Your Organization’s Fiscal Equilibrium?

This is the first post in a series of three on Organizational Equilibrium, written by Non-Profit Consultant Derek Link.

In the present economy, many non-profit organizations would probably say their fiscal equilibrium is a bit off center. Some might even say they’re wobbling like a top spinning slowly down and dangerously out of balance.

If ever there was a time for your fiscal feedback loops to be utilized and re-evaluated, this is probably it. If your fiscal stool had only one leg, you’re probably already on the floor or headed that direction. Sources of funding have dried up rapidly as discretionary income of individuals and organizations has slowed to a trickle.

A wise fiscal plan for a non-profit does not count on one source of income. It’s wise to cultivate multiple sources including grants, donors, planned giving, annual campaigns, special events, merchandising, etc. Weaving together a sustainable intelligent fund raising design creates equilibrium, and paying attention to feedback loops – like timely statistics on income from all sources – can give you valuable information to ensure that efforts to raise money are targeted toward all possible sources.

Diversification of fund raising is crucial at times when donors are struggling (as they are now), and government is giving away lots of grants (as they are now). It’s wise to have strategies for both donor appeals and grant writing. Paying attention to feedback and planning ahead can give your organization something to grab onto when traditional fund raising methods are slow or closed completely.

Another key to financial stability is to have an audit conducted each year by an accountant who knows the non-profit world and can offer sound advice and feedback. This feedback loop not only provides an external review of your fiscal practices, it also adds an important level of accountability.

So in order to stabilize your fiscal equilibrium pay attention to feedback you’re getting right now. There may be changes and adaptations your organization needs to make in order to maximize your organization’s income during this turbulent economic time. By paying attention to your fiscal feedback loops, your organization can survive and thrive while less agile organizations fold up their tent and move along.

——–

Parts 2 (How is Your Organization’s Governance Equilibrium?) and 3 (How is Your Organization’s Operational Equilibrium?) of this series will be posted on February 18th and 20th.

Grant Writing Tools and News You Can Use

There are some tools on the website and news coming this week that I wanted to be sure to share with you.

Help with Writing Letters of Support for Grants – As you put together grant proposals over the next few months, don’t shortchange your proposal by including poor letters of support. Recently, we posted a blog post on Writing Good Letters of Support for Grants that you should check out.  Because I couldn’t get all of the information in a short, easy to scan post, I also recorded a webinar on the topic. The recording is free and will be available for viewing on demand (within the next day or so) on our Webinar Resource page. While you’re there, check out the other grant writing webinars.

FY 2011 Proposed Federal Budget Update – On Friday, February 19, 2010, our Tips from the Grant Goddess show on BlogTalkRadio will focus on some highlights of the President’s proposed FY 2011 budget.  We will speak specifically about what the budget proposes for education and social services. You can listen to the show live online on Friday, or listen to the recording later on demand.  We have many other recoded radio shows available at that link, too, on a variety of grant-related topics.  They are all free for you, so take some time to browse the topics. One last thing about the FY 2011 Proposed Budget Highlights – We’ll be posting additional highlights, beyond those we discuss on the radio show, on our  GrantGoddess.com member site. If you are not a member, check out what you can get if you gain access to the largest collection of grant seeking, grant writing, non-profit development, and program evaluation resources on the web!

New Mini-Grants Posted on Mini-Grant Central – Some folks are interested in large state, federal, and foundation grants, but many others are perfectly happy writing for mini-grants (small grants ranging from $500 – $10,000). Mini-grants are everywhere, but they can be hard to find if you don’t know where to look.  That’s why we added Mini-Grant Central to the forum on the GrantGoddess.com member site. I just added 10 more mini-grant sources this morning.  We added 12 last week.  The list will keep growing and growing. If you’re interesting in mini-grants, membership is for you.

New Grant Tips iPhone App – Just three weeks ago, we released an iPhone (and iPod Touch) application.  Grant Tips includes over 100 grant writing tips organized into categories designed to provide support through all stages of proposal development. We have heard some great feedback on this tool, so take a look here for more information.

We are constantly adding new resources to the Grant Goddess website.  Take a few minutes and see what gold you can find there!

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

Grant Writing Tools and News You Can Use

There are some tools on the website and news coming this week that I wanted to be sure to share with you.

Help with Writing Letters of Support for Grants – As you put together grant proposals over the next few months, don’t shortchange your proposal by including poor letters of support. Recently, we posted a blog post on Writing Good Letters of Support for Grants that you should check out.  Because I couldn’t get all of the information in a short, easy to scan post, I also recorded a webinar on the topic. The recording is free and will be available for viewing on demand (within the next day or so) on our Webinar Resource page. While you’re there, check out the other grant writing webinars.

FY 2011 Proposed Federal Budget Update – On Friday, February 19, 2010, our Tips from the Grant Goddess show on BlogTalkRadio will focus on some highlights of the President’s proposed FY 2011 budget.  We will speak specifically about what the budget proposes for education and social services. You can listen to the show live online on Friday, or listen to the recording later on demand.  We have many other recoded radio shows available at that link, too, on a variety of grant-related topics.  They are all free for you, so take some time to browse the topics. One last thing about the FY 2011 Proposed Budget Highlights – We’ll be posting additional highlights, beyond those we discuss on the radio show, on our  GrantGoddess.com member site. If you are not a member, check out what you can get if you gain access to the largest collection of grant seeking, grant writing, non-profit development, and program evaluation resources on the web!

New Mini-Grants Posted on Mini-Grant Central – Some folks are interested in large state, federal, and foundation grants, but many others are perfectly happy writing for mini-grants (small grants ranging from $500 – $10,000). Mini-grants are everywhere, but they can be hard to find if you don’t know where to look.  That’s why we added Mini-Grant Central to the forum on the GrantGoddess.com member site. I just added 10 more mini-grant sources this morning.  We added 12 last week.  The list will keep growing and growing. If you’re interesting in mini-grants, membership is for you.

New Grant Tips iPhone App – Just three weeks ago, we released an iPhone (and iPod Touch) application.  Grant Tips includes over 100 grant writing tips organized into categories designed to provide support through all stages of proposal development. We have heard some great feedback on this tool, so take a look here for more information.

We are constantly adding new resources to the Grant Goddess website.  Take a few minutes and see what gold you can find there!

Writing Good Letters of Support for Grants

One of the most difficult parts of the grant writing process is getting good letters of support from project partners. Collecting lots of letters is not the point.  In fact, having a big handful of poorly written letters will actually hurt your chances of funding, rather than help.

The whole point of submitting letters of support with a proposal is to document your collaboration and the contributions to be made by various partners. If your letters do not accomplish that point, they are more of a hindrance than a help.

Here are some tips to help you write and gather great letters of support:

  • Don’t use a form letter.  Yes, everyone is really busy, but using a form letter for all of your letters of support (just substituting the letterhead and the name of the organization) actually demonstrates a lack of collaboration, which is opposite to the effect you want. If you want to provide samples for your partners, fine, but be aware that some folks will just copy those samples unless you work with them very closely.  If your partners are unable to put together the kind of letters you need, it would be a better idea to write each individual letter for them and submit them to your partners for their approval and signature.  They can then make any changes they need before putting the letter on letterhead and signing.  They will be grateful for the help, and you’ll get better letters.
  • Include the identity of the partner, the nature of the relationship, and the nature of the contribution. That’s three core paragraphs.  The identity of the partner paragraph should include basic information about the agency authoring the letter.  The nature of the relationship paragraph should discuss the history of the relationship and how the parties are working together on the project in question. The history of the relationship would go here, too. The nature of the contribution paragraph should focus on what contributions the partner agency will make to the project during the life of the grant, or at least over the next year.  It should clearly delineate if the contribution is an in-kind donation of services or if the agency will be compensated for the contribution through the grant.
  • Quantify contributions whenever possible. Contributions can be quantified, but folks often hesitate to do so because they are afraid they will be asked to produce that donation in cash at some point.  That is not the case.  If you’re that worried about it, say in the letter that the contribution is in the form of services, not cash. An estimate of the actual dollar value of the contribution is enough.  This is a letter of support, not a tax receipt.
  • Put the letter on agency letterhead. This makes it look much more official than a letter on plain white paper. Remember, in the computer age, letterhead can be easily created for free.
  • Include the signature of the organization decision maker. The signature of the superintendent or executive director is generally more valuable than the signature of a coordinator or project manager; however, if a letter from a lower level employee in the organization would be more inclusive of details about how the agencies work together, go for it! Remember, the content matters.
  • Make sure the letters match what you said in the narrative.  This is why grant planning and writing can be so challenging.  Your partner letters need to reinforce and support what you said in the main grant narrative.  That means your partners really need to play some role in the planning and know something about the proposal.  They don’t necessarily need to see the full proposal before you can expect a letter, but they should at least know something about it. The more they know, the stronger the letters will be.

Taking the time to gather really good letters can make a big difference in your chances of funding.  Sometimes, the letters will make the difference.  Don’t make the mistake of underestimating their value.

On Friday, February 26, 2010, we’ll be hosting a Tips from the Grant Goddess BlogTalkRadio episode on this very topic. You can listen to the show live (and call in to ask questions, if you’d like) or you can listen to the recording of the show on-demand any time after the live broadcast at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Veronica-Robbins . Of course, it’s free!

In addition, sometime within the next few days, we’ll be posting a FREE webinar on the topic (Writing Great Letters of Support for Grants).  You can access it through the webinar page on our website.

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

Writing Good Letters of Support for Grants

One of the most difficult parts of the grant writing process is getting good letters of support from project partners. Collecting lots of letters is not the point.  In fact, having a big handful of poorly written letters will actually hurt your chances of funding, rather than help.

The whole point of submitting letters of support with a proposal is to document your collaboration and the contributions to be made by various partners. If your letters do not accomplish that point, they are more of a hindrance than a help.

Here are some tips to help you write and gather great letters of support:

  • Don’t use a form letter.  Yes, everyone is really busy, but using a form letter for all of your letters of support (just substituting the letterhead and the name of the organization) actually demonstrates a lack of collaboration, which is opposite to the effect you want. If you want to provide samples for your partners, fine, but be aware that some folks will just copy those samples unless you work with them very closely.  If your partners are unable to put together the kind of letters you need, it would be a better idea to write each individual letter for them and submit them to your partners for their approval and signature.  They can then make any changes they need before putting the letter on letterhead and signing.  They will be grateful for the help, and you’ll get better letters.
  • Include the identity of the partner, the nature of the relationship, and the nature of the contribution. That’s three core paragraphs.  The identity of the partner paragraph should include basic information about the agency authoring the letter.  The nature of the relationship paragraph should discuss the history of the relationship and how the parties are working together on the project in question. The history of the relationship would go here, too. The nature of the contribution paragraph should focus on what contributions the partner agency will make to the project during the life of the grant, or at least over the next year.  It should clearly delineate if the contribution is an in-kind donation of services or if the agency will be compensated for the contribution through the grant.
  • Quantify contributions whenever possible. Contributions can be quantified, but folks often hesitate to do so because they are afraid they will be asked to produce that donation in cash at some point.  That is not the case.  If you’re that worried about it, say in the letter that the contribution is in the form of services, not cash. An estimate of the actual dollar value of the contribution is enough.  This is a letter of support, not a tax receipt.
  • Put the letter on agency letterhead. This makes it look much more official than a letter on plain white paper. Remember, in the computer age, letterhead can be easily created for free.
  • Include the signature of the organization decision maker. The signature of the superintendent or executive director is generally more valuable than the signature of a coordinator or project manager; however, if a letter from a lower level employee in the organization would be more inclusive of details about how the agencies work together, go for it! Remember, the content matters.
  • Make sure the letters match what you said in the narrative.  This is why grant planning and writing can be so challenging.  Your partner letters need to reinforce and support what you said in the main grant narrative.  That means your partners really need to play some role in the planning and know something about the proposal.  They don’t necessarily need to see the full proposal before you can expect a letter, but they should at least know something about it. The more they know, the stronger the letters will be.

Taking the time to gather really good letters can make a big difference in your chances of funding.  Sometimes, the letters will make the difference.  Don’t make the mistake of underestimating their value.

On Friday, February 26, 2010, we’ll be hosting a Tips from the Grant Goddess BlogTalkRadio episode on this very topic. You can listen to the show live (and call in to ask questions, if you’d like) or you can listen to the recording of the show on-demand any time after the live broadcast at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Veronica-Robbins . Of course, it’s free!

In addition, sometime within the next few days, we’ll be posting a FREE webinar on the topic (Writing Great Letters of Support for Grants).  You can access it through the webinar page on our website.

Are You a Risk Taker?

Here are a few thoughts from our Grant Coach, MaryEllen Bergh, on taking risks:

Taking risks means daring to try new approaches or ideas with no predictable control over results or consequences; in other words, taking action when the outcome is unknown. There are very few things in life that come without any risk and quite a few of the most remarkable things frequently have a higher risk associated with them. For example, writing grants comes with quite a bit of risk but, if you are successful, amazing things can happen to support your organization’s vision. If you don’t take the risk, perhaps because you see that there will only be 8 awards in the entire United States, yet you know you meet the criteria and have an innovative design, you will never have the chance to be one of those eight awards!

The key to taking risks is to keep things in balance. Make sure that you do the research and the thinking necessary to make a smart decision about the opportunity but don’t over-analyze every possible outcome to the extent that you miss the opportunity. Ultimately, if the opportunity fits, just do it. If you didn’t have a wild success the first time, learn from your mistakes and try again. If you were successful, jump back in. In the words of T.S. Eliot, “Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far they can go.”

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