Webmaster
By:
Ralph Nelsen
Some folks think
the fall and early winter as being the Holiday Season
but those in the grant-seeking business refer to it more often as the Writing
Season. From October through March, federal grant deadlines arrive,
especially those for the majority of the U.S. Department of Education's grant
programs. This gives new meanings to the fall and winter holidays. (Halloween
trick = getting out three proposals between the program announcement
and application due date; Thanksgiving Blessing = invention
of computers; Christmas Wish = hoping Santa will bring an expanded
grammar check software program; New Year's Resolution= promising
to get a "real" job next year.)
Since Writing
Season is just ahead and, also, since CEC
regularly receives requests for assistance from individuals and agencies interested
in applying for federal grants, we are devoting part of our web site
to the subject of grants and how you might go about getting them accepted for
funding. We offer the following ideas and suggestions (but no guarantees) to
those setting out in search of the elusive pot of gold.
Finding fortune
(no pun intended) in the grants game is not like the old Mickey Rooney and Judy
Garland movies where all you had to do to be successful is to say, "Hey,
gang, let's put on a show!" Preparing a competitive funding proposal
is almost as tough as producing a successful Broadway play. The federal funding
scene in education is complex and variable and, like the big business it is,
calls for some pretty sophisticated market analysis. To be rewarded with success,
an agency's search for funding can't be based on the less-than-specific guesses
of a teacher or administrator who "knows" there has to be some outside
money for his or her good idea.
The first step
in ANY successful grant application is to find out where you can apply for what---
and this means research. CEC makes research a priority
function. We annually allocate money for subscribing to publications that deal
exclusively with grant opportunities and also acknowledge that almost daily
long distance calls to Washington, DC are part of the overall proposal development
bill. And, providing time for a staff member, generally me, to analyze publications
and ask the right questions of federal grant program officers is viewed as a
critical ingredient in the recipe for preparing successful funding proposals.
Regularly reading
through various funding publications--- such as those we reference in the section
entitled On-Line and
In-Print Resources -- will give you a very good idea of what agencies
are supporting what kinds of ideas and will even give you "inside scoop"
as to special priorities, levels of funding, and often even the expected "odds"
for any given proposal successfully making it through the grant competition.
Note: Although this commentary deals with federal grant opportunities, for many
schools the best probable source would be your State Department of Education
and, funding opportunities through that organization. The feds annually give
big bucks to state departments to pass on to local districts for innovative
staff development projects. States hand out most "flow through" grant
monies on a "flat per-capita formula" basis but some funds are available
on a competitive proposal basis. This . You should call your State Department
of Education or State Agency for Higher Education
to get details on what funds are available, how the money is distributed, what
deadlines there may be, what priorities exist, etc.
Also, there is a "private side" to the grant business. Your local library should have a copy of a reference volume called Annual Register of Grant Support or one called Foundation Index. These extensive works list private foundations and philanthropic organizations and give short descriptions of funding interests and priorities. One caution, however: I have found the "private side" to be frustrating and, in the long run, not often worth my efforts. That's me, though, and you might find big success with such agencies as AT&T, K-Mart,Community Foundations, etc, etc, etc... or even a "biggie" like Kellogg Foundation or Ford Foundation. (Don't overlook your own community, either, because PTA groups will often fund a small project, as will Rotary, Kiwanis, Lions, Junior League, etc.)
In the eyes of
the unsuccessful applicant, grants always go to someone else. Trying to figure
out why some other person came away with the goodies all too frequently leads
the disappointed proposal author to one of two thoroughly rationalized conclusions:
either: 1) some other applicant had an "inside track"; or 2) it was
a matter of bad luck in drawing proposal reviewers who can't read or don't understand
what's really going on in the schools. "Therefore," asks
the unsuccessful applicant, "What chance does a newcomer have in the
game of grantsmanship?"
This frustrated
writer might well consider a third possibility for rejection -- the
proposal just wasn't good enough.
Contrary to some
opinion, federal education grants (at least those not handed out on a formular
basis) are not mysterious gifts given from on high. They come from public funds
appropriated by Congress to enable an institution or agency to carry out an
educational project or study of merit. The phrase "of merit" suggests
some genuine need. Federal dollars generally find their way to institutions,
school districts, and project directors that have carefully developed a project
proposal built from substantiated need. Accordingly,
the needs-assessment part of the proposal process is no mere embellishment.
It ties a proposal to genuine need and, thus, justifies its application.
For most federal
grant competitions these days, "needs assessment"
should begin at the local level, with an eye toward national goals, priorities,
and standards. Review federal regularions and policy statements and determine
how they might relate to the local scene. By calling or writing key people (such
as program officers at the national or regional offices of the funding agency),
the proposal writer can find out what these priorities are. "National
significance" has become an almost automatic requirement
for federal grant success--- how much an applicant can reasonably relate the
proposed project to national priorities will be a cardinal point to be weighed
by the reviewers. The "local/national" tie-in is legitimate as long
as local needs are not distorted or contrived to correlate with national ones.
Another caution
involves the actual proposal preparation process. Although it may sound like
a good idea at first thought, it is generally a mistake to have one person "do"
the whole process, from planning to final proposal. (ONE PERSON,
however, SHOULD DO ALL THE WRITING!)
The "one person does everything" proposal development approach too often turns out a proposal that is one-dimensional and too full of gaps to be persuasive. Even worse, if the proposal happens to be funded, the one person show is fated for difficulties later on because those who actually will implement the project may not have been involved in its planning. Entering the picture after the grant has been awarded, they will want to operate the project their way. It is better to have a TEAM work on the proposal, using many skills, ideas, and perspectives to round out the package. And it is always wise to involve the sponsoring institution's top-level administration--- for example, the district superintendent or School Board--- so that solid support will be there when needed.
With the merit/need of the proposal established and the idea in mind that a team will work on specific development phases, the "proposal construction" process begins. At the outset you should order from the pertinent federal or state agency copies of the laws and regulations that govern the particular program under which the grant application will be made. The laws authorizing a grant program set forth general funding parameters.
BUT, the grant regulations and proposal guidelines are the heart of the whole matter for they contain the bread-and-butter details--- who is eligible, how to apply, what is required under the program (for example, parent/ community representation, matching funds, etc.), what evaluation criteria will be applied, what deadlines need to be met, and whether any kinds of limitations have been stipulated. Without this information, a proposal team is working in the dark! Use the funding agency's guidelines and criteria as your "blueprint for action."
Note: The first step, in my opinion, is to write a four or five page Concept Statement which describes: 1) the needs you are addressing and what you want to do about them (objectives); 2) how you are going to go about reaching these objectives (p[rocedures); 3) who is going to do the job and how much it will cost (resources required); and 4) how you will measure what you accomplish (evaluation ). Writing this up in just four or five pages forces you to clean up your foggy ideas and streamline your approach to writing a more extensive proposal. In the meantime, you can use the Concept Statement for "does this make sense to you" reality checks. If "outsiders" don't understand what you're saying or want to do, then no proposal reviewers will, either.
Most veteran proposal
writers know that an application begins on solid ground if it has a full steering
committee of administrators, faculty, staff, and, if they're to be involved,
persons from neighborhoods or communities. The committee decides what tasks
must be done, who will perform them, and what sort of timetable can satisfy
the proposal deadline. It may want to make some changes in the original work
breakdown. As goal-setters and direction-finders, the committee members guide
the proposal through its formative stages. They also check out the different
parts of the proposal as they are completed by the writer: an accurate needs-assessment
study, the addressing of major problems, some identification of alternatives,
the specification of priorities, and the overall logical coherence of the total
proposal package.
As mentioned above,
a solid assessment of needs should be done early in the planning stages. This
involves much more than warming over statistics or rehashing old problems. The
assessment should demonstrate a reasonable blend between the "perceived
needs" of faculty, students, and community and the "objective needs"
inferred from solid data. For example, in order to establish sound, "fundable"
objectives, the proposal team should draw data from indicators such as achievement
levels, drop-out rates, number of students going to high school or to post-secondary
institutions, and attendance rates -- whatever is relevant to the proposed activity.
If a proposal does not document underlying and stated needs, it fails to justify its existence. To proposal reviewers and evaluators, needs and objectives are the yardsticks for determining the degree to which an applicant understands and can document the current situation as well as how well he or she can translate it into a set of attainable and manageable goals and objectives.
Although the grant seeker's biggest resources are staff, faculty, students, and representatives of the local community, there may be occasions when seeking advice and assistance from outside consultants at colleges or universities or even consulting firms is wise. However, I believe it is unwise to delegate the proposal writing itself to outside individuals or groups because they generally lack the detailed grasp of a situation or problem that produces a sound, "sparkling with ownership" proposal based upon real needs. The writing is best assigned to a staff member. (This advice is from someone who HAS a laptop and does "hire out" as a grant consultant!)
Note: Not everyone can be or should be a proposal
writer. If you are not a VERY GOOD writer, forget it! Be the
planner, typist, copyreader, project director--- anything, but not the writer!
And, don't casually assign the task of writing a proposal to someone already
overburdened by his/her regular job responsibilities-- a harried vice principal
or a multi-hatted department head/teacher/coach/counselor/hall monitor. (Professional
grant writers eat up competition like that!)
Whoever writes your proposal sholuld be given plenty of time and support--- maybe even substitute time. IT TAKES A COMMITMENT OF TIME, MONEY, AND OTHER RESOURCES TO PREPARE AN APPLICATION THAT WILL BRING IN OUTSIDE DOLLARS.
No free lunch--- if you can't provide time and other support for one of your own people, then perhaps the next best thing is hire a knowledgeable consultant to do your proposal for you--- but then you'll almost always lose some of the "ownership" that comes with local people writing their own document.
There is much
to be said for establishing "inside" contacts with funding agencies.
As public servants, officials and staff persons within these agencies are expected
to answer requests for factual information. They are not expected to provide
comments about your specific program plans, but they can and will clarify such
details as program objectives, goals, priorities, and budget questions.
Note: Agency personnel are, generally speaking, less than enthusiastic when it comes to dealing with "fishing expeditions" by grant seekers. Some speculators will tcast a line figuring that "We'll find the problems you want if you have the money." Such tactics are beyond the bounds of legitimate inquiry.
Some funding agencies offer preapplication workshops, websites, mailouts, and other ways to clarify or interpret important items of information such as demographic data, recommended proposal length, estimated budget figures and scope, and rules about subcontracting. Applicants can inquire by letter, email, or phone about these services.
One critical point
that almost always separates a good proposal from a mediocre one is how much
time the team spent on researching the subject. Many a proposal has lacked sound
background information because the necessary spade work was not done. (Didn't
you know that according to an article in September's Phi Delta Kappan,
your basic idea was successfully implemented in New Jersey last year?)
Research should begin as soon as the program priorities are selected. The team researcher assigned to review the literature and select applicable research findings can do two good deeds: 1) he or she can arm the proposal writer with the facts; and 2) make facts available to those responsible for preliminary decisions on how the program will be set up when funded.
Once the proposal team has reviewed needs, gathered pertinent information, and cleared its recommendations, objectives, and budget considerations with the steering committee, it is time to begin writing the proposal. Once again, while it's not recommended that one person take care of the proposal process from soup to nuts, it is wise to select one individual to write the proposal narrative. (And pick your best writer!) If parts are assigned piecemeal to a number of people, the end product is likely to be an untempered assortment of details and observations that lack unity and coherence--- remember the "horse/committee/camel" bromide. Having only one writer lets you avoid this pitfall. It is desirable that the person chosen to do your writing will have been involved with the project from the earliest planning stages.
The best proposals are written in clear, concise English and in straightforward style. Educational platitudes, excessive clauses and phrases, circumlocution, and jargon are excess baggage. The writer has to resist the temptation to pad and, above all, he or she MUST USE THE GUIDELINES AND EVALUATION CRITERIA as an outline!
Note: When I review proposals for various granting agencies, I consider "pop" words and "ed-speak expressions" to be indications "fuzzy thinking" and "paucity of precise writing skills". For example:
"In order to maximize opportunities students and teachers, undertake a paradigm shift, seeking a systemic approach that allows each player or stakeholder to contribute his or her own unique piece and participate meaningfully in a collaborative endeavor focusing on reform challenges and opportunities."
When your first draft has been completed, the steering committee can review it and ask outside professionals (or non-professionals, as is sometimes even better) for their comments. The draft, following requirements for format and containing the application forms, should closely resemble the style of the final product.
While proposal formats vary, must include five essential points:
Finishing the Package
Most completed applications usually have three sections: 1) the various application forms; 2) the narrative, including the sub-parts mentioned above; and 3) and a budget that has been justified and related to the scope-of-work. Many an aspiring grants writer has missed the boat because of failure to understand or show in the proposal that each of these parts bears equal importance. If there is no logical and close relationship among the proposal's parts, its data, work tasks, and costs, and yet somehow, defying all odds, the applicant is funded, some real problems can be anticipated during subsequent negotiations and later in the program period.
In the end, it
often comes down to salesmanship that is based on a sound (and attractively
presented) product. If the proposal team has paid attention to agency requirements,
done all the homework, and applied common sense, the proposal should stand on
its own merit.
Use a team approach in the proposal process rather than a one-person show.
Study pertinent guidelines and regulations drafted by the federal agency.
Consult
the funding agency for information within legitimate bounds and get to know
its program staff.
Appoint
a steering committee to oversee the proposal project and to make up schedules
and timetables for the staff; and monitor their progress closely.
Assign
tasks to staff members on the basis of their skills, specialties, and willingness
to cooperate.
Define
needs clearly after a thorough appraisal of the local picture; keep in mind
the larger national scene.
Research the general topic in order to collect useful background data.
Involve professionals from the sponsoring institution and members of the community in the planning and development stages.
Ask
outsiders to comment on the proposal's first draft.
Select
one person to write the proposal in clear concise English without verbal padding
or "Ed-speak."
Ensure
that the total package addresses the key proposal elements: justification, objectives,
procedures, evaluation, and budget.
Mail or hand carry the proposal to the funding office on time because a missed deadline means automatic rejection. (ALWAYS use certified mail and hang on to the receipt!)
Fortified with
this checklist, the grantseeker can design a solid plan for developing a proposal
of substance and merit. While these pointers cannot guarantee a successful proposal,
they can help take some of the guesswork out of grantsmanship.
OK, everyone together now, "Hey gang, let's put on a show!"