Comprehensive Study Notes: The Only Grant-Writing Book You'll Ever Need

Grantsmanship in a Volatile Economy

• Context of Uncertainty: The Fourth Edition identifies a climate of change characterized by terrorist attacks, economic crises, and natural disasters (e.g., Tornadoes in Oklahoma, Superstorm Sandy, Sandy Hook shootings). These events draw resources away from everyday needs, making good grantsmanship more critical than ever.
• The Baseball Analogy: The authors compare grant writing to baseball; while salaries and ticket prices change (the climate), the distance from the pitcher's mound to home plate remains $60\text{ feet } 6\text{ inches}$ (the mechanics). Successful grant seekers must practice harder and do more homework to succeed in a shifting environment.
• Grant Defined: A grant is verbatim defined as an award of money that allows an entity to do very specific things that meet specific, painstaking guidelines.

Roundtable: Grantsmanship and the Economy

• Sequestration Impacts: The federal budget cuts known as sequestration are expected to reduce funding to state/local governments and the nonprofit sector by $5\% \text{ to } 10\%$ or more. Experts note that even a $5\% \text{ to } 10\%$ cut still leaves significant discretionary money, but competition has intensified.
• Foundation Recovery: Some endowments remain $20\%$ below pre-$2008$ levels. However, the number of foundations increased from $56,582$ in $2000$ to $76,610$ in $2010$. Total giving rose from $\$27.56\text{ billion}$ to $\$45.86\text{ billion}$ in that same period.
• Strategic Trends:
  • Consolidation: Move toward larger grants given to larger grantees perceived as more stable.
  • Investor Mentality: Shift from a "funder" mentality to an "investor" mentality, prioritizing measurable outcomes (e.g., "Did you keep a child out of a gang?" instead of "How many workshops did you conduct?").
  • Scenario Planning: Proposers should explain their organization's stability despite specific funding losses (e.g., "We lost $20\%$ of city council funding, here is our plan").
  • Partnership: Government agencies are redefining their relationships with nonprofits as business partners.

Understanding Categories of Grant-Seeking Organizations

• Grassroots Organizations: Small, local groups (block associations, tenant groups). They often lack formal structure. They raise small amounts (\100\text{s or } \$1,000\text{s}$) via bake sales or dues. To receive foundation/government grants, they typically must formalize or find a fiscal conduit.
• Social Service Agencies: Nonprofits, government agencies, or for-profits. They serve specific populations (youth, seniors, families). They require various funding streams (individuals, private foundations, corporations, government).
• Advocacy Groups: Focus on specific political or social issues (environment, civil rights). Most are not $501(c)(3)$ because they lobby, making them ineligible for many foundation and government grants.
• Community-Based Organizations (CBOs): Organizations specifically serving a defined geographic or ethnic community rather than an entire city.
• Individuals: Artists, scholars, and researchers. They often seek associations with universities or cultural institutions to serve as grant recipients.
• Legal Status: Verbatim, $501(c)(3)$ refers to the section of the Internal Revenue Code authorizing tax-exempt status. A "determination letter" from the IRS serves as proof of this status.

Identifying Grant Sources

• Foundation Types:
  • Family Foundations: Narrow giving based on donor or family interests; many do not accept unsolicited proposals.
  • Independent Private Foundations: Have professional staff and follow specific donor intent (e.g., training opera singers).
  • Federated Funds: Pool donations (e.g., United Way) to support nonprofits.
  • Corporate Foundations: Independent entities funded by businesses; giving often aligns with corporate goals (e.g., a bank funding community development).
  • Community Foundations: Over $650$ exist in the U.S. They administer donor-directed funds for local benefit. Excellent starting point for local grants.
• Government Grants:
  • Federal: Announced via the Federal Register, Grants.gov, and the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA). Subject to "devolution" (funding pushed to state agencies).
  • Formula Grants: Allocations based on legislation and population statistics (e.g., residents below the poverty line).
  • Project Grants: Discretionary grants for fellowships, research, training, or demonstration projects.
• Informational Resources:
  • The Foundation Center: Maintains libraries and "Cooperating Collections" ($470$ locations). Publishes the Foundation Directory.
  • The Grantsmanship Center (TGCI): Provides training and searchable databases of winning federal proposals.
  • GuideStar: Provides access to IRS Form $990\text{s}$, which list a foundation's previous grantees and award amounts.

Decoding Grant-Application Packages

• Variability: Packages range from $125\text{ pages}$ (Federal Safe Schools/Healthy Students) to a simple postcard or two-page common application.
• Point Systems: Government RFPs (Requests for Proposals) often use selection criteria worth a set number of points (e.g., Community Assessment = $20\text{ points}$). Proposers should allocate narrative space proportional to the point value.
• Logic Models: Some grants (like Safe Schools) require a Logic Model to chart needs, goals, activities, and outcomes.
• Letters of Inquiry (LOI): Used to pitch a project before a full proposal. Should include organization mission, need, program cost, and amount requested.
• Formatting Compliance: Strict adherence to font (usually $12\text{-point}$), margins ($1\text{ inch}$), and page limits is mandatory. Failure often leads to disqualification.

Prerequisites and Documentation Preparation

• Boilerplate Archive: Organizations should maintain a folder of standard documents to enable quick response to grant opportunities:
  • Agency mission statement.
  • Certificate of incorporation and $501(c)(3)$ determination letter.
  • Employer Identification Number (EIN) and DUNS number (Data Universal Numbering System).
  • Board list (names, addresses, occupations, and $100\%$ contribution record).
  • Current resumes and brief biographies of key management/staff.
  • Auditor's report and agency-wide budget for the current and previous year.
  • Organization chart.
  • Linkage documents (MOUs or letters of agreement with partners).
• Government-Specific Prep: Requires overview of the locality (demographics, political structure) and agency structure (hiring/procurement regulations).
• Individual-Specific Prep: Portfolio of work, reviews, and a list of past partners/clients.

The "Intangibles" of Successful Grant Writing

• Internal Politics: The grant writer must navigate colleagues who may view the process as a chore. Success requires "getting inside the program staff's heads."
• Role of the Writer: Must be a planner, digital native (tech-savvy), and "stalker" of information (proactively seeking data from busy staff).
• Avoid Greed: Proposals should request reasonable salaries (e.g., not $\$200,000$ for a local youth coordinator) and include in-kind contributions (donated space, volunteers) to show commitment.
• Relationship Building: Successful grant writers invite funders to visit programs or send occasional newsletters before seeking money. Verbatim quote: "Without grantees, we just have money. Grantees are our clients."
• Smart and Savvy: Writers must follow current events and trends in their field; proposals are not written in a vacuum.

Stylistic Rules for Proposal Writing

1. Make an Outline: Follow the funder's headers exactly, even if they seem illogical.
2. Write as You Speak: Avoid being overly formal or using slang (e.g., "way cool" or "bloviate").
3. Terminology Precision: Avoid insensitive terms (use "children with intellectual disabilities" rather than outdated phrasing).
4. Avoid Exaggeration: Let the facts speak. Instead of "cutting-edge," show how the program has been cited for excellence.
5. Grammar: Errors suggest sloppiness and risk funding.
6. Dictionary/Thesaurus usage: Avoid homophone errors (to vs. too vs. two).
7. Active Voice: Use "Jane Manning will hire staff" instead of "Staff will be hired."
8. Objectivity: Leave out personal humor, politics, or value judgments.
9. Limit Adjectives: Meaty descriptions are better than meaningless modifiers like "exhilarating."
10. Third Person: Avoid "I," "we," and "our." Refer to the organization by name.
11. Avoid Acronyms: Spell out terms (e.g., Department of Health instead of DOH) unless recently defined.
12. Proof/Evidence: Backup claims with data (e.g., school incident reports or police data).

Documenting the Problem: The Needs Statement

• Target Population: Use data to show the target area is needier than the city at large across variables like income, crime, and education.
• Data Sources:
  • Quantitative: Census Bureau, National Center for Education Statistics, police precinct data, hospital admissions, school report cards.
  • Qualitative: Anecdotal stories, focus groups (conducted in the target community), or waiting lists for existing services.
• Scale: Move from a national context to a local one. Cite researchers if possible (e.g., "Richardson ($2013$) found $60\%$ of elementary students were latchkey children").
• Gaps in Service: Explicitly define what is missing in the current community infrastructure that your program will provide.

Formulating Goals and Measurable Objectives

• Goals: Broad, long-term intentions (e.g., "Ending youth violence"). They are often not fully achievable during the grant period.
• Objectives: Verbatim, outcomes that are concrete, measurable, realistic, attainable, and time-bound.
  • Bad Objective: "Improve children's self-esteem."
  • Good Objective: "$80\%$ of participants will show improvement in reading scores as measured by standardized tests by the end of standard semester code."
• Outcome Directed Thinking: Every dollar requested must be linked to these objectives.

Designing the Program Plan and Timeline

• Consistency: Staffing, activities, and budget must all align. If you serve $100$ kids, you need enough staff and supplies for exactly $100$.
• Timeline Elements:
  • Month 1: Recuit staff/Director.
  • Month 2: Adapted Curricula.
  • Month 3: Pre-tests and enrollment.
  • Months 4-11: Implementation.
  • Month 12: Post-tests and final report.
• Recruitment Strategy: Explain how you will find and keep participants (referrals, pizza parties, marketing in local media).

Strategic Collaboration and MOUs

• Collaboration Verbatim: "Shared creation or shared discovery." It is a survival mechanism in tight economies.
• Memorandums of Understanding (MOU): Formalized mini-contracts specifying exactly what each partner provides (costumes vs. stage).
• Avoid "Forced" Collaboration: Reviewers can detect partnerships thrown together just for money. Use meeting minutes and sign-in sheets to prove real development.

The Evaluation Framework: Process and Outcome

• Process (Formative) Evaluation: Assesses how the project is functioning. Uses qualitative methods (interviews, case files) to make mid-course corrections.
• Outcome (Summative) Evaluation: Measures program impact. Uses quantitative methods (pre- and post-tests) to see if objectives were met.
• The Evaluator: Often an outside consultant or university professor. They should ideally help develop the proposal "on spec."
• Measurement: Use "dosage" concepts to see if the amount of service (e.g., $2\text{ hours vs. } 1\text{ hour}$) affected results.

Financial Planning: The Program Budget

• Personnel Services (PS): Salaries and fringe benefits (social security, health insurance). Full-time staff ($21+ \text{ hours/week}$) and part-time staff have different benefit levels.
• Other Than Personnel Services (OTPS): Rent, insurance, supplies, travel ($\text{cost per mile/hotel limits}$), and consultants.
• Indirect Costs (Overhead): Agency-wide costs (utilities, fiscal management). Usually a fixed percentage (e.g., $5\% \text{ to } 10\%$) allowed by the funder.
• Verification: Reviewers often have run similar programs and know the true cost of things; "rounding up" to the nearest $\$1,000$ looks lazy.

Sustainability and Capacity

• Sustainability Strategies:
  • Turnkey training (training trainers to train others).
  • Resource guides or videos with longevity.
  • Diversified funding (individual donors, earned income, state grants).
  • Institutionalization (having a larger agency absorb the program).
• Organization Capacity: Demonstrate fiscal control systems, diverse board expertise, and a history of on-time reporting. Reputation is effectively a "score" in the eyes of local funders.

Auxiliary Documents and Follow-up

• Abstract: The "work of art" summary. First impression for the funder.
• Appendix: A repository for audit reports, Form $990\text{s}$, MOUs, and staff resumes. Only include what is asked for; don't "stuff" it.
• Site Visit: A sign of serious interest. Host by showing programs in action and having key leadership present.
• Rejection follow-up: Only $15\% \text{ to } 20\%$ of rejected applicants call for feedback. Asking "Were there questions about the program I need to address?" helps build a bridge for next time.
• Manners: Write thank-you letters whether the grant is won or lost. Maintain relationships with program officers.

Review Logic (Point-Based Algorithm)

• Federal agencies often use multiple reviewers ($3+$) per proposal.
• Scores are sometimes standardized to account for "reader bias" (e.g., a standard deviation of $16$).
• The cabinet secretary often has final discretion for geographic balance.
• Verbatim Funder Quote: "I hate pseudoscience babble… just tell me what you're going to do."