Grant Seeking Primer

By Bauer David

by David Bauer

Adapted from Grantseeking Primer for Classroom Leaders, by David G. Bauer. Copyright © 1994 by David G. Bauer. All rights reserved. Used by permission of Scholastic Inc. Scholastic material shall not be downloaded, transmitted, modified, manipulated, reproduced or otherwise distributed and/or exploited in any way without the prior written authorization of Scholastic, Inc.

Getting Ready to Seek Grants Support
Six Rules for Developing Proposals
Five Steps to Increase Success
Developing Objectives
Dealing With the Decision

Getting Ready to Seek Grants Support

There are two different ways to approach proposal development — reactively and proactively.

1. The Reactive Grantseeking System

Reactive grantseekers wait for a grantseeking opportunity to present itself. Often they are made aware of opportunities through a peer, a journal or newsletter, a grants coordinator, or a curriculum specialist. They then attempt to develop an innovative, creative, well-organized approach to solving a problem while they are in a state of frenzied confusion. Whether you are creating a model project, a demonstration grant, or a research proposal, it is difficult to develop a successful approach while under the pressure caused by acting reactively rather than proactively.

2. The Proactive Grantseeking System

Proactive grantseekers begin with a need or problem they wish to solve through grant funding. They view problems as opportunities to interest a funder in working with them to implement solutions that will improve education.

Imagine that a funding source appeared in your classroom with a shoe box filled with money and said, "I am granting this money to your school and putting you in charge of spending it. First, however, I need to know what areas, or problems, the money will be used for." What would your response be? Take a few minutes to list the problems/opportunities you would present to our fictitious grantor.

This process is analogous to that of a friend telephoning you to let you know that he just won a million dollars in the lottery. He asks you to suggest some vacation spots that you think he might like and then informs you that he intends to take you with him. You would probably not start out by telling your friend where you would like to go. First, you would ask some general questions to help clarify what he would enjoy. For example, does he want to take a winter or summer vacation? Would he like to visit a tropical island or go on an African safari? In other words, you would try to assess the needs and expectations of your traveling companion. You would definitely not focus on your lifelong dream of visiting a particular destination if your friend has no interest in that spot.

Think of a grant as an agreement to travel with the grantor on a journey that benefits the funder as well as your classroom and students. Today's educational needs provide many opportunities to work with funding sources. In order to determine the projects you will pursue, outline your opportunities in advance.

Outlining opportunities does not entail writing down all solutions. Instead, begin by brainstorming, either by yourself or with a grants advisory committee (see chapter 3), a list of the problems/opportunities that you may want deal with. This will get you going on your quest for grants. Remember, to get organized for grants success, you have to get started!

Review your list of problems/opportunities and select one, two, or three areas in which you would like to develop solutions. By generating a list of needs (problems, areas of interest, and so on) that you would like to impact, you will begin to develop a proactive system based on locating funding sources that are interested in the same problems you are and are therefore likely to invest in your solutions.

Create a three-ring binder (a Grants Workbook) for each need or problem area that you have identified and label the binders appropriately. Some problem areas (opportunities) will be difficult to place in one workbook because they encompass several areas of the curriculum. In this case you may want to develop one multidisciplinary book. How you do this is not as important as getting organized, selecting the problem, and getting started!

Your Grants Workbook will act as your filing cabinet. Use it to file:

journal articles, studies, surveys, human interest stories, and newspaper clippings that document the problem,
committee notes and names of other teachers and parents who are interested in collaboration on solutions to the problem,
details of solutions to each problem,
pertinent information on potential funding sources, including notes on your contact with them and ways to tailor your proposal to fit their needs and values, and
letters of endorsement, consortium agreements, subcontracts, and so on.

I have found that the most effective grantseeking aids are usually simple and easy to implement. For instance, by organizing a Grants Workbook for each area you are interested in, you will save hours of time when you actually begin to write your proposals. In addition, a Grants Workbook makes a positive impression on grants advisory committee members, school staff, and especially funding sources.

Top of Page

Six Rules for Developing Grant Proposals

Obviously, you want to avoid the common pitfalls of the rejected grantseeker, increase your chances of success, and use the time you invest in grantseeking to its fullest. If you ask a foundation or corporate funding source to name the most common and fatal mistakes grantseekers make, they will list many of the same problems they would have listed 20 years ago. Every year they receive piles of poorly prepared, hastily written proposals. How can you capitalize on this history of errors to develop a successful proposal? Learn what the most common mistakes are and review Bauer's Rules of Proposal Development.

Rule 1: A successful grants system takes work.

A large percentage of the 15,000 individuals I have instructed in my grants seminars received one grant before attending. In fact, often their successful grant was a result of their first attempt at proposal development. However, after that initial success, they received a number of rejections. They came to my seminar to learn why they never struck gold again. Basically, it's because they were just lucky in their first attempt. As in other professions, homework, hard work, and practice are the keys to consistent grants success, not luck. No one knows better the benefits of doing homework than we who assign it.) This primer will provide you with shortcuts, tips, and time-saving grants strategies, but you must add the work that will turn them into a successful system.

Rule 2: Funders don't care what you need or want to do.

Be it curricular reform or new equipment, no funding source cares about what you want in exactly the same way you do or sees the same results or benefits in your project as you do. Grantors have their own reasons for funding projects. Grantors fund recipients because they see or think they see benefits or results that they value. First-time recipients especially may not even be aware of grantors' reasons for funding them or of the funding sources' expectations. The message here is that if you do not have a clear picture of the benefits that your grantor expects, you may highlight the wrong data and examples in your reporting and evaluation and have difficulty obtaining subsequent funding.

Rule 3: Better to send your proposal to one funding source and be awarded than to 100 funding sources and be rejected.

This rule has several components.

a) The "shotgun" approach to grantseeking repulses grantors. Just as you dislike "Dear Occupant" junk mail, most funders dislike receiving a proposal that has been submitted to several other potential funding sources. This "shotgun" approach is like haphazard bird hunting. If you shoot enough bullets in the air, an unsuspecting and unlucky bird may eventually fly into one of them. However, funding sources are much smarter than birds, and this type of grantseeking actually insults the potential funding source. While a direct-mail appeal may motivate some to make individual donations, there is a great difference between a $20 individual contribution and a $20,000 grant award. Grant funders expect a tailored and individualized appeal that acknowledges their value to the field of education and to children.

b) Rejection means negative positioning, and funding sources have long-term memories. In marketing terms, the name recognition of your school is its "positioning value," and in the grants arena you do not get credit for trying and failing.

A one-percent success rate means that 99 times out of 100 the funding source not only rejects your proposal but also has solid evidence that you do not do your homework. For example, your proposal may indicate to them that you do not know what types of projects they fund, their average grant size, or the types of institutions or organizations to whom they prefer to fund. Funding sources want to work with winners. You should aim at a grants success rate of 25 percent to 50 percent. To succeed 50 percent of the time, do your homework! Know which funders to go to, why they would want to fund you, and for what amount of money.

Rule 4: Whom you know is more important than what you know.

As a classroom teacher, I thought that you needed to be a superintendent of schools or a politician to need to keep track of whom you knew who could influence the outcome of a grants competition. Since then, I have learned that whom you know can influence the outcome of a grants competition and that individuals tend to Know far more people than they think. Whom you know and whom the people that you know can get in touch with are worth their weight in gold.

One of my students was the nephew of the mayor of the city I taught in. While not a major metropolis, its population was 80,000. It had mayoral advisory committees and funding for grants in literacy, vocational education, substance abuse, and a variety of other areas. Thanks to a common bond between me and the mayor (i.e., his nephew, my student), I was named to several of the mayor's committees and helped these groups see the wisdom of funding public elementary and junior high school educational programs to prevent problems.

In short, you must get involved and keep track of who could help you get corporate foundation, and government grants (More on this to come.)

Rule 5: Quality proposals do not float to the top like cream on milk; they are pushed up there.

After you read this primer and understand how funding sources view the world and how few staff they have to help them separate the excellent proposals from the good ones, you will feel justified in using every possible advantage to ensure that your proposal gets the attention it and your students deserve.

If your proposal is worth writing, it is worth the support of all the sources that are sympathetic to your education cause. The more local the funding source, particularly if it is a foundation or corporation, the more likely it is that a local friend of the school district can influence the decision. But you must ask them to help you.

Rule 6: Ask for the specific amount of money you need to complete the project or for the portion of the full amount that the grantor is likely to fund, based on their granting history and pattern.

Your research (homework) will tell you the funder's interests and level of support for education. If your project requires more funding than the grantor usually gives, identify the other funders you will be approaching and report any funds you have already been fortunate enough to acquire.

A proposal is not a shopping list. You should not give the funding source a choice of projects or a range of contribution. "Ask and ye shall receive" is a basic tenant of grantseeking. Give the funder a clear description of your project and specify the amount you expect fRom them. This will keep you from falling prey to the "Dear Occupant, Please Send Money" approach that often results in a check for $100 when you wanted $10,000.

Top of Page

Five Steps to Increase Your Grants Success: The Values Approach

So what can you do to increase your grants success? The successful grants system is composed of the following five steps.

Develop and document the need or problem (opportunity).
Propose several solutions.
Identify, through research, possible grantors that may be responsive to and interested in your project.
Contact the grantor (directly or through linkage) to gather information that will help you choose the solution that will be the most appealing to the potential funding source.
Write the proposal.

Following these five steps in order is critical to your success. Many grantseekers believe that the project they want to get funded is so important, interesting, and creative that they skip the first four steps and begin by writing their proposal. Then they practice reactive grantseeking or spend a few minutes searching on a computer for funders before setting out to hunt grants with their shotguns.

The basics for gathering data on the need for any project or solution are founded on the principle that individuals see and hear what they want in a proposal. To help you understand this process, I have developed the Values Approach to Grantseeking. Each of us, including grantors, develops a set of values that guides us through our lives. This internal guidance system is based upon a variety of influences, including culture, religion, family, friends, education, and so on.

The values we develop define our reality and, once formed, provide the basis for what we believe to be true (not what is true, but what we believe to be true). When we are presented with facts, proposals, and situations, we attend to what is consistent with our beliefs.

Think of these values as a pair of prescription glasses. Each of us has developed a distinct and different pair, and therefore we all view the world differently. These prescription glasses have a pair of prescription hearing aids attached to them. The lenses and the hearing aids act as filters to help us attend to and store information that matches our prescription and reinforces what we believe. In essence, we each hear and see what we want to! Conversely, we ignore what we don't value. Complementing this theory is my conviction that we are all entitled to our own prescription glasses (or values) as long as we operate within our society's laws.

I know of few things that demonstrate an individual's values more than how they spend their money. Grantors can be divided into three groups (government, foundation, and corporate). At this point, it is only important that you realize that you must be knowledgeable about grantors' values or you run the risk of assuming that they use the same prescription lenses as you to view the world. In fact, I believe that the main problem with 50 percent of rejected proposals is that the prospective grantee assumes that the funding source's values are the same as his or hers.

The first step to grants success is to develop and document the need or problem (opportunity). Never start with a solution unless you are independently wealthy and can fund your own project! If you have not chosen your parents carefully or won the lottery, begin by gathering many types of data to document the need for your project. You must gather several types of data because at this stage you do not know:

whom you will approach;
what they will value in your problem and solution; or
what will make the best "see" the need and hence feel a compelling motivation to fund it.

This Values Approach to Grantseeking will help you know what to present and how to present it to each particular grantor as well as what not to say to avoid a values conflict. Even when you and the grantor have many values in common, presenting the need for your project in the wrong way may repel a funding source. Funding sources make grants for their reasons, not yours.

It is imperative that you learn the "Golden Rule of Grantseeking": He or She Who Has the Gold Makes the Rules and the Grants.

Top of Page

Developing Objectives

Through preproposal contact, you will determine which of your solutions appeals most to the prospective grantor. This will help you decide which solution to propose. Once you have selected the best solution or approach, you must develop your proposal objectives. An objective is a measurable step taken to narrow or close the gap between what is and what ought to be. A well-constructed objective tells the funding source what will change as a result of the funds they provide.

Many grantseekers do not understand the difference between an objective and a method. Some actually write objectives that focus on the approaches or methods that will be utilized to bring about the change. This confuses what will be accomplished with how it will be accomplished.

To be sure you have developed a well-constructed objective, ask yourself if there is more than one way to reach your objective. If the objective you are testing suggests that there is only one possible approach, then you are dealing with a solution, not an objective. By asking yourself why you are performing a particular activity, you may back into your objective. In doing so, you will strengthen your proposal and develop a clear sense of what you will measure as you close the gap in the area of need.

An objective provides a measurable way to "see" how much change will occur by the conclusion of the project. A method tells how this change will be accomplished. A simple rule of thumb is:

Objectives tell what you want to accomplish, and methods tell how you will accomplish it.

Developing objectives may seem tedious, especially when you are eager to write your proposal. But keep in mind that well-written objectives that focus on the measurable change to be accomplished will make your proposal more interesting and compelling to the funder and will enable you to measure the changes the proposal suggests.

In addition, when writing a proposal, most grantseekers want to move quickly to how they will do their project instead of first presenting what is to be accomplished. Measurement and evaluation to these grantseekers often focus on such issues as how many students will be exposed to a new piece of equipment or teaching regime rather than what the students will be able to do as a result of the experience. Well-written objectives will help combat this problem.

While this primer outlines a process for developing well-constructed objectives, the ultimate judge of a "good" objective is the grantor. There are vast differences in the ways grantors prefer objectives to be written. By procuring a copy of a funded proposal and discussing your proposal idea of what they consider a "good" objective and therefore have a better chance of winning support.

In general, a "good" objective has the following components:

an action verb and a statement;
a measurement indicator;
a performance standard;
a deadline; and
a cost frame.

Top of Page

Dealing With the Decision

Rejected Proposal:
When a proposal is rejected, a grantseeker's first reaction is to withdraw from grantseeking and go into hibernation. Okay, you worked hard and you did not win. But you must act proactively, as you did when you began the grants process. After all, you knew when you started that not everyone ends up a winner. Remember that even grantseekers who are successful 50 percent of the time fail the other 50 percent. There are not enough federal grant funds to support all of the best projects. You must now make a rational decision about whether you should resubmit your proposal. Review the following suggestions and keep your feelings in check.

Immediately send a thank-you letter to the federal agency official you have been in contact with. Thank the official for her help and let her know that you understand the agency's funding constraints. Ask to be sent your reviewer's comments and include a self addressed label. Explain that your grants research indicated that the agency's program presented a great opportunity for funding because of its concern for your area of interest. Inform her that you will be contacting the agency in the near future concerning the next submission date and grants cycle. Ask the federal program official if she anticipates the availability of any unsolicited funds or if there is any chance that one of the successful applicants may not expend all of the granted monies in the time frame allowed. You could use any unexpended funds or unsolicited funding to do part of your project, which would make you a better applicant in the future.

Keep in contact with the funding source! Get ready for next year. Your chances may actually be better after you have been rejected because the reviewers' comments and insights will help you improve your proposal. Demonstrate a positive attitude and a sincere concern for the funder.

If you receive a letter that gives you a priority score and explains that you are not yet rejected but that the score is not adequate to attract funding, do not be a grants spoiler and protest your score. Do not take the rejection personally. React constructively and positively and do not burn any bridges or alienate any funders. If you resubmit, your proposal is supposed to be judged by a new panel or reviewers, which means that you have a new chance of being funded. Try to be objective and rational about the likelihood of your project being funded upon resubmittal. If your score was very low, ask the federal grantor if it would be best for you to develop a whole new approach.

Accepted Proposal:
Many federal program officers who grant millions of dollars each year never receive thank-you letters or requests for reviewers' comments. (In many cases, applicants do not receive reviewers' comments unless they request this valuable feedback in writing.)

Be different. Send a thank-you letter and ask for the reviewers' comments. Include a self-addressed label. Remember, you need to know what you did that resulted in your high ranking so you can repeat the techniques. In addition, invite the granting officials to visit your school. They have the legal authority to make a site visit, but it looks better if you invite them.