Grants Development

PBS 136 – GrantsmanshipNovember 17, 2008

Chapter 8 – Organizational Information and Conclusion

Today’s Agenda

• Review Chapter 7: 6:00 – 6:15• Go over Chapter 8: 6:15–8:00• Lab: 8:00 – 9:00

Future Presenters

• December 8th: Michelle Jones - Associate Director, Office of Community Capacity Building, Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development.

• December 15th: Jeffrey Mansour - Senior Program Officer, The Harvest Foundation.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: O.I.• 1st sell the project then sell the

organization.• What to discuss (in 2 pages or less):

– Date founded.– Mission and how project fits the mission.– Organizational structure.– Programs offered.– Staff and their expertise.– Board (#, how recruited, participation).– Volunteers.– Audience served.– Agency expertise

Organizational Information & Conclusions: O.I.

• Clearly establishes who is applying for funds.

• Briefly addresses the rationale for the founding of the organization.

• Describes applicant agency's purposes and long-range goals.

• Describes applicant's current programs and activities.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: O.I.

• Describes applicant's clients or constituents.

• Provides evidence of the applicant's accomplishments.

• Offers statistical support of accomplishments.

• Offers quotes/endorsements in support of accomplishments.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: O.I.

• Supports qualifications in area of activity in which funds are sought (e.g. research, training).

• Describes qualifications of key staff members.

• Provides other evidence of administrative competence.

• Leads logically to the problem statement.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: O.I.

• Is as brief as possible.

• Is interesting.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: Appendix• Contains:

– Board members with affiliations.– Annual budget (2-3 years).– 501(C)3 determination letter.– Audited financial statements.– IRS 990.– Annual report.– Certificate of/in Good Standing.– Staff resumes.– Brochures/supporting materials.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: Appendix• Appendix info:

– Support letters.– Support materials: newsletters, brochures, etc.– Special project budget (if applicable).– List of clients served (if appropriate).– List of other current funding sources.– Biographies of key personnel (only if requested).– Articles/endorsements (no more than two).– Diagrams for equipment or building requests.– Organization's by-laws.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: Conclusion• 1-2 paragraphs.• NEVER introduce new concepts.• Final appeal.• Thank you.• Can be somewhat emotive.• Tightly sums up project.• Reiterates funding need and why your

organization.• Make “look forward” statements.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: Conclusions• In summary, a proposal should reflect planning,

research and vision. • The importance of research cannot be

overemphasized, both in terms of the funders solicited and the types of funds requested.

• The appropriate format should be used, and the required attachments should be included.

• The most successful proposals are those which clearly and concisely state the community's and organization's needs and are targeted to donors which fund that field, a reflection of careful planning and research.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: Conclusions• In writing and/or evaluating a proposal, the

following conclusions were drawn from a University of Pennsylvania study. A study team investigated the criteria foundations and government agencies consider most important when reviewing proposals for community-based projects. They concluded that there are five factors all funders consider "highly important":

– Project purpose.– Feasibility.– Community need for the project.– Applicant accountability.– Competence.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: Conclusions

• Other factors also considered “somewhat important” include:

– Project logic.– Probable impact.– Language.– Money needed.– Community support.

Organizational Information & Conclusions: Conclusions• Although there is some disagreement about

the factors which are considered unimportant, funders generally agreed that the “least important” factors in assessing a proposal are:

– Working relationships.– Advocates.– Minority status.– Social acceptability.– Prior funding.– Influence of acquaintances.

Web Resources

• http://www.mcf.org/mcf/grant/writing.htm

• http://www.writingcenter.emory.edu/grant.html

• http://www.blackbaud.com/files/Newsletters/FundraisingWell/2006/FundraisingWellAugust2006.htm

• http://www.hotwinds.com/Grant_Prop.html