|
PART ONE: DEVELOPING A GRANT
PROPOSAL
Preparation
A successful grant proposal
is one that is well-prepared, thoughtfully planned, and concisely packaged. The
potential applicant should become familiar with all of the pertinent program
criteria related to the Catalog program from which assistance is sought. Refer
to the information contact person listed in the Catalog program description
before developing a proposal to obtain information such as whether funding is
available, when applicable deadlines occur, and the process used by the grantor
agency for accepting applications. Applicants should remember that the basic
requirements, application forms, information and procedures vary with the
Federal agency making the grant award.
Individuals without prior
grant proposal writing experience may find it useful to attend a grantsmanship
workshop. A workshop can amplify the basic information presented here.
Applicants interested in additional readings on grantsmanship and proposal
development should consult the references listed at the end of this section and
explore other library resources.
INITIAL
PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT
Developing Ideas for the Proposal
When developing an idea for
a proposal it is important to determine if the idea has been considered in the
applicant's locality or State. A careful check should be made with legislators
and area government agencies and related public and private agencies which may
currently have grant awards or contracts to do similar work. If a similar
program already exists, the applicant may need to reconsider submitting the
proposed project, particularly if duplication of effort is perceived. If
significant differences or improvements in the proposed project's goals can be
clearly established, it may be worthwhile to pursue Federal assistance.
Community Support
Community support for most
proposals is essential. Once proposal summary is developed, look for individuals
or groups representing academic, political, professional, and lay organizations
which may be willing to support the proposal in writing. The type and caliber of
community support is critical in the initial and subsequent review phases.
Numerous letters of support can be persuasive to a grantor agency. Do not overlook
support from local
government agencies and public officials. Letters of endorsement detailing exact
areas of project sanction and commitment are often requested as part of a
proposal to a Federal agency. Several months may be required to develop letters
of endorsement since something of value (e.g., buildings, staff, services) is
sometimes negotiated between the parties involved.
Many agencies require, in
writing, affiliation agreements (a mutual agreement to share services between
agencies) and building space commitments prior to either grant approval or
award. A useful method of generating community support may be to hold meetings
with the top decision makers in the community who would be concerned with the
subject matter of the proposal. The forum for discussion may include a query
into the merits of the proposal, development of a contract of support for the
proposal, to generate data in support of the proposal, or development of a
strategy to create proposal
support
from a large number of community groups.
Identification of a Funding
Resource
A review of the Objectives
and Uses and Use Restrictions sections of the Catalog program description can
point out which programs might provide funding for an idea. Do not overlook the
related programs as potential resources. Both the applicant and the grantor
agency should have the same interests, intentions, and needs if a proposal is to
be considered an acceptable candidate for funding.
Once a potential grantor
agency is identified, call the contact telephone number identified in
Information Contacts and ask for a grant application kit. Later, get to know
some of the grantor agency personnel. Ask for suggestions, criticisms, and
advice about the proposed project. In many cases, the more agency personnel know
about the proposal, the better the chance of support and of an eventual
favorable decision. Sometimes it is useful to send the proposal summary to a
specific agency official in a separate cover letter, and ask for review and
comment at the earliest possible convenience. Always check with the Federal
agency to determine its preference if this approach is under consideration. If
the review is unfavorable and differences cannot be resolved, ask the examining
agency (official) to suggest another department or agency which may be
interested in the proposal. A personal visit to the agency's regional office or
headquarters is also important. A visit not only establishes face-to-face
contact, but also may bring out some essential details about the proposal or
help secure literature and references from the agency's library.
Federal agencies are
required to report funding information as funds are approved, increased or
decreased among projects within a given State depending on the type of required
reporting. Also, consider reviewing the Federal Budget for the current and
budget fiscal years to determine proposed dollar amounts for particular budget
functions.
The applicant should
carefully study the eligibility requirements for each Federal program under
consideration (see the Applicant Eligibility section of the Catalog program
description). The applicant may learn that he or she is required to provide
services otherwise unintended such as a service to particular client groups, or
involvement of specific institutions. It may necessitate the modification of the
original concept in order for the project to be eligible for funding. Questions
about eligibility should be discussed with the appropriate program officer.
Deadlines for submitting
applications are often not negotiable. They are usually associated with strict
timetables for agency review. Some programs have more than one application
deadline during the fiscal year. Applicants should plan proposal development
around the established deadlines.
Getting Organized to Write the Proposal
Throughout the proposal
writing stage keep a notebook handy to write down ideas. Periodically, try to
connect ideas by reviewing the notebook. Never throw away written ideas during
the grant writing stage. Maintain a file labeled "Ideas" or by some other
convenient title and review the ideas from time to time. The file should be
easily accessible. The gathering of documents such as articles of incorporation,
tax exemption certificates, and bylaws should be completed, if possible, before
the writing begins.
REVIEW
Criticism
At some point, perhaps after
the first or second draft is completed, seek out a neutral third party to review
the proposal working draft for continuity, clarity and reasoning. Ask for
constructive criticism at this point, rather than wait for the Federal grantor
agency to volunteer this information during the review cycle. For example, has
the writer made unsupported
assumptions or used jargon or excessive language in the proposal?
Signature
Most proposals are made to
institutions rather than individuals. Often signatures of chief administrative
officials are required. Check to make sure they are included in the proposal
where appropriate.
Neatness
Proposals should be typed,
collated, copied, and packaged correctly and neatly (according to agency
instructions, if any). Each package should be inspected to ensure uniformity
from cover to cover. Binding may require either clamps or hard covers. Check
with the Federal agency to determine its preference. A neat, organized, and
attractive proposal package can leave a positive impression with the reader
about the proposal contents.
Mailing
A cover letter should always
accompany a proposal. Standard U.S. Postal Service requirements apply unless
otherwise indicated by the Federal agency. Make sure there is enough time for
the proposals to reach their destinations. Otherwise, special arrangements may
be necessary. Always coordinate such arrangements with the Federal grantor
agency project office (the agency which will ultimately have the responsibility
for the project), the grant office (the agency which will coordinate the grant
review), and the contract office (the agency responsible for disbursement and
grant award notices), if necessary.
PART
TWO: WRITING THE GRANT PROPOSAL
The
Basic Components of a Proposal
There are eight basic
components to creating a solid proposal package: (1) the proposal summary; (2)
introduction of organization; (3) the problem statement (or needs assessment);
(4) project objectives; (5) project methods or design; (6) project evaluation;
(7) future funding; and (8) the project budget. The following will provide an
overview of these components.
The Proposal Summary: Outline of Project Goals
The proposal summary
outlines the proposed project and should appear at the beginning of the
proposal. It could be in the form of a cover letter or a separate page, but
should definitely be brief -- no longer than two or three paragraphs. The
summary would be most useful if it were prepared after the proposal has been
developed in order to encompass all the key summary points necessary to
communicate the objectives of the project. It is this document that becomes the
cornerstone of your proposal, and the initial impression it gives will be
critical to the success of your venture. In many cases, the summary will be the
first part of the proposal package seen by agency officials and very possibly
could be the only part of the package that is carefully reviewed before the
decision is made to consider the project any further.
The applicant must select a
fundable project which can be
supported
in view of the local need. Alternatives, in the absence of Federal support,
should be pointed out. The influence of the project both during and after the
project period should be explained. The consequences of the project as a result
of funding should be highlighted.
Introduction: Presenting a Credible Applicant or
Organization
The applicant should gather
data about its organization from all available sources. Most proposals require a
description of an applicant's organization to describe its past and present
operations. Some features to consider are:
·
A brief biography
of board members and key staff members.
·
The
organization's goals, philosophy, track record with other grantors, and any
success stories.
·
The data should
be relevant to the goals of the Federal grantor agency and should establish the
applicant's credibility.
The Problem Statement: Stating the Purpose at
Hand
The problem statement (or
needs assessment) is a key element of a proposal that makes a clear, concise,
and well-supported statement of the problem to be addressed. The best way to
collect information about the problem is to conduct and document both a formal
and informal needs assessment for a program in the target or service area. The
information provided should be both factual and directly related to the problem
addressed by the proposal. Areas to document are:
·
The purpose for
developing the proposal.
·
The beneficiaries
-- who are they and how will they benefit.
·
The social and
economic costs to be affected.
·
The nature of the
problem (provide as much hard evidence as possible).
·
How the applicant
organization came to realize the problem exists, and what is currently being
done about the problem.
·
The remaining
alternatives available when funding has been exhausted. Explain what will happen
to the project and the impending implications.
·
Most importantly,
the specific manner through which problems might be solved. Review the resources
needed, considering how they will be used and to what end.
There is a considerable body
of literature on the exact assessment techniques to be used. Any local,
regional, or State government planning office, or local university offering
course work in planning and evaluation techniques should be able to provide
excellent background references. Types of data that may be collected include:
historical, geographic, quantitative, factual, statistical, and philosophical
information, as well as studies completed by colleges, and literature searches
from public or university libraries. Local colleges or universities which have a
department or section related to the proposal topic may help determine if there
is interest in developing a student or faculty project to conduct a needs
assessment. It may be helpful to include examples of the findings for
highlighting in the proposal.
Project Objectives: Goals and Desired Outcome
Program objectives refer to
specific activities in a proposal. It is necessary to identify all objectives
related to the goals to be reached, and the methods to be employed to achieve
the stated objectives. Consider quantities or things measurable and refer to a
problem statement and the outcome of proposed activities when developing a
well-stated objective. The figures used should be verifiable. Remember, if the
proposal is funded, the stated objectives will probably be used to evaluate
program progress, so be realistic. There is literature available to help
identify and write program objectives.
Program Methods and Program Design: A Plan of
Action
The program design refers to
how the project is expected to work and solve the stated problem. Sketch out the
following:
·
The activities to
occur along with the related resources and staff needed to operate the project
(inputs).
·
A flow chart of
the organizational features of the project. Describe how the parts interrelate,
where personnel will be needed, and what they are expected to do. Identify the
kinds of facilities, transportation, and support services required
(throughputs).
·
Explain what will
be achieved through 1 and 2 above (outputs); i.e., plan for measurable results.
Project staff may be required to produce evidence of program performance through
an examination of stated objectives during either a site visit by the Federal
grantor agency and or grant reviews which may involve peer review committees.
·
It may be useful
to devise a diagram of the program design. For example, draw a three column
block. Each column is headed by one of the parts (inputs, throughputs and
outputs), and on the left (next to the first column) specific program features
should be identified (i.e., implementation, staffing, procurement, and systems
development). In the grid, specify something about the program design, for
example, assume the first column is labeled inputs and the first row is labeled
staff. On the grid one might specify under inputs five nurses to operate a child
care unit. The throughput might be to maintain charts, counsel the children, and
set up a daily routine; outputs might be to discharge 25 healthy children per
week. This type of procedure will help to conceptualize both the scope and
detail of the project.
·
Wherever
possible, justify in the narrative the course of action taken. The most
economical method should be used that does not compromise or sacrifice project
quality. The financial expenses associated with performance of the project will
later become points of negotiation with the Federal program staff. If everything
is not carefully justified in writing in the proposal, after negotiation with
the Federal grantor agencies, the approved project may resemble less of the
original concept. Carefully consider the pressures of the proposed
implementation, that is, the time and money needed to acquire each part of the
plan. A Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) chart could be useful and
supportive in justifying some proposals.
·
Highlight the
innovative features of the proposal which could be considered distinct from
other proposals under consideration.
·
Whenever
possible, use appendices to provide details, supplementary data, references, and
information requiring in-depth analysis. These types of data, although
supportive of the proposal, if included in the body of the design, could detract
from its readability. Appendices provide the proposal reader with immediate
access to details if and when clarification of an idea, sequence or conclusion
is required. Time tables, work plans, schedules, activities, methodologies,
legal papers, personal vitae, letters of support, and endorsements are examples
of appendices.
Evaluation: Product and Process Analysis
The evaluation component is
two-fold: (1) product evaluation; and (2) process evaluation. Product evaluation
addresses results that can be attributed to the project, as well as the extent
to which the project has satisfied its desired objectives. Process evaluation
addresses how the project was conducted, in terms of consistency with the stated
plan of action and the effectiveness of the various activities within the plan.
Most Federal agencies now
require some form of program evaluation among grantees. The requirements of the
proposed project should be explored carefully. Evaluations may be conducted by
an internal staff member, an evaluation firm or both. The applicant should state
the amount of time needed to evaluate, how the feedback will be distributed
among the proposed staff, and a schedule for review and comment for this type of
communication. Evaluation designs may start at the beginning, middle or end of a
project, but the applicant should specify a start-up time. It is practical to
submit an evaluation design at the start of a project for two reasons:
·
Convincing
evaluations require the collection of appropriate data before and during program
operations; and,
·
If the evaluation
design cannot be prepared at the outset then a critical review of the program
design may be advisable.
Even if
the evaluation design has to be revised as the project progresses, it is much
easier and cheaper to modify a good design. If the problem is not well defined
and carefully analyzed for cause and effect relationships then a good evaluation
design may be difficult to achieve. Sometimes a pilot study is needed to begin
the identification of facts and relationships. Often a thorough literature
search may be sufficient.
Evaluation requires both
coordination and agreement among program decision makers (if known). Above all,
the Federal grantor agency's requirements should be highlighted in the
evaluation design. Also, Federal grantor agencies may require specific
evaluation techniques such as designated data formats (an existing information
collection system) or they may offer financial inducements for voluntary
participation in a national evaluation study. The applicant should ask
specifically about these points. Also, consult the Criteria For Selecting
Proposals section of the Catalog program description to determine the exact
evaluation methods to be required for the program if funded.
Future Funding: Long-Term Project Planning
Describe a plan for
continuation beyond the grant period, and/or the availability of other resources
necessary to implement the grant. Discuss maintenance and future program funding
if program is for construction activity. Account for other needed expenditures
if program includes purchase of equipment.
The Proposal Budget: Planning the Budget
Funding levels in Federal
assistance programs change yearly. It is useful to review the appropriations
over the past several years to try to project future funding levels (see
Financial Information section of the Catalog program description).
However, it is safer to
never anticipate that the income from the grant will be the sole support for the
project. This consideration should be given to the overall budget requirements,
and in particular, to budget line items most subject to inflationary pressures.
Restraint is important in determining inflationary cost projections (avoid
padding budget line items), but attempt to anticipate possible future increases.
Some vulnerable budget areas
are: utilities, rental of buildings and equipment, salary increases, food,
telephones, insurance, and transportation. Budget adjustments are sometimes made
after the grant award, but this can be a lengthy process. Be certain that
implementation, continuation and phase-down costs can be met. Consider costs
associated with leases, evaluation systems, hard/soft match requirements,
audits, development, implementation and maintenance of information and
accounting systems, and other long-term financial commitments.
A well-prepared budget
justifies all expenses and is consistent with the proposal narrative. Some areas
in need of an evaluation for consistency are: (1) the salaries in the proposal
in relation to those of the applicant organization should be similar; (2) if new
staff persons are being hired, additional space and equipment should be
considered, as necessary; (3) if the budget calls for an equipment purchase, it
should be the type allowed by the grantor agency; (4) if additional space is
rented, the increase in insurance should be supported; (5) if an indirect cost
rate applies to the proposal, the division between direct and indirect costs
should not be in conflict, and the aggregate budget totals should refer directly
to the approved formula; and (6) if matching costs are required, the
contributions to the matching fund should be taken out of the budget unless
otherwise specified in the application instructions.
It is very important to
become familiar with Government-wide circular requirements. The Catalog
identifies in the program description section (as information is provided from
the agencies) the particular circulars applicable to a Federal program, and
summarizes coordination of Executive Order 12372, "Intergovernmental Review of
Programs" requirements in Appendix I. The applicant should thoroughly review the
appropriate circulars since they are essential in determining items such as cost
principles and conforming with Government guidelines for Federal domestic
assistance.
|