Grants and Funding Information

Matching Priorities and Interests of Funders to Needs

It is no secret that funders provide money to causes, or programs that they feel match their mission or interest. One of the challenges that grant writers face is matching a funder to a project need. After a successful funding match is completed the funder will next need to be convinced that their mission or cause will be promoted. Miner and Miner (2005) explain that funders must be persuades that funding requests matches their mission, priorities and values. If a projects goal match a funders mission it may have a better chance of getting funded. For example, Camarena (2000) provides details of how giving interests have motivated the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to selected organizations such as libraries. In fact, I just recently received a flyer in the mail asking for a contribution for disabled veterans. I am very interested in this organization because my Father and Uncle are both disabled veterans. Without question I wrote a check and dropped it in the mail. This provides additional evadence that Funders donate to causes or projects that they are interested in.

Program Unique Qualities and Innovative Features

Reed (2006) describes how making or developing a community need that is highly unique will help with getting a grant proposal awarded. The United States Department of Education awards many educational grants which require that the program or project have innovation or unique qualities. For example, the Department awards several million dollars every year for assistance with foreign language programs. The Department of Education’s website describes the project as providing grants to establish, improve, or expand innovative foreign language programs for elementary and secondary school students.

The United States Department of Agriculture awards 24 million dollars every year to originations for Distance Education and Telemedicine. A major section of the grant application contains a section on project innovativeness. Several points are provided if this section is adequately addressed.

It is interesting that Porter (2005) points out the unique or innovative projects typically aren’t funded because peer reviewer have a bias against projects that are new and feel that they are not well developed scientific ideas. This was the only comment of this nature and it was isolated so this is evidently related to scientific grants specifically written for the National Science Foundation.

Concise, clear and free of errors

Grant proposals are the face of an organization therefore, the proposal must be free of errors, clear, concise and be presented in a professional format. Porter (2005) reports that grant reviews said that the most common mistake is writing that is vague and unfocussed. In the learner’s experience, some of most successful proposals explain the project upfront and do not embellish the proposal with irrelevant information. Bourne, and Chalupa (2006) explain that it is important to be mindful of the three Cs—Concise, clear, and complete. Also, they caution about trying to explain or do too much in a proposal. From grant readers stand point it is valuable to get to the objectives upfront. Next, each objective must be explained in a very concise manor. Readers will be pressed for time and will not shift through lots of data.

Economy

The economy will significantly impact the degree and amount of grants and funding awarded in 2009. The county is facing an extreme economic down turn. Many foundations and endowments have had a decrease in funds allotted for grants and giving. In fact, Healy, B. and Syre, S. (2008) explain that Harvard had just one-third of its assets in stocks last summer, yet the fund still lost 22 percent of its value, or $8.1 billion, in four months from July through October. More evidence is found in federal funding cuts. According to the United States Department of Education website in 2008 the budget for Title grants digressed 36%.

Organization Financial Contributions

Another casualty of the Economic down turn is the dollar amounts organizations have to financially contribute to their own projects. For example, many federal grants have a matching fund component. The Assistance to Firefighter Grant administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requires a 10% to 30% match for a project submitted for grant funding. Do to the cuts in state funding; many Fire Departments do not have the resources to provide the needed match.

Another example is the Federal Erate Program for schools and libraries. The matching component of the grant is anywhere from 10% to 80%. According to the Erate Website this year several large school systems will not apply for funding because they did not have their match.

Regional Locations

Many grants are focused on funding projects that directly address underserved populations or areas. Reed (2006) explains that the South Texas College received a grant for nursing education due to the fact that the grant proposal addressed an area in Texas is considered “medically underserved”. Many federal grants target rural or underserved areas such as the Department of Commerce or the Department of Agriculture’s grants for Rural Community Empowerment. These funding sources are great if your organization is located in a rural or underserved area. The fact of the matter is that most of organizations that need funding reside in urban locations.

References

Bourne, P., & Chalupa, L. (2006, February). Ten simple rules for getting grants. PLoS Computational Biology, pp. 59, 60. Retrieved January 7, 2009, from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=23694293&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Camarena, J. (2000, May). A wealth of information on foundations and the grant seeking process. Computers in Libraries, 20(5), 26. Retrieved January 7, 2009, from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.library.capella.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=3072723&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Education Budget (2008) Retrieved January 11, 2009, from http://www.ed.gov/programs/flapsea/index.html

Healy, B. and Syre, S. (2008, December 4). Even the famous Harvard University endowment can’t beat this historically ugly market. Boston Globe. Retrieved January 15, 2008, from http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/12/04/the_toll_on_harvard_81b/

Miner, J. T. & Miner, L. E. (2005). Models of proposal planning and writing. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Porter, R. (2005). What do grant reviewers really want, anyway? Journal of Research Administration, 36(2), 5-13, 3. Retrieved January 7, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 939722761).

Reed, S. (2006). Getting the Grant. Community College Week, 18 (25), 3-4. Retrieved January 13, 2009, from http://webebscohost.com.library.capella.edu/?vid=4&hid=13&sid=97534b99-ba12-4eac-5b2-057f6fcb
Universal Service Fund Award Reference (2008) Retrieved January 12, 2009, from http://www.universalservicefund.org.