Putting an Application Rejection Into Perspective

Most grant writers tend to blame themselves unduly if an application is rejected. Granted, there are sometimes instances where obvious mistakes have been made on the part of the grant writer. However, I have found that most professionals in this field are sincerely dedicated to their jobs and really want to receive the grant money. This is a very big incentive to do the very best job possible on the grant application.

This field of work has some features which are different from many others. There is a need to remain focused and stay on track, as tangible products must be produced. It is hard to “slack off” when there is a submission deadline to be met. The funding agencies will not accept late applications. Grant writers who do not produce an application on time will not have many more chances to redeem themselves. Not meeting the deadline and therefore not being able to submit an application is considered to be a failure of the worst sort.

This of course produces a pressure to perform, which can, in extreme cases, induce performance anxiety. This is exacerbated by the highly competitive field in which the grant writer operates. In the case of most federal and state grant opportunities, all municipalities, counties, or nonprofits applying are in competition with one another. This does nothing to reduce the pressure.

Conversely, when an application is approved, the grant writer becomes a “rainmaker”. As one can imagine, this is a highly respected person who is given a great deal of importance within the organization.

The purpose of saying all of this is to caution the grant writer to not become overly identified with the results of any one particular application or even several applications. In order to preserve one’s sense of balance, it is necessary to not become overly dejected when an application is not funded or to take too much of the credit for successful applications.

Oct 18, 2014 | 0 comments | View Post

Putting a Grant Rejection Into Perspective

Most grant writers tend to blame themselves unduly if an application is rejected. Granted, there are sometimes instances where obvious mistakes have been made on the part of the grant writer. However, I have found that most professionals in this field are sincerely dedicated to their jobs and really want to receive the grant money. This is a very big incentive to do the very best job possible on the grant application.
This field of work has some features which are different from many others. There is a need to remain focused and stay on track, as tangible products must be produced. It is hard to “slack off” when there is a submission deadline to be met. The funding agencies will not accept late applications. Grant writers who do not produce an application on time will not have many more chances to redeem themselves. Not meeting the deadline and therefore not being able to submit an application is considered to be a failure of the worst sort.
This of course produces a pressure to perform, which can, in extreme cases, induce performance anxiety. This is exacerbated by the highly competitive field in which the grant writer operates. In the case of most federal and state grant opportunities, all municipalities, counties, or nonprofits applying are in competition with one another. This does nothing to reduce the pressure.
Conversely, when an application is approved, the grant writer becomes a “rainmaker”. As one can imagine, this is a highly respected person who is given a great deal of importance within the organization.
The purpose of saying all of this is to caution the grant writer to not become overly identified with the results of any one particular application or even several applications. In order to preserve one’s sense of balance, it is necessary to not become overly dejected when an application is not funded or to take too much of the credit for successful applications

Feb 01, 2013 | 0 comments | View Post

Working “Smarter”, Not Harder

As grant writers, we work in a field which is inherently full of pressure, due to its very nature. We must prepare and submit grant applications to meet deadlines which are nonnegotiable. The funding agencies will almost never give an individual applicant an extension. If the application is not submitted by the due date, the application has no chance of being considered. Also, grant writers are prone to performance anxiety due to the fact that our success or failure is so visible. We either get the money, get part of what we requested, or get nothing at all. Many grant writers fall into the trap of becoming too personally identified with the results of the applications they write. This makes them feel that a rejection is due solely to their lack of skill in writing the application. This could not be farther from the truth, as there are many other reasons for the rejection of an application, such as other applicants with a greater level of need or having a project which is not really ready to be implemented.

A grant writer’s method of dealing with stress and time management will naturally have to take into account whether they are part-time or full-time and whether they are a grant consultant or an employee of an agency which is seeking grants. In my case, this is how I make my living and support my household. One would think that this would cause a great deal of stress, worry and pressure. I know it sounds simplistic, but my way of dealing with this is that I concentrate on the work to be done and do not let myself get into the stress-oriented frame of mind. I have found, in my 35 years of grant writing, that the best policy is to do the best one can and have confidence that the funds will flow. This is sometimes difficult to do. I recognize that some personalities deal with pressures in different ways. However, if you are an excessive worrier, you probably should not be a grant writer.

Having expressed these generalities, I would like to share with you some of the techniques I use in order to meet my deadlines and work at a comfortable pace. Fortunately, my business is thriving and I therefore must work on multiple projects at the same time. One of the things which really helps me the most has been my use of dictation. For a number of years now, I have used a product called Dragon NaturallySpeaking, which is manufactured by a company called Nuance. This software enables one to speak into a microphone and have the words automatically typed on the computer screen. It is hard to overstate the time savings I have realized as a result of using dictation. However, I think that everyone is initially leery of working in this fashion. Many people feel that they can think better if they type. However, my advice would be to start out dictating very simple letters and memorandums, which is what I did. Once you get comfortable with that, it will be relatively easy to dictate two page documents and work up from there.

Another method I use for avoiding stress is to gather all documents I need from others prior to beginning an application. For example, a funding agency may request copies of audits, articles of incorporation, a list of board members and so forth, which I will have to gather from the client. I have found that it really helps to get these documents together in the very beginning. This will help the grant writer to avoid last-minute pressures.

It is also a good idea to avoid unnecessary meetings. For those meetings which must take place, it is a good idea to encourage brevity by knowing ahead of time what you wish to say and what you hope to get out of the meeting. I have found in most cases that one motivated person can help to keep meetings shorter, provided that the group is not too large. Of course, you will find that some clients (in the case of consultants) or coworkers (in the case of grant writers which work for an organization) will try to increase the number of meetings and interactions above and beyond what is really necessary. In some cases, this is due to the fact that this is what they are used to. In other cases, it may be because these individuals feel that more is better in the case of meetings. I generally have one meeting with a client in the beginning and have the rest of our interactions by telephone and e-mail. This has proved to be sufficient.

Finally, I would encourage all grant writers who are employees to be frank with their supervisors about what they need in order to produce a successful application. This may be a reduction in other duties, allowing work at home, support from other staff, or access to research resources. Employers are generally happy to receive this sort of feedback, as they are as concerned as you are about producing an excellent application. They will not know your needs unless you tell them. Being assertive is a key to success in the grant field.

These are just a few suggestions on how to avoid burnout. Being able to organize your time and to speak up about your needs are key factors. Having a mentor is of immeasurable benefit, as support from others goes a long way towards relieving stress. I wish you success in your grant seeking.

Jan 15, 2013 | 0 comments | View Post

The Importance of Looking at the Problem First

Sometimes, believe it or not, it is difficult to actually identify what the real problem is. Grant writers deal with the full range of social, economic, and environmental problems. Governmental entities may deal with a lack of public infrastructure, a high crime rate, poor economic indicators, lack of recreational facilities, public health concerns, weaknesses in the public education system, and the need to preserve cultural and historic resources. Nonprofits typically deal with the need for supplemental educational activities, the need for assistance to destitute individuals, sports and after-school programs, the need for job and life skills training and mentoring, housing problems, the natural environment, and a whole host of other needs which are not met by governmental entities.

In many situations, the problem is clear. A good example would be a city government which might be aware of a street which is in need of sidewalk repair or replacement. Obviously the need exists to either build a new sidewalk or repair the old one. Likewise, the consequences of the problem are also obvious. In this example, the deteriorated condition of the sidewalk leads to unsafe conditions which include the risk that elderly or frail individuals may trip or fall. The unsightly condition of the sidewalks may contribute to neighborhood blight, which in turn lowers property values and causes economic problems for the residents.

An outdated sewage treatment plant will lead to a lack of capacity for new development, which hinders the economic growth of an area. In addition, the poor condition of the plant may result in inefficient service to the residents and cause higher user fees. The repair of the plant or the construction of a new one will solve the problem. In both examples given, the problem is easy to identify. Existing infrastructure is not adequate to serve the needs of the residents. Once this infrastructure is repaired or replaced, the problem is resolved.

Other types of projects require a more thoughtful approach to identifying the problem. Let us take the case of a nonprofit which wishes to find a way to lower the high dropout rate at the high schools in its area. The high dropout rate is what I call “the presenting problem” or the end result of other societal problems. These other problems include what society as a whole assumes to be the cause of the presenting problem-lack of familial encouragement; devaluation at home of the merits of education; lack of economic resources, thus resulting in a need for the student to work in addition to going to school; lack of other wholesome activities for youth in the community; and living in a high crime atmosphere which makes it difficult to study.

These are actually the underlying causes of the high dropout rate according to common wisdom as well as documented studies. The nonprofit which is looking for a way to resolve the problem will need to tailor the program to address the underlying causes. For example, the program may include coursework on the value of getting a good education in order to counteract the opposite attitude being prevalent at home. It is much more difficult to address the crime and economic issues. This is where the nonprofit may wish to cooperate with the local law enforcement agency in order to bring about more police presence in the neighborhood in which the youth live. A well-designed program may also link the parents, job services, and job training in order to eliminate the economic stress being felt by the student and his or her family.

This example was given in order to demonstrate how one specific result-i.e., the dropout rate, cannot be addressed without working specifically on the underlying causes. In some cases, additional tutoring alone can be enough to reduce the number of dropouts. However, the most effective programs offer multiple services to address multiple causes. This is why it is important to dig a little further in order to identify the underlying causes of the problem. Research into the design of similar programs across the country can and must be undertaken. However, it is essential to take into account factors which are unique to your area. This process may sound somewhat complex, but it greatly adds to the chances for success of a project.

Mar 11, 2012 | 0 comments | View Post