The Waiting is NOT the Hardest Part

...  A Proposal for Uniform Feedback of Grant Application Denials

From Guest Blogger: Brian Leitten. Mr. Leitten is an experienced non-profit leader and consultant, chief executive and attorney. He provides consulting services nationally to non-profit and healthcare leaders from his office in Port Orange, Florida. He can be reached at Leitten Consulting - consulting.leitten.com. 

Every year I assist clients in preparing grant applications that are submitted to 30-50 different private, community and corporate foundations and government agencies. The grant applications could be as simple as a letter of intent or a letter introducing the non-profit and explaining the grant request; or it could require a multi-page write-up with a significant number of supporting documents. Often, the foundation or agency has a very particular format that the application and supporting documents and it is generally the case that no two grant applications require exactly the same information presented in exactly the same format. In short, uniformity has not yet come to the grant application process.

Once the hours or days of preparation have been invested, the grant application is thrown into a virtual 'black hole'. After submitting the application, applicants wait to receive a decision. Most foundations are excellent at acknowledging receipt of a grant proposal, but from there communication falls off a steep ledge. Some grantmakers do provide a target date for making decisions on submitted grants; many do not. Non-profits can do nothing but wait. Many times they never hear back from a grantmaker on the outcome of the consideration of their application. I know of one application that was approved, a check was mailed (to the wrong address) and eventually canceled because the grantmaker (without bothering to inquire) assumed that the money wasn't wanted.

I find myself disagreeing with song writer and rock musician Tom Petty when I hear him sing 'The Waiting is the hardest part'. For me and the clients I serve, the waiting is the 2nd hardest part. The hardest part is receiving a denial letter with no explanation or feedback about why your proposal was not funded. Unfortunately, the typical denial communication goes something like 'Thank you for your application. We receive many more applications for support than we are able to accommodate and we will not be able to provide funding for your request'. This type of response is nothing more than a forced nicety and provides no help or feedback to the grant applicant. Without feedback, non-profits are unable to improve their grant submission process. This means that they could continue to submit grant applications containing flawed elements with no awareness of the problem and that grantmakers could continue to receive and waste time reviewing grant applications that have no chance of success.

It struck me that adding one rather simple step could greatly improve the feedback loop and eliminate the costly waste that continues to hamper the grant making system. I propose adoption of a uniform, one -page feedback sheet that would accompany all denial letters and emails. The feedback sheet would contain a list of common reasons for denial that could easily be checked off without adding any significant time burden to the denial communication process. It's likely that one or two issues led to a decision not to fund, and the checklist would be an easy and convenient way to deliver that message. This would provide extremely valuable information to the applicants that can help them improve future applications and not waste time seeking grants for which they have no chance of receiving. For the grantmakers, it would provide a wonderful opportunity to improve the quality and relevancy of future applications and avoid significant amounts of future time spent reviewing applications that they will end up turning down.

I submit the following one-page feedback sheet as a starting point for creating a uniform communication tool for grant application denials:

(click here to see full-size image)

This kind of uniform feedback would be a major step forward in enhancing the grant application process for non-profits and the foundations and agencies that support them. It would eliminate or reduce a significant flaw in the current process and return "The Waiting' to the top of the 'Hardest Part' list.

Three R's of Grant Writing

We had a great turnout at yesterday's Basic Grant Proposal Writing workshop at Community Foundation Santa Cruz County. The group asked a lot of great questions, and we covered a lot of material. Exhausting, but in a good way!

At the end of the day, Community Foundation Communications Officer, Luis Chabolla, asked me to stick around and make a quick video for the Foundation's YouTube channel. Luis asked me for three quick grant writing tips in under two minutes. Here's the result:


The Three R's of Grant Writing:

Research - Stop sending proposals scatter-shot to every foundation in the book. Target your proposals to those foundations who are interested in your work. No matter what work your organization does, there's a foundation that is interested in it.

Relate - Yes, you need good strong data to make a case, and to report on your outcomes, but don't forget the story. Putting a face on those numbers is what makes your proposal relatable and memorable and puts signatures on checks.

Revise - Edit for clarity and brevity. Proofread and then do it again.

Nonprofit Rescue: The Pitch

We all have dreams for the nonprofit sector: increased individual giving, more effective boards, simplified government grant applications, better trained staff... Well, one of my dreams for the sector is greater public understanding of the nuts and bolts of how nonprofits operate, and I've got an idea for implementing it: a reality TV show.

So far the only time real, community, grass-roots nonprofits have been seen on reality TV is on shows like the Secret Millionaire. Each week a different successful business person gets in touch with the broader community by masquerading as a "regular person." They wander the streets, find struggling community programs, and get involved. The programs are typically run on a shoe-string by a founder who never collects a salary, but keeps things going against all odds. At the end of the show, the millionaire reveals his or her true identity and writes a large check, saving the day.

This perpetuates many myths that harm the sector. First, that organizations do not need professional, paid management to be effective. Secondly, that all they need to continue operating is for a single major donor to magically show up on their doorstep. Third, and perhaps most detrimental, that an organization which has never had a budget greater than $25,000/year can suddenly accept a $50,000 donation without any capacity building assistance and maintain that level of service once that cash is spent.

My idea is a bit different. Picture Secret Millionaire meets Restaurant Impossible. Restaurant Impossible (like Kitchen Nightmares with Gordon Ramsey) features chef Robert Irvine traveling the country and fixing our restaurants one at a time. In each episode he enters a new restaurant and assesses the food, the cleanliness, the business practices, the decor, and the owner/manager's personal problems and has 48 hours to fix them all with the help of his small team. By the end of the show, the food is delicious, the service is excellent, the walls are painted, the feuding owners are in love again, and the rats have been vanquished from the kitchen.

So, now, I give you the pitch for my new series, Nonprofit Rescue! Here's how a typical episode will run:

In the opening scene I enter the office of a small, neighborhood family resource center. The program offerings are strong - brochures for parenting classes, rental assistance, health care referrals, senior meals, etc., are strewn around the lobby - but there is no receptionist to greet me as I enter, leaving me free to wander around. I find client files open on unattended desks, and finally stumble into the conference room where the board chair and the executive director are fiercely arguing about the budget and why donations are lagging. It's several minutes before they notice me.

Over the next few scenes I meet privately with staff and clients. Clients tell me this used to be a great resource for the community. Now they only come to get a bus pass (when available) so they can go to a different agency downtown where there is better case management and follow-up. Staff are demoralized by the constant fighting and several rounds of lay-offs.

I get to work on the issues with my team of expert consultants. The next scenes are hectic as we cut back and forth between a strategic planning session, a community town hall to find out what services are needed, one-on-one meetings with funders and local elected officials, and the removal (and smashing) of any donated PCs powered by an Intel 286 processor. Between these clips, the board chair and ED each privately complain about each other to the camera. I meet with them each to discuss their proper roles and expectations.

After the final break comes the big reveal of the "new" agency. It starts with board, staff, and community members standing on the street. Our designer pulls a rope that drops the tarp covering their new sign. A new logo is revealed that is warmer and more welcoming than the old one that people said reminded them of the signage at a Soviet prison. We enter and see a well-organized and staffed reception area. Once in the conference room, we give binders to all board and staff with the new Strategic Plan (including a strong, realistic Fund Development Plan), graphics guidelines, privacy policies, Board handbook with member agreements and expectations, and an updated Employee Handbook with clear personnel policies.

The ED and Board Chair are given a template for their monthly board meeting agenda and a simple format for a one-page dashboard report that includes all the pertinent data they need to watch to not fall behind on their goals. The ED and Board Chair embrace; there are tears in everybody's eyes. Consulting has saved another community nonprofit. I wish them well and move on to the next week's challenge.

So, what do you think? Do any of you have any connections at the A&E network to help me set up a meeting? Or, maybe, it's just a dream...

Basic Grant Proposal Writing Workshops

For several years now I have been honored to teach nonprofit workshops through the Community Foundation of Santa Cruz County. This year, I will be teaching three sessions of "Basic Grant Proposal Writing" on:

• Monday, January 28
• Thursday, May 16
• Wednesday, September 18

We pack a lot of information into these sessions, but they're always lots of fun, with about 12-15 people attending per session.

We start with a quick review of the charitable giving landscape, then move on to:

• Building your case for funding:
• Understanding your organization's assets
• Clarifying your Mission
• Knowing what story you're telling
• Writing a successful grant proposal:
• Types of proposals/submissions
• The standard components, section by section
• Focus on Outcomes!
• Putting the proposal together and submitting
• After the Proposal - Next Steps

The workshops are held at the Community Foundation's building on Soquel Drive in Aptos, right off Highway 1. If you're in the Monterey Bay area, or even Silicon Valley and want a day near the ocean, click on the dates above to register, or click here to see the full workshop schedule.

Irwin B. Goldstein, 1929-2012

Dear friends, today's blog is not about nonprofit management, but, in a way, it is about leadership. My first and most important mentor in leadership, my father, passed away, surrounded by family, on Sunday, December 9, 2012.

Irwin B. Goldstein was born in January, 1929, in Boston, Massachusetts. After graduating from high school, he joined the Army, then went on to Bentley College on the G.I. bill where he earned a certificate in accounting. In 1950 he got his first job in the record business, never expecting it would be his life's work. Forty-three years later, in 1993, he retired as a Senior Vice President of Warner-Elektra-Atlantic Distributing Corp.

The music business also introduced Irwin to the love of his life. He first saw Judi, then working for a classical music radio station, at a Boston Hi-Fi show in late 1954. They were engaged two weeks after their first date and married six months later. They have three sons (I am the youngest).

Irwin and Judi, were also dedicated volunteers, working to raise money for cancer research and treatment through the Music Industry Chapter for the City of Hope. For many years of that, he served as the treasurer of their chapter.

He is survived, missed, and loved by his wife of 57 years, Judith, sons Stephen, D. Miles, and Kenneth, daughters in law-in-law Jennifer, Michelle, and Leslie, six grandchildren, two great-grandchildren, his younger brother and sister, nieces, nephews, cousins, and countless more who all wished that he was their Dad.