Fundraising: Some Basic Advice

NPCC recently hosted several workshops on fundraising and grant writing. Ellen Karsh and Sue Fox, authors of a recently published book, The Only Grant-Writing Book You’ll Ever Need, which includes both their suggestions as grant writers and the results of their interviews with a variety of government and foundation funders, hosted two sessions, and Ilene Mack, senior program officer at the Hearst Foundations, discussed what she likes to see in a proposal and why the playing field isn’t level. The advice offered by these practitioners is summarized below.

Homework & Research

Before anything else, you need to do your homework. You must do some research to see whether your organization and the program that you’re seeking funding for fits within the foundation’s guidelines. For example, if you’re a performing arts organization, will they fund arts groups? If your budget is under $1 million, will they fund you? Make sure there’s a fit.

Sue Fox and Ellen Karsh estimate that a great deal of the time spent on grant writing involves preliminary research. They strongly advise people to do their foundation research and not to submit applications blindly hoping that one will stick. Ilene Mack concurs with this philosophy and feels that it’s better to submit five well-researched proposals than twenty-five blind proposals.

Make sure that your proposal is consistent with the funder’s objectives because a program officer can’t take an application that doesn’t fit to his board, and a government agency can’t fund something not approved by the legislation.

Researching whom a funder funds can be done with directories such as those the Foundation Center publishes as well as online sites such as Guidestar or Grantsmart. (See the resource section at the end of this article.) In addition, many funders’ websites offer guidance as to who is eligible to apply.

Follow the Guidelines

Generally, an application package outlines what the funding is for, who is eligible to apply, whether a letter of intent is required, the due date for an application, and instructions that may include requirements for page size, margins, number of words, etc.

Some funders will require a letter of inquiry, others won’t. If a funder doesn’t specify that a letter of inquiry is required, should you send a letter of introduction or just send the full proposal? Mack said that she would prefer just to receive a full proposal because it ultimately saves her and her staff time. Fox recommends that if you do send a letter of inquiry, let the funder know that you’ve done your homework: “We’ve noticed that you fund similar programs ... here’s us ... here’s what we do ... etc.”

Do what the guidelines call for and follow their order. While it may seem confusing to you, a funder has designed its application that way for a reason. Give them what they ask for and save time. Don’t make them have to ask you for any missing pieces.

If an application has numerous parts, be sure that there is consistency throughout. Review all the sections before you submit it to make sure that it’s cohesive and makes sense in relationship to the other parts. Give the funder a proposal that demystifies your program.

Look for the “don’ts,” and if they’re not specifically spelled out in the guidelines, call and ask. For example, do not send a video unless it is requested or permitted. If the guidelines don’t say anything about it, call and ask if it is okay to submit it along with your application. In a similar vein, don’t inundate the funder with excess material; don’t send 50 copies of the same press clippings, just send one.

Familiarize yourself with the contents of the application and don’t skimp on reading the application package. If, after you have thoroughly read the guidelines, you are still unclear whether the funder will fund an aspect of your program, call the program staff. Most program staff at a funding agency will help with these questions (that’s one aspect of their job), but be sure that your question isn’t addressed in the guidelines before you call.

What will decrease your chances of getting funding? Not reading the application and the guidelines, or reading them and not following them. Some funders operate under the tenet, “do it right, or don’t do it at all,” and will reject outright an application that is incomplete or incorrect. Finally, proofread your application and proofread it again.

Know Your Programs

Know your organization and your programs thoroughly. This is especially important if the person writing the grant application is an outside consultant and is not familiar with the organization’s programs. The person writing the proposal needs to be able to sell the programs, not the jargon.

In some cases, you will be writing an application to fund existing programs and in other cases you will be applying for funding for a new or not-yet-existing program. In either case, be conscious of why you are writing the grant or why you want to develop this program. Carefully develop your statement of “why.”

If you’re developing a new initiative or program, bring creative people to the table to help with the design. Figure out how to create a solid program. Determine what obstacles exist. Clearly explain your program. Determine whether there are other programs that already exist that may address the need. Keep in mind that it doesn’t have to be the most creative thing in the universe—most funders don’t necessarily want “innovation,” they just want a good solid program that will actually do what it is intended to do.

If you’re trying to secure funding for an existing program, you should always be willing to review it to see if and how it can be improved. This doesn’t necessarily mean elaborate, extensive, or expensive evaluation, just a good look at it, possibly with fresh eyes to see how to make it better.

Karsh notes that an organization that is new or doesn’t have a history of institutional funding will need to develop a track record with private funders before it attempts to secure a government grant. Most government agencies, especially federal agencies, are not willing to fund organizations with no or little history of funding support from institutions, and federal grants can be as time consuming and complicated to administer as the applications are to complete.

The following are some of the components of a proposal.

Need or Problem

Generally, most applications will ask you to define the need or problem that you are addressing in your application. They may ask for this in great detail or in a summary form. When describing your organization’s need, Fox says that it may be better not to make such a dire case that the problem appears so overwhelming that the grant reviewer is led to think that it is insurmountable and shouldn’t be funded because it can’t be solved.

Know the arguments for your need, but be cautious of being seen as too far on the fringe in your solution. Your school of thought for the solution to a problem may not be the same as someone else’s. Also, be aware that what one funder may love, another may hate.

Keep in mind the difference between goals and objectives. Goals are broad. Your organization may never be able to accomplish its goals (or it may). An objective is a specific, measurable outcome that you can expect from a program over which you will have some control.

Evaluation

Program evaluation is not just someone looking over your shoulder. It’s just an honest, on-going assessment of how the program is doing and finding out if there are any ways to improve it. With all evaluation, keep in mind that a negative finding can be just as useful as a positive finding. Evaluations shouldn’t be feared as onerous, complex endeavors.

Budget

Be brutally honest in your budget preparation. Don’t pad or inflate items, and, conversely, don’t underestimate expenses. Those who review grant applications tend to know how much things cost, and you won’t be able to slip anything past anyone. Program staff look carefully at financials and often do their own research and talk to others in the funding world.

Funders want to see a realistic, clear, and transparent budget that is connected to the programs, and one that is reasonable to the size of the organization and its budget.

Don’t shortchange yourself by under-funding your programs, and conversely, don’t be greedy. A funder’s guidelines probably won’t say, “Don’t use grant funds to buy a Jeep Cherokee to ferry around kids.” But, common sense tells you that this wouldn’t be wise.

Sustainability

In many grant applications, you will have to address the sustainability of the program beyond the requested funding. After the funding runs out, how will the organization continue the program if needed? Will the organization assume responsibility and build it into its operations, will the program become self-sustaining, or will you seek funding from other sources? Collaboration with another organization may also be another way to help sustain a program. If appropriate, Fox recommends sustaining the life of a program by creating videos or resource guides.

Many funders also take a look at an organization’s board of directors. They look at the leadership to gauge its stability and may also ask whether an organization is doing any strategic planning. Another area that many look at is succession planning and whether the organization is looking to the future. This is especially true for organizations that are founder-driven. A funder needs to know that the organization’s works will be carried on even if the founder or the current leadership were gone tomorrow.

Collaboration

Karsh thinks that collaboration is absolutely essential. Even if you have the greatest program in the world, it can probably be improved upon by some kind of assistance. Fox, on the other hand, thinks that collaborations should be approached very cautiously. She advises groups to be very careful even if the organization knows who it’s working with very well. Problems will arise, because you’re essentially competitors. Mack feels that, generally, collaborations can be great, but that it ultimately depends on the circumstances.

Karsh notes that the overarching concept of collaboration is that you can’t solve a compelling problem alone. Therefore, you have to build relationships with others who can help you solve that compelling problem.

If a collaboration is only about money, it’ll never work. If it’s about truly solving the problem, it’s got a better chance of working.

Other Points

Mack believes that if you can’t explain a grant in two pages, you won’t be able to in 20 pages. She also feels that content is more important than appearance. For example, a good table of contents is better than a fancy binder with expensive tabs. She feels that what foundations want is transparency, accountability, and results.

Don’t be “creative” in your application. Karsh believes that if you can convince them to fund you, that’s all the creativity that’s needed. She notes that a limerick inserted in the middle of a proposal just won’t help you score any points.

Avoid acronyms. A reviewer in Des Moines isn’t going to get it, and that’ll lessen your chances of receiving funds. And, watch your language. Politically incorrect language won’t help you secure a grant.

Know That You Won’t Win Every Time
— Or, Why the Playing Field Isn’t Level

Mack notes that she tries to make the playing field level, but inherently, the relationship between a funder and a grant seeker is not. A nonprofit organization is asking for money from a funder that will not be able to support all of the worthy requests it receives. There are going to be plenty of “no’s.”

Even if you do everything right — you do the best possible job and everything is letter perfect — you may still be turned down. Many funders will send a letter stating why the application didn’t succeed. But if they don’t, you have every right to try to find out why your proposal didn’t get funded. You generally don’t have to talk to the executive director and usually can find out about your proposal from the program officer. Ask the program staff why your proposal was rejected, and listen to the “no.” Is it a “no” because you didn’t fit within the guidelines or is it a “no” because the funder had already funded its allotment of arts-education requests for this round?

If you get a rejection, don’t inundate the funder, but keep them informed about your programs if it is appropriate. But be cautious in your further inquiries: It’s a fine line between persistence and pestering. Again, listen to the “no.” Mack feels that active listening is a skill that needs to be practiced more. Depending on the “no,” you may be able to talk to the program staff about whether or not you should apply in a future round.

Many foundations are staff-driven, however some are not and are more board-driven in their grant making. If you are formally rejected, be aware that an attempt at making an end-run around a program officer to the foundation’s board could get you off of some funders’ lists forever. However, in some cases a board member can be used diplomatically to make inquiries about an organization’s prospects for funding.

Karsh notes that with federal grants, the more appropriate proposals you put out, the greater the opportunities of eventually getting funded. It helps put you on the map and funders and readers recognize your organization after a while.

Interacting With Funding Staff

Mack feels that the relationship between a foundation and a grant-seeker shouldn’t be adversarial. There has to be trust and empathy, mutual respect, honesty, and openness. After all, she notes, foundations wouldn’t exist without the needs of nonprofits.

Be honest, forthright and upfront in your communication and dealings with a funder. Let them hear bad news from you first, not from the daily newspaper. For example, if there’s going to be a change in leadership in the organization, don’t wait until one month before it happens, clue them in early.

If you need to change the terms of a grant, for example, a budget reallocation or completion timeline, ask to do so. They may say no. But don’t try to hide it—because it will come out sooner or later.

Nurture the relationship and keep in communication with your funders. Other than a report (if it is required), Mack says that a thank-you letter would be a start. Add the funder to your mailing list to get your newsletters or other publications. Invite them to your events. Let them know about the progress of your programs. Personally communicate with them.

Some Resources to Help With Fundraising

The Only Grant-Writing Book You’ll Ever Need by Ellen Karsh and Arlen Sue Fox is available at www.amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com for approximately $11.

The Foundation Center publishes various directories of funders in print as well as online, has a library and offers classes in fundraising, as well as many online articles and other resources for grant seekers. For more information, go to www.fdncenter.org.

Review the 990PF (the IRS’s required filing for private foundations) to see where a particular foundation gives its money. They can be viewed online at www.guidestar.org or at www.grantsmart.org.

The Chronicle of Philanthropy is a bi-weekly newspaper that includes notices of recent grants and foundation reports as well as articles, trends, and other items on fundraising and management. NPCC members are eligible for a discount on subscriptions. For more information, go to www.npccny.org/member.htm.

NPCC’s Government Grants Information Service is a free service for NPCC members that sends notification about new government grants available. For more information, go to www.npccny.org/grants.htm.

NPCC’s Who Does What? database has several dozen resources on fundraising. Visit www.npccny-whodoeswhat.org.

Copyright 2004 Nonprofit Coordinating Committee of New York, Inc. (NPCC). This article originally appeared in the January 2004 issue of New York Nonprofits, the monthly newsletter of NPCC. www.npccny.org