The Fund Finder News
Public Safety Grants Consulting
The Fund Finder News
A Bi-Weekly Grants News and Information Update By Kurt Bradley
Issue 22, February 25, 2005
"What Separates the Winners from the Losers in Grants?"
Many departments, particularly volunteer departments, fight a continuous and ongoing battle in funding their existence. How can you get the grants that are one of your best weapons in this never-ending struggle?
The Problem
Shrinking tax bases, poor economies and swings from the budget axe take their toll on all departments daily and have become the norm, instead of an occasional problem area. Most fundraising activities are marginally successful and generally allow us to keep fuel in our vehicles or keep the lights and phones turned on at the station and little else. So how do we continue to wrestle with this beast and serve our populations and keep our members safe?
If You Don't Play, You Can't Win
One answer to that question is through the use of grant strategy; planning, researching, developing and applying for grants. The grants ballgame is very much like playing the lottery and simply stated, "If you don't play, you can't win".
Quite a few of you are obviously playing the game, as 24,000 of you applied for AFGP alone in 2004. Many of you got your "Dear John" letters last week, and this might have been the second or third time you have received a rejections notice for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program. I am sure many of you – whether you're in fire, EMS or law enforcement – are asking the obvious question, "What separates the winners from the losers"?
Turning Losers into Winners
This past year I purposely took on 18 departments who had previously had their grant applications rejected for a minimum of 2-3 years. This was done purposely, with the intent of conducting an experiment to see what impact "applying the rules" would have on the outcomes. Apparently my observations about what they were doing wrong were correct, as 14 of those departments were funded in 2004, after using this approach to their grant applications.
Lessons Learned
Part of this problem lies in not understanding exactly what a grant is, or what is required to get a grant. Let's examine these two issues and see if a little knowledge can tear away the frightening mask that covers the face of this imaginary "boogey man".
One of Mr. Webster's definitions of a grant is particularly applicable to fire departments grants:
"giving to a claimant or petitioner something that could be withheld"
In the world of public safety, "grant" means something more. It goes to the heart of what we're trying to do: protect our communities. For us, a grant means a gift or monetary award to perform certain deeds or services and to achieve certain goals while solving a particular problem(s) exclusive to your agency and your served populations. However, applying for and being awarded a grant is not just simply saying, "I need money" and then sticking out your hand.
In that scenario, the only thing likely to be placed into your hand will be a rejection notice. All grant programs are offers to fund solutions to problems that exist for your community and, for which no other source of funding is available. Grants are, in essence, a program/ project to resolve community problems. Please pay particular attention to the use of the word "program" here.
Study Your Playbook & Play by the Rules
The first thing to understand and remember is that all grant programs have "funding priorities" assigned to them. We need to remember that it is "their" money, and if you want "their" money, you must address "their" priorities. If you don't, you have just failed the basic test of getting your grant into the competitive range.
In the AFGP Guidelines document, the "primary reason" for this program is stated as being "to enhance firefighter safety". What can we infer from this statement? They are seeking to make the individual firefighter safe.
Those of you who applied should now ask yourself what your response was to the question that was asked in the grant application, "How many firefighter related injuries has your department had during the last three years"? Almost without fail, every rejected application I read had answered that question with "0".
Now, if the primary purpose of the grant is to enhance firefighter safety, and you answered that you had no injuries in three years, what do you suppose a grant reviewer, or in this case the "computer reviewer" would conclude? The computer will assume that you run a very safe operation and that you do not need any help with safety related matters. Guess what? You just got rejected. In the words of the noted southern comedian, Bill Engvall, "Here's your sign!"
Did you assume that they meant a "workman's comp-related injury"? Or one that "required formal medical intervention"? That's not what they're asking. All they asked you for was how many "injuries".
They did not say what severity, or ask you how many went to the ER, they simply asked, "how many reported injuries did your department have." True, none of us wants to be labeled as having an "unsafe" department, but having injuries and being unsafe are not the same thing. Injuries are part of the job.
Here's the key thing: Your workman's comp insurer and the State reporting requirements specifically tell you what types of injuries need to be reported to them. USFA is not asking you that. It's easy and understandable to read too much into the injury question – but doing so will get you a "Dear John" letter.
How could you have answered the injury question differently? Here's one way to look at it:
How many of you have been fighting a structure fire and the smoke column shifted with the wind and you sucked in some smoke? You probably had to go get into the clean air, or sit on the rescue truck and suck some O2 and then you went about your business. That's an "injury".
Now let's say you included new SCBA equipment in your grant request. Does it not make sense that you should have some "smoke inhalation" injuries in order to justify the need for new SCBA and individually fitted face masks?
The key to this is you need to have "documented" these injuries. That can be as simple as making a notation on a run record that FF Smith suffered a small cut on his right hand, which was treated at the scene and no formal medical attention was needed. Or that FF Jones suffered minor smoke inhalation, which was treated on-scene.
Questions, Answers & Good Math: Getting Past the Grants Gatekeeper
Did you know that for many grant programs your first reviewer isn't a person, but a computer?
How you answer application questions, especially in a large program such as AFGP, is critical to getting past this computer scorer. A computer tabulates and assigns points to the answers you provide. If, in the end, your score does not reach a certain level, you never make it into the "competitive range". That means a human being never reads your request, and all of the work you did in the narrative section now becomes moot.
It is vitally important that the answers to "activity specific" questions are not put in "willy-nilly". You need good numbers, and that will require thorough research. Answers should be accurate and complete. Yeah, we'd all rather be doing something other than research – but we'd also rather get that grant approved! You will have to do some research here folks, but doing the math could well be the difference between clearing the computer and getting your grant reviewed by a person... or you finding another "Dear John" letter in the department mailbox.
The Narrative: Paint a Complete Picture
After doing all this numbers research, you have another role to take on. A grant writer must also be an artist – in the narrative, you have a "picture to paint" for that human reviewer.
The narrative is how you provide the funding source, or "grantor", with a picture of your community, its problems, your department's problems, and the proposed solution. To compare a grant application with a photograph, many rejected applications are like a muddy black and white picture. An awarded application delivers an 8x10, color glossy, 5 mega-pixel digital image. When that person on the review panel finishes reading a well-detailed narrative, all their questions should be answered, and they should see exactly what your problems are, how you're going to solve them, and how "their" money is going to do that.
Grant application narratives request many different types of information. You should address each of these, using the headings provided by the grant guidelines. That way, the reviewer is assured that you are addressing each of the concerns they have outlined for applying departments.
- Project Description - Defines the problem you are experiencing in your department. You will generally need figures and statistics for three years on the average, plus the most current yearly figures for the grant application. This is also the area where you should tug at the emotions of the reader. Grant writers call this the "make em' bleed, make em' cry factor". It is critical to grab the attention of the reader and impress upon them that you need outside help to solve this problem. Things to address:
- Why does the problem exist? What is its history?
- What have you done to try and correct the problem yourselves?
- Why haven't you funded this project yourselves?
- How many runs or calls did you answer last year?
- How many of them were for mutual aid?
- How big is your service area?
- How many people live there?
- What critical infrastructure do you protect?
- Financial Need - Outline your funding structure and budget sources. Provide hard facts – use the Internet and your records to dig up statistics and newspaper articles about why you can't fund these activities with your current budget. The reviewer needs to understand why you are in the financial predicament that you are in and what efforts you are making to deal with it. Things to address:
- What was last year's budget?
- How much did you spend on the lights, building mortgage, maintenance of vehicles, fuel, equipment repair etc.?
- Why are you in need?
- Did you ask your governing boards for assistance?
- Did the voters reject a tax referendum?
- Did a major employer close up shop?
- What is your debt service on mortgages to build the firehouse or pay off your apparatus?
- Has the municipality recently paid for new utilities, for example a new water plant to bring the water pressure up and to extend lines and hydrants into new service areas?
- What is the primary economic structure of your community?
- What is the average median income for a resident of your community?
- Cost Benefit - Otherwise known as "bang for their buck". All grantors, or givers, want to know that the most people will benefit from the least amount of money spent. You must show that the community and other surrounding agencies as well (think mutual aid here) will benefit from your good fortune and their generous gifts. It is vitally important that you address this in detail.
- Operational Outcomes - This is new area in the 2005 AFGP application, and is something to consider in your overall strategy and in any grant application, as it shows thorough planning. Explain to the reviewer what the results will be: how will addressing this need increase your operational capabilities or efficiency? Demonstrate how obtaining the new equipment increases your capacity to fill a void that previously existed in your capabilities. This section is also where you should discuss the difference the funding will make in how you did things before, and how you will be able to do things now.
Before You Send in That Application
As you develop your application and especially as you get ready to send the final application off to the reviewers, remember to get people to read it over and give their suggestions. Call upon the first rule of proper management: "surround yourself with competent people and listen to them".
Do you have a budget expert amongst your staff? A grant writer? Someone to check your math and stats? An "editor" to check for typos, grammatical errors and writing "goobers"? If not, seek those folks out. Most communities are happy to lend the expertise of their city treasurer, a bank loan officer or similar type person to assist you in preparing a proper and accurate budget. Would the high school English teacher be willing to read over your application?
Reach out to folks in your community to check the details, and then send in that application!
The Most Important Things to Remember
- Those that play by the rules closest, usually win!
- Check your numbers, be thorough, and follow the guidelines to the letter.
- If you don't play, you can't win!
Good luck with your applications, and may 2005 be the year you join "the grants winners circle"!
Visit the Fund Finder News Archives
Back to Grant News and Information
|
© Copyright 1998-2008, CHIEF Corp. All rights reserved.
Account
Help
Resources
Cart