Increased Competition:

As the demand for grant funding continues to rise, the competition among organizations and individuals seeking grants has become more intense. Currently, the funding levels for many federal grants is ranging around the 90^th percentile and above.

Evolving Donor Priorities:

Donor priorities may shift over time due to changes in political, economic, or social landscapes, which require grant writers to adapt their proposals accordingly. For example, as presidential administrations emphasize their research and educational priorities, funding also changes to reflect these interests.

Demonstrating Impact and Sustainability:

Funders increasingly expect grant applicants to demonstrate their projects’ potential impact and sustainability. Grant writers must develop strategies for effectively measuring and communicating the outcomes and institutionalization of their initiatives to secure funding and ensure long-term viability for their organizations.

Limited Resources and Capacity:

Many organizations that increasingly face internal budget cuts often reduce resources necessary for grant writing efforts, such as staff time and training. These cuts pose a significant challenge for grant writers, who must often juggle multiple responsibilities and priorities while pursuing funding opportunities.

Adapting to Digital Platforms

With the increasing digitization of grant application processes, grant writers need to adapt to numerous online platforms and technologies. This may require taking extra time to learn new software and digital communication strategies to effectively submit their project proposals to funders.

So, what must grant writers and organizations do in the face of these obstacles? First and foremost, institutions need to understand that internal cuts result in much larger consequences for external giving. Secondly, grant seekers must constantly stay current on evolving donor priorities, digital platforms and technologies. Thirdly, grant writers must ensure sustainability by institutionalizing their initial funding so that they become ongoing efforts, such as train the trainers programs, infusing student learning in existing courses, or creating focus groups that can continue to serve their communities after the donor’s funding ends.

The post Challenges Facing Grant Writers in Today`s Environment appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

1. Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligence training focuses on developing self-awareness, empathy, and effective communication skills. Emotional intelligence is the ability to understand and manage your own emotions and the emotions of others. Leaders who possess high emotional intelligence are better equipped to lead teams and create positive work environments.

2. Coaching and Mentoring

Coaching and mentoring are valuable tools for developing leadership skills. Coaching is a collaborative process where a coach helps a leader identify strengths and weaknesses and develop strategies to improve performance. Mentoring, on the other hand, is a relationship between a more experienced leader and a less experienced one. The mentor provides guidance and support to the mentee to help them develop their skills and reach their potential.

3. Team Building

Effective leadership requires strong teamwork. Team building activities help leaders build relationships with their team members, improve communication, and foster a positive work environment. These activities can be as simple as regular team meetings or as complex as offsite team-building retreats.

4. Diversity and Inclusion

Diversity and inclusion training is becoming increasingly important as institutions strive to create more diverse and inclusive work environments. Leaders who are knowledgeable about diversity and inclusion are better equipped to lead diverse teams and create a culture of inclusivity. This training focuses on developing skills like empathy, active listening, and cultural competency.

5. Resilience

Leadership can be a stressful and demanding role, and resilience training is becoming more important for leaders to develop. Resilience training helps leaders develop the ability to bounce back from setbacks and maintain their focus and productivity in challenging situations. This training typically includes techniques like mindfulness, positive thinking, and stress management.

6. Strategic Thinking

Leadership requires strategic thinking and planning. Strategic thinking training helps leaders develop the ability to think critically and strategically about their organization’s goals and objectives. This training includes skills like problem-solving, decision-making, and innovation.

7. Technology and Data Analysis

Leadership is becoming increasingly reliant on technology and data analysis. Leaders who are proficient in these areas are better equipped to make data-driven decisions and leverage technology to improve their organizations. Technology and data analysis training typically includes skills like data visualization, analytics, and project management tools.

8. Ethical Leadership

Leadership also requires ethical decision-making. Ethical leadership training fosters skills like integrity, honesty, and accountability. This helps leaders develop the ability to make decisions that are ethical and align with their organization’s values.

In conclusion, the state of the art training on leadership is constantly evolving, and institutions need to keep up with the latest trends and best practices to develop effective leaders. Emotional intelligence, coaching and mentoring, team building, diversity and inclusion, resilience, strategic thinking, technology and data analysis, and ethical leadership are some of the key areas of focus for leadership training. By investing in their leaders’ development, institutions can create a more productive and positive work environment and achieve their organizational goals.

Find out more about our upcoming Executive Leadership Workshop

The post Boost Your External Funding via Effective Leadership appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

Globalizing Accessibility: According to Susan Guthrie from RAND Europe, online platforms can help boost the diversity of review panels and widen participation. Now that the financial burden of travel is no longer a constraint, researchers from many countries are invited to participate in review panels. Meeting through video conferencing has prompted other positive changes such as globalizing our research agendas and expanding cultural diversity. It would be wrong to assume that the world of funding and grants will simply return to business as usual, for what we have seen to date is that virtual meetings have proved to be highly effective.

Panel Reviewers: The NIH polled panel reviewers about their Zoom experiences. The replies varied as to their preference of meeting face to face or reviewing grants virtually. Many voiced their discontent with video conferencing. However, it was noted that as far as scoring, there was little difference in the process. Even though this may not have been the best platform for grant reviewers, they did agree that it was cost effective and more convenient in terms of their time commitments.

Partnerships: Partnerships, innovation, inclusion and interdisciplinary may all be important outcomes of video conferencing. Although this is not a new phenomenon, Covid-19 and video meetings have demonstrated new and ongoing approaches to working outside of our own space and creating interdisciplinary spaces. The instantaneous communication of scholars in the US and abroad allows us to increasingly speak to one another globally.

Mentors and Tutors: Certain donors require that young investigators be trained via mentorship and tutoring. Prior to the accessibility of video conferencing, these researchers would not always have access to the best mentors for their needs. According to the NIH, “Finding the right research mentor is critical to a successful and enjoyable research experience.” Researchers and young investigators now have a large and even global platform through which they can select the most appropriate mentors for their needs and easily arrange meetings with all involved.

Training: Virtual training during Covid-19 has increased the participation of international attendees, who due to fiscal constraints, could not previously travel to the training sites. We at the Grant Training Center have seen a much higher percentage of international organizations and individuals enrolling in our sessions, many from developing countries. This, in turn, has shifted in our training toward emphasizing global opportunities for funding.

Donors: Feedback that emerged during the unique circumstances of Covid-19 gave foundations time to consider emphasizing diversity, equity and inclusion throughout all aspects of their organizations. For example, the Clubhouse Foundation and others are now bringing new perspectives and demographic information on diversity to their board of directors, propelling racial justice initiatives.

The pandemic has increased our reliance on video conferencing. This has altered our approach to travel, meetings, communication and decision-making. Even though we are now more physically distant from one another, it has also brought us closer together. It has allowed us to give consideration to the issues of access, partnerships, diversity, inclusion and equity. Whether this will become the most common way of communication, or whether we will return to the “way it was” is no longer a question. As a recent article in The Economist states: “In the 19th century the telegraph shrank the time needed to contact envoys. In the 20^th century the jet plane shrank distance. Now digital platforms are supplanting physical presence.” Used wisely, the world of funding and grants will be all the better for it.

The post Going Virtual: A Paradigm Shift for Grants appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

I discovered, however, that once the grant was won and the funds became available, those responsible for the implementation often did not know how to proceed. For example, the detailed plan outlined in the original grant request often was not followed, timelines were set back, funds were not dispersed properly and many other inconsistencies occurred. The result was that a large percentage of the grants failed at the implementation level. This phase of the project does not involve the external grant writer. Also, in cases where I was writing a grant for my own institution, it would not be unusual for a supervisor to ask me to apply for funding even though I had given very specific reasons why we would not succeed. Their reply was: “just spin it.” It was for these reasons that I eventually stopped writing grants for others. Today, I am at times offered large sums of money to write grants within a short window of time, but I refuse. I do so because of the following reasons:

1. Chasing the money – In much of my own experience, the top level administrators who hired me to write their grants were primarily interested in the money. After a while it became clear, however, that grants are not about the money, but the good ideas that need money to be executed.

2. Lack of buy-in – This is a major reason for the implementation stage failure, since it is not unusual for administrators to receive a grant and then assign the responsibility of implementing it to those who either know nothing about it or even worse, are not interested.

3. Lack of effective management – It is important to agree prior to submitting the grant on how the project will be managed and implemented. This cannot be done if extensive conversations have not taken place on what the grant award will mean for the institution and its beneficiaries.

4. No attention to detail – If the grant is written by an outside grant writer, there probably has been little discussion on who will oversee and execute the details of the project. This becomes a serious problem if an outside evaluator from the funding agency examines how the project was executed.

5. Strategic planning is non-existent – Superior grants emerge from institutions that have a sound understanding of external funding. They know that successful projects will emerge from the strengths of the institution and focus on how these strengths can be augmented via external requests.

At the end of the day, utilizing external grant writers leaves an institution in a position where they have to hire more of the same, and eventually, there is a good chance that their reputation could very well suffer. Instead, the institution needs to train as many people as possible to write successful proposals. These people should be familiar with the needs, strengths, and challenges of the organization. Once a proposal is written, it should be the same individuals who will implement the grant. The ultimate success for any institution will require a proactive approach that evolves out of strategic planning, buy-in from administrators, attention to detail, excellent management, and a large number of grant writers who have the training and experience in writing winning proposals.

The post Why You Should Not Hire an External Grant Writer appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

What you say and how you say it will determine how effectively you keep pace with or surpass your competition. Demonstrating the extent of the problem through examples, statistics, and expert opinion, and following these up with effects, causes, and solutions will be your first step. Your second – and just as important – task will be to write in eloquent prose and clear language. Preparation for the competition will include three important tasks: your research, your vision, and your writing. To accomplish these, you will need to begin with the following:

Study

Having more knowledge, data, background, and creativity will always give you the upper hand over other proposal writers. To find out who will be competing, you should examine all the awards of the previous competition and see how you compare to them. Then, contact previous awardees and speak with them about their projects and to what they would attribute their success. Ask the program officer what the reviewers get enthusiastic about in the review process. Finally, you should know about your reviewers and their backgrounds (e.g. publications, experience, etc.). Studying your competition and the judges will give you the edge on how you approach your proposal, both in content and language.

Develop

Build up the skills necessary to achieve excellence in your grant writing. This can include taking a grant training course, reading superior sample proposals, speaking with your peers who have been successful, and seeking professional reviews and editing of your project. Once you have gained this experience and developed the skills needed to write a successful grant for the donor, chances are that you will be ready to effectively swim with the sharks.

Practice

Many superior athletes contribute their success to practice. For example, Tiger Woods was interviewed on the Golf Channel and was asked what he thought was the key to his success. His answer: practice. For proposal writers, practice does not mean applying and reapplying to various donors. Instead, it means analyzing how you will meet the goal of your research or project. Rigorously combing through your process will allow you to remove bad patterns in every step.

Play the Game in Your Head First

Having studied, developed, and practiced, you are now ready to play the game. Just like preparing for a debate, an important phone call, or an important meeting, running through the event in your own head is critical to success. As a proposal writer, you are trying to persuade others. To achieve this goal, you must reach your audience through logic and when necessary, emotion. You will need to convince them that you have a solution to a specific problem, and then you must maintain their attention so they score in your favor. To be effective, you first need to play the scenario in your head over and over again, ensuring that each objective or aim is doable, focused, and achievable. What will the scenario look like when you are funded? How will you begin? How will you execute each step? What obstacles will you need to solve? The more of these questions you can answer, the closer you will come to success.

Increase your odds in the competition first and foremost with the understanding that you are playing to win. You will be swimming with the sharks knowing that your life may depend on victory. This is the case for many grant writers who need their grants for tenure and promotion, as well as for others who need to sustain their jobs and salaries. You should not enter the competition merely hoping to win, but doing everything you can to prepare yourself for success. You are now in it to win it.

The post The Grant Competition: Swim with the Sharks appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

The Learning Environment and Challenging Curriculum

Funding requests should include the following best practices for a positive learning environment:

• Encouraged collaboration between students
• Topics that relate to student interests and the discovery process
• Integration of math, science, and technology to help students understand the importance and connections between these fields
• Focus on hands-on experience, not just textbook learning
• Students should be helped to understand that failure is a normal occurrence while learning, and under no circumstances should they be punished for failure
• Flexible curriculum that demonstrates and facilitates creativity
• Use of latest technology, visual aids, and laboratory kits to foster learning
• An inquiry-based experiential curriculum that is clearly defined and understood
• Real-world applications
• Critical thinking and problem solving
• Student-centered plans to carry out investigations
• Students critiquing their own and their peers’ science practices
• Criteria that incorporate local, state, and national standards

Teacher Training on Inquiry-Based Learning

I would agree with Bill Gates, who said: “Technology is just a tool. In terms of getting the kids working together and motivating them, the teacher is the most important.” Teacher training should be ongoing and provide the techniques to use state-of-the-art technology and experiential teaching approaches. The focus should be on how teachers and students can work together as active learners. Specifically, training should include:

• Outcome-based lessons, whereby teachers transform their classes to include components of their training
• Topics for classroom instruction, such as: inquiry-based science teaching, the frontiers of science, and the analysis of difficult problems
• Subjects that lead to inquiry-based science learning with embedded student experiments
• An emphasis on the importance of student diversity, individuality, and uniqueness

Defined Outcomes or Assessment

Your proposal should clearly identify goals and objectives, and success should be measured against them. These should reflect the short-, mid-, and long-term outcomes. The evaluation should include a mixed method approach, in which quantitative and qualitative information is sought. The resulting assessment must clearly demonstrate a continuous effort to improve the program and ensure that all students are reached.

Sustained Commitment from the School Leadership, Parents and Community

In order for any STEM program to be sustained, collective support should be a major factor. This should begin with the school leadership, who should encourage and reward teachers who practice inquiry learning. Just as importantly, parents should be recognized for being involved in their children’s education. The community can also become an active partner via the funding from private industry.

These elements need to be included in a funding request to the donor to win STEM education grants. Both the public and private sectors are now offering funding opportunities, based on the urgency of this problem.

The post America’s STEM Education Problem appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

Internal Control Systems

Grant-winning institutions must have a tight system of policies and procedures in place that are recognized and respected at all levels of the organization. Normally, this system is managed by the Sponsored Research Office or another fiscal administration office, whose ultimate responsibility is to manage grants for the organization. Most often, this office will provide grant management training for staff and grantees, in addition to coordinating programs with similar goals and purposes.

Performance Measures

Monitoring the progress of program objectives to meet short-, mid-, and long-term outcomes in accordance to the request and timelines of the funded grant is a major way to achieve performance measures. Working with grantees to ensure the objectives and outcomes are linked with the activities can lead to compliance and collaboration. This is especially important with new grantees, who may not be aware of the regulations for grant awards. A sound and ongoing training process will greatly facilitate this effort.

Pre-Award Process

During the pre-award process, institutional grant administration personnel review compliance regulations and requirements in the RFPs and RFAs, and convey these to the applicant. Doing so makes certain that all parties are aware of the scope of management and responsibility of the grant. Specifically, the grant administrators will finalize the budget, ensure appropriate internal signatures, and – for a federal grant – submit the proposal through Grants.gov.

Post-award process

If the pre-award process is carefully designed and administered, the post-award procedure to ensure results will be a simpler undertaking. Three main areas control this aspect of grant management: financial compliance, performance monitoring, and time commitments of grantees. Awarded, in-kind, and matching funds will need to be tracked, along with payroll and participant records. Monetary conformity and the time commitment of the staff are essential for success. Poor management in the latter aspect has often resulted in institutions having to return money to donors. When a grant is awarded with a time commitment from existing full-time personnel, the awardee institutions must demonstrate a reduction in the existing duties of said personnel that corresponds to their reported time commitment for grant activities. This is why payroll and participant records need to be especially accurate and specific.

Assessing and Using Results

The donor organization’s monitoring process should be a blanket effort over all awarded grants, which will ensure compliance and grant success. Serving as both a grantee and a compliance team officer has given me the perspective from both sides. As a grantee, I wanted to expedite a program that may or may not have been precisely executed according to what I had promised the donor in my grant request. As a compliance team officer, I had to guarantee that what had been promised by the grantee was being achieved. These two roles are often more cacophonous than harmonious. Nevertheless, grantees must provide progress reports throughout the various phases of their work, including demonstration of achievement. Ongoing and continuous evaluation of the program objectives – along with results assessment and alterations to the program, if needed – is a good method to ensure that the original promise to the donor is met by the end of the grant. At the end of the day, the institution that has a strong system of regulations and reiterates those to their grantees is an institution that need not worry about audits.

The last time your institution was audited, what was the outcome? Share your experience in the comments.

The post Surviving an Audit: How to be Ready appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.