Debunking Grant Myths

Transcription

1 2017 Navigate Summit Debunking Grant Myths Strategies for Winning Institutional Awards

2 Meacie Fairfax Senior Analyst, EAB Strategic Research

3 ROAD MAP 3 1 Introduction: Why Myths? 2 Busting Common Grant Myths 3 Closing and Questions

4 Leave No Stone Unturned Top Ten Reasons Provide Two Key Areas for Improvement 4 October 24, 2017 Dear Vanguard Community College: Thank you for your recent request to XYZ. Your proposal has been carefully reviewed, and it is with regret that we must decline your request for the following reasons: 1 Funder Research Content guideline errors Outside targeted geographic area or funding priorities Inaccurate or poor research efforts Allocation of grant funds is complete Insufficient grant track record* Unaware of funding cycles and timelines Inaccurate budget Inadequate project plan Unmeasurable program objectives 2 Project Plan Development Generalized evaluation plan Unrealistic sustainability plan Lack of local/regional collaborators and partnerships *Consider joint proposals to build a solid track record. Inadequate processes Planning staff doesn t account for essential staff Source: EAB interviews and analysis.

5 Not Just Staffing, but Efficiency Grant Staff Are Often Few, and Have Few Campus Advocates 5 Typical Grant Development Office 2 FTE Staff members $9M Average fund dollars managed Grant Review Process Faculty member submits grant request Grant coordinator reviews Faculty member submits grant approval form Routed for approval Proposal writing begins Have we determined project alignment and grant readiness? Common Concerns Crucial staff excluded from decision process Reduced capacity to support requests Lower quality of proposals Source: CASE Grant Office Survey, September 2016, and EAB analysis and interviews.

6 Many Sources of Truth for Winning Grants 6

7 ROAD MAP 7 1 Introduction: Why Myths? 2 Busting Common Grant Myths 3 Closing and Questions

8 The Acceptance of Half-Truths Four Reasons Myths Remain Embedded in Society 8 Control Natural Forces Justify Social Structure Explain Natural Phenomena Set Examples for Human Behavior If the path before you is clear, you are probably on someone else's. Joseph Campbell Source: Campbell, Joseph, and Bill Moyers. The Power of Myth New York: Doubleday

9 The 7 Grant Myths Avoid Disruptions to the Grant Development Process 9 FUNDING LANDSCAPE PLANNING PROCESS FUNDER ASSESSMENT 1 The availability and frequency of grant opportunities is shrinking. 3 To win, apply often. 5 Grant reviewers tend to favor select institutions. 2 Competition is too great its not worth it to apply. 4 Grant strategy is the responsibility of the proposal writer or project owner. 6 Institutional need is the greatest factor in the review process. 7 Funders only give to institutions they know.

10 10 Myth #1 Competition is too great for available grants it s not worth the effort to apply.

11 Myth #1: Competition is too great for available grants it s not worth the effort to apply. Not All Competition Is the Same Quick Math for Grant Hopefuls 11 Who s Your Real Competition for an Average Grant Award? Based on National Averages 10,000 Estimated number of applicants for a grant competition 4,000 of applicants do not follow grant submission guidelines outlined in the RFP 3,000 of applicants lack proper documentation to either receive or accept grant funds 1,500 of applicants are poorly budgeted, making grantors feel uneasy about rewarding funds 1,500 of applicants will meet the basic standards needed for consideration of funds

12 Myth #1: Competition is too great for available grants it s not worth the effort to apply. Place Your Bets Sinclair Community College Matrix Focuses Efforts on Biggest Potentials 12 Factors reflect grant readiness and ability to compete Decision is based on weighted criteria Source: Sinclair Community College and EAB interviews and analysis.

13 Would You Apply? Upcoming Grant Competition For Your Institution to Consider 13 Improving Transfer Pathways for Community College Students Deadline: December 30, 2017 Award Amount: Up to $2 million over 3 years Number of Awards: 40 Requirements: At least two current university partners with articulation agreements in place Activities must include: academic planning, career counseling, and student mentors. Total Score Assessment Poor, do not pursue opportunity Average, consider barriers before applying Above average, pursue opportunity after resource audit Additional points for community colleges which submit a joint proposal and reach over 10,000 students.

14 14 Myth #2 Grant strategy is the responsibility of the proposal writer or the project owner.

15 Myth #2: Grant strategy is the responsibility of the proposal writer or the project owner. (Lacking) A Seat at the Table Important Perspectives Often Missing from Grant Development Decisions 15 What are the compliance and reporting requirements for the grant? Potential to create additional deficit Finance Who will contribute to the creation and ultimately execute the grant? Grant Office Faculty What additional time or resources will be required of faculty, and what incentives are available? Lack of available staffing or expertise President College Grant Decision Committee Provost How can we increase enrollment, retention, and completion rates? IR and IT Enrollment How do we get faculty and staff involved providing holistic student supports? What institutional and student outcome data is required for initial application? Inability to track outcomes Mismatch of supports How can we identify and reach out to students that do not enroll, no longer persist, or stop out before its too late? Source: EAB analysis and interviews.

16 Myth #2: Grant strategy is the responsibility of the proposal writer or the project owner. Cross-Departmental Grant Strategy Team Build Consensus and Create Transparency in Grant Submissions Identify Department-level contacts Choose staff grant leads from each center, division, or department Establish meeting schedule to discuss grant opportunities and support needs Develop internal rubric to determine whether to proceed with grant funding Decide Grant feasibility and strategy Offer staff grant leads an opportunity to assess resources and capacity to assist in a grant proposal Tabulate results with cross-departmental team Decision based on collective assessment of grant readiness matrix Utilize Input to inform proposal and process improvements Seek input on your internal grant development process Include key staff and coordinators in grant development discussions Identify and measure metrics to determine success Source: EAB interviews and analysis.

17 Building Your Cross-Functional Grants Team 17 Finance IR and IT Faculty Enrollment Grant Review Process Identify grant opportunities Determine if opportunity is right-fit Draft grant proposal Provide feedback on grant proposal Review data from grant submissions Source: EAB interviews and analysis.

18 Time to Get Folks Off The Bench Building a Team to Support Grant Development Efforts 18 Exercise: Do you have a cross-campus team? Who does that involve? How did you select the members of the team? How regularly do you meet? What works? What doesn t work?

19 19 Myth #3 A funder relationship increases the odds of winning an award.

20 Myth #3: A funder relationship increases the odds of winning an award. Apply for Grants Where a Relationship Exists 20 21% Of current grantees report that relationships provided the opportunity to apply for funding Source: The Center for Effective Philanthropy, Working Well with Grantees (2014); EAB interviews and analysis.

21 Myth #3: A funder relationship increases the odds of winning an award. Relationships Provide Insight, Not Grants Ensuring Match Between Funder and Proposal Is Even More Critical 21 Funding agency solicits grant proposal based on relationship Funding agency allocates funding Potential Barriers to Funding Mismatch with Current and Future Priorities Overlooked Guidelines Reliance on Relationship to Gain Approval Lack of Partnerships Impartial Peer Reviewers Source: EAB interviews and analysis.

22 22 Create New Connections with Funders Each foundation has its own strategy about how it is trying to make a change in the world. Nothing is more important when applying for a grant than having the right information. Debbie Rey, Grant Processor W.K. Kellogg Foundation

23 Myth #3: A funder relationship increases the odds of winning an award. Putting It All Together Find, Utilize, and Build Relationships That Support and Strengthen Mission 23 Prospective Funders Current Funders Find Best-Fit Grant Opportunities Intro and Provide Program Updates Share Key Lessons Learned Receive Grant Opportunities Engage in regular online and in-person research to unearth new funders Grants.gov Association Grant Resource State and local resources Peers Create program collateral that demonstrates program impact Send progress reports Offer firsthand visit experience Share higher education resources that relate to your program Offer to connect via phone or in person to report on progress Form a local affinity group Invitation to apply from private foundations Shared knowledge of upcoming relevant grants Conferences Funder roundtables Source: EAB interviews and analysis.

24 ROAD MAP 24 1 Introduction: Why Myths? 2 Busting Common Grant Myths 3 Closing and Questions

25 25 Where Do We Go from Here?

26 Case Study A Gradual and Steady Rise to the Top Key Policies and Procedures Lead to Increased Grant Revenue 26 What They Do Sinclair Community College Grants Development Offices Benchmarks 1 Consistent and Methodical Planning Process Each department develops a model indicating how it supports student learning and plan of activities to advance them. +6X Increase 26.1M 2 Customer Service Philosophy and Approach 3 Staff Development The grant office provides pre-award and post-award support to increase the probability of receiving an award and supporting staff. 4.3M The grant team members are trained facilitators who develop and storyboard proposal goals, objectives, plan, evaluation and other key elements Grant Revenue (in millions) Source: Sinclair Community College Grants Development Page, and EAB analysis.

27 LEGAL CAVEAT EAB is a division of The Advisory Board Company ( EAB ). EAB has made efforts to verify the accuracy of the information it provides to members. This report relies on data obtained from many sources, however, and EAB cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information provided or any analysis based thereon. In addition, neither EAB nor any of its affiliates (each, an EAB Organization ) is in the business of giving legal, medical, accounting, or other professional advice, and its reports should not be construed as professional advice. In particular, members should not rely on any legal commentary in this report as a basis for action, or assume that any tactics described herein would be permitted by applicable law or appropriate for a given member s situation. Members are advised to consult with appropriate professionals concerning legal, medical, tax, or accounting issues, before implementing any of these tactics. No EAB Organization or any of its respective officers, directors, employees, or agents shall be liable for any claims, liabilities, or expenses relating to (a) any errors or omissions in this report, whether caused by any EAB organization, or any of their respective employees or agents, or sources or other third parties, (b) any recommendation or graded ranking by any EAB Organization, or (c) failure of member and its employees and agents to abide by the terms set forth herein. EAB, Education Advisory Board, The Advisory Board Company, Royall, and Royall & Company are registered trademarks of The Advisory Board Company in the United States and other countries. Members are not permitted to use these trademarks, or any other trademark, product name, service name, trade name, and logo of any EAB Organization without prior written consent of EAB. Other trademarks, product names, service names, trade names, and logos used within these pages are the property of their respective holders. Use of other company trademarks, product names, service names, trade names, and logos or images of the same does not necessarily constitute (a) an endorsement by such company of an EAB Organization and its products and services, or (b) an endorsement of the company or its products or services by an EAB Organization. No EAB Organization is affiliated with any such company. IMPORTANT: Please read the following. EAB has prepared this report for the exclusive use of its members. Each member acknowledges and agrees that this report and the information contained herein (collectively, the Report ) are confidential and proprietary to EAB. By accepting delivery of this Report, each member agrees to abide by the terms as stated herein, including the following: 1. All right, title, and interest in and to this Report is owned by an EAB Organization. Except as stated herein, no right, license, permission, or interest of any kind in this Report is intended to be given, transferred to, or acquired by a member. Each member is authorized to use this Report only to the extent expressly authorized herein. 2. Each member shall not sell, license, republish, or post online or otherwise this Report, in part or in whole. Each member shall not disseminate or permit the use of, and shall take reasonable precautions to prevent such dissemination or use of, this Report by (a) any of its employees and agents (except as stated below), or (b) any third party. 3. Each member may make this Report available solely to those of its employees and agents who (a) are registered for the workshop or membership program of which this Report is a part, (b) require access to this Report in order to learn from the information described herein, and (c) agree not to disclose this Report to other employees or agents or any third party. Each member shall use, and shall ensure that its employees and agents use, this Report for its internal use only. Each member may make a limited number of copies, solely as adequate for use by its employees and agents in accordance with the terms herein. 4. Each member shall not remove from this Report any confidential markings, copyright notices, and/or other similar indicia herein. 5. Each member is responsible for any breach of its obligations as stated herein by any of its employees or agents. 6. If a member is unwilling to abide by any of the foregoing obligations, then such member shall promptly return this Report and all copies thereof to EAB.

28 2445 M Street NW, Washington DC P F eab.com