Blog

It's finally happened: the funder has made a decision on your grant proposal. They may respond in one of several ways. But what should you do after they’ve informed you of their decision? Let’s look at four different scenarios.

If your organization has experienced financial difficulty in the past or received a less than perfect audit, you might still get federal grant funds but be designated by the government as a “high risk” grant recipient. If your organization is cash poor, a high-risk grantee designation will make things even harder because you’ll be placed on reimbursement funding status—a kind of funding purgatory. Reimbursement funding status means you must advance your own funds first and then get reimbursed when you submit documentation of spending.

Thousands of federal grant proposals are submitted each year. Around 80% will be rejected and around 20% on average will get funded. The required signatures on the federal Standard Form 424 face sheet and the companion “Standard Assurances” bind your organization to comply with each of the 23 assurances associated with receipt of federal funding.

You have a federal grant award with an approved budget and you have verified that your spending plan includes only eligible costs. Now you can just draw down and spend, right? Not quite. The reality is that you have to earn the right to draw down those awarded dollars.

In the world of grant proposals, the budget comprises as little as 5% or as much as 20% of the points you’ll be awarded in the federal review process. Yet, for many, preparing the budget and budget justification is the most troublesome and time-consuming part of the proposal development process.

When auditors assess your handling of grant funds, they’re not looking to ding you at every possible point with negative findings. Their job is to provide an official opinion about your financial statements that is unqualified, qualified, or disclaimed. An unqualified opinion means that your financial statements are free of material error and may be relied upon.

Yes, really. It’s an old notion that’s run its course and that was never right in the first place. Time moves on, and in the best of circumstances people wise up. There’s a movement stirring, a new wind blowing. It’s a revolution that calls out to each and every person working in the field of grants, pushing them to wake up or to speak up, and to contribute their energy to move the work forward in the right direction.

This is a preview from our latest Grant Management series article, Model Purchasing Policies and Procedures: A Guide for Nonprofits, Governments, and Tribal Organizations, available for purchase here. Preface I. Introduction Welcome to Model Purchasing Policies and Procedures: A Guide for Nonprofits, Governments, and Tribal Organizations. It has been more than 30 years since any organization has issued something substantially new concerning procurement for use by governments and nonprofit organizations. The question is why now? There are four reasons.

Strong grant proposals use relevant data to support the request for funding. You can spot an experienced grantseeker by how artfully they use data. The successful grant professionals I know are obsessed with data.

Effective programs are more than well designed and more than appropriately funded―they’re culturally competent. Truly effective programs are planned and operated with a high-level of respect for and sensitivity to the groups they’re intended to benefit.