Grantwriting Help
There is an old saying about grantseeking that “If you’ve seen one foundation,
you’ve seen one foundation.” That’s partially true: Each foundation’s
grantmaking priorities, review processes, and overall “personality” will differ
from another’s. Although each is unique, all share common traits.
In this section, we’ll try to give you insight into the grantmaking process at
the King Foundation. These comments won’t necessarily apply to all other
foundations you may encounter, but we hope the information on our site will
help you understand the basics of foundation grantseeking and proposal writing.
Let's start with some basic truths:
-
Grants are very competitive.
The Chronicle of Philanthropy reports that there are more than 100,000
private grantmaking foundations in the U. S. These foundations contributed an
estimated $36.5 billion to charity in 2006, representing only 12.4% of all
charitable gifts. The vast majority of these foundations have very small staffs
or no staff at all, and many have very small endowments. Others give only to
preselected organizations or focus their grantmaking on a few areas. All of
these factors combine to make grantseeking among broad-purpose foundations like
the King Foundation highly competitive.
It is not unusual for the initial ratio of grant dollars requested to grant
dollars available to be 5:1 or more at the King Foundation. (It’s even higher
at some other foundations.) In that environment, it is critical for each
nonprofit to put its best foot forward from the very beginning. If a nonprofit
fails to comply with guidelines, or presents a sloppy or incomplete proposal,
it creates a bad impression that can permeate the entire review process.
-
The grants review process is both objective and subjective.
There is a natural temptation to think that if a nonprofit can demonstrate
facts A, B, and C, funding is nearly assured, but there is no sure-fire
formula.
The due diligence process is a combination of both head and heart. Good
grantmaking includes both factual analysis and some unquantifiable factors,
such as the reviewer’s personal assessment and observations of agency
conditions, or the staff quality and integrity. Also, some grant cycles have
more competitive requests than others.
-
Grantmakers are human, too.
Personal relationships and past experience between a nonprofit and the grant
reviewer can affect the process, both positively and negatively. For example,
if an agency was less than forthright about important matters in the past, or
previously showed poor stewardship, the grant reviewer naturally enters the
process with a cautious eye.
In those foundations with paid staff, employees tend to work hard and are
generally pressed for time, like other nonprofit workers. In addition to these
common work stresses, there is an inherent power dynamic, and resultant
tension, between grantmakers and grantseekers, which exists whether an
individual grantmaker promotes it or not. (Admittedly, some do.) Don’t make the
review process adversarial by having an uncooperative, defensive, or resentful
attitude. Try to treat the grantmaker as an advocate for your organization,
rather than a critic.
-
Homework is important.
Read guidelines carefully before you apply, and contact the Foundation to
clarify any uncertainties. Don’t rely exclusively on resources like the
Foundation Directory, even if using the Internet versions. As good as these
clearinghouses are, the most current and detailed information will normally be
available from the Foundation itself, confirmed through a telephone
conversation.
Give yourself enough time before the deadline to ensure that you understand the
complete process, not just the deadline date. Our grants process takes six
months from submission of a letter of inquiry to the earliest possible funding.
So don’t submit a letter in June for a project that will need money in October,
because a grant could not be made until December.