What got my attention the most in this chapter was the process of making connections and inquiring for meetings or phone calls with funders. First off, I thought it was interesting how they suggested to reach out to prior grantees about their experience. I’m not sure why, but I had the impression that this would be something deemed “not okay” in the realm of funding. That it would seem like an organization was being sneaky in how they are obtaining information about a funder. In reality, it’s good to get as many sources and as much information as possible. In addition to this, I wanted to mention the “reality check” the authors included on page 21 of the chapter. It really sold to me the caution one must take in networking and establishing connected. That having a connection to a funder through your organization can be good, but it can also be detrimental. The way to strike a balance is to show interest but not be too eager that it reads as overbearing. I thought the “soft hand” versus “heavy hand” was a great way to put it. Lastly, I had a question regarding how grant seekers can reach out to funders. It suggests that one can send an email (or make a phone call), but only if permitted. I’m curious as why funders would disallow emails or phone calls from grant seekers because, in my opinion, it only prevents the ability to connect. The chapter doesn’t provide much relief on why a funder would prevent such channels either. This is something we could possibly discuss in Wednesdays meeting.
The most notable part of this chapter for me was complexities around building a relationship with the funder. The reality check on page 21 specifically stuck out to me, as it talks about not being too pushy when trying to build a relationship with a funder. I would be curious to explore this more in class and talk about how to feel out these boundaries with funders. I was also surprised that it might be appropriate for funders to visit grantseeker’s organizations in person, as I thought this would not be allowed. The amount of information that is put in the letter of interest was completely new to me too, as I assumed the letter would be more to the point. So far, the letter seems like an overall view of the organization, rather than an introduction, which is different from what I initially thought.
I found it interesting and clever how it mentions looking for existing relationships between one’s organization and the funding foundation. It is important to use any resources that one has as effectively as possible, as it makes the grant-seeking process less time-consuming and for more impactful grant proposals. Having that relationship allows the funder to have existing insight into the organization’s reputation, making it easier for them to make a decision, typically a positive one, if funding was provided to the organization in the past. Speaking with other grantees about developing a relationship with the funder is also a notable tactic to use, as it yields information about what the funder is looking for in an organization and ideas on what is successful in obtaining grants from the funder. I also find it very crucial to consider whether it is appropriate to use a contact to introduce one’s organization to a funder, as it can lead to pressured decisions by the foundation that will, in the long run, lead to failure or a lack of truth when it comes to finally deciding who gets the grant, possibly wasting a lot of time. A genuine relationship and interest should be developed between the funder and the organization, increasing the likelihood of the organization’s other projects being funded by the foundation and leading to a better reputation for the organization.
I think there wasn’t one thing in this chapter that stood out to me because all of it was relevant and super important. When writing or developing a grant for your program it takes a lot of blood, sweat, and tears. And behind those emotions is a human. The same goes for asking a funder for money. A lot about grant writing and working in a non-profit environment involves the human component that is immeasurable. That’s why reaching out to have a quick chat in person or online is super important to forming that connection that will hopefully gain you an edge on your project. Once you have that meeting, it is polite and shows character that you follow up with the funder that you enjoyed talking to them, and thank them for taking the time out of their busy schedule to talk/listen to what you have to say. The other half of the chapter was about LOI or Letters of Interest. This is important because it gives the funder a better understanding of your organization/project so that way they can make a better decision on your grant. It also helps them better understand you as the grant writer and why is organization/project might be helpful to the community.
On the topic of building connections and making things more personal for the potential funder, appealing to them and telling what they can do for the community instead of what they can do for your organization. It brings me back to the salesman or even subtle showmanship to this. With all the different methods of establishing a connection to your funder either with a phone-call email, or what does stick out to me an event. I wonder if there’s more creativity to this early process, showing off your individuality/uniqueness in establishing connections. A practice in social skills somewhat, obviously within reason and not without the ability to be more formal when it matters when it comes to official proposal’s/letters.
I continue to find myself baffled by the amount of preparation and extensive research that goes into preparing just the letter of intent, let alone a grant. I am sure that as the class goes on, this will seem less daunting, but right now I am definitely a little overwhelmed with the info they are throwing at me. Before even submitting a letter of inquiry, one must essentially already have built a relationship with the funder. Whether it be by having a meeting/interview or by having prior connection, it is kind of necessary in order to even be considered for the potential grant. I also really liked the example of the letter of intent, I found it to be really helpful to actually see one written out, I felt like it made the process seem more manageable. In the reading they talked about how the letter of intent should be really brief, although I found this example one to be rather wordy, so I would like to know further clarification on what the letter of intent actually entails, which I am sure we are going to discuss next time.
I thought it was helpful to learn that one should err on the side of restraint when it comes to relationship building with funders. And this makes sense – if it were me in the position of the funder, being forced into a meeting would set me the wrong way. However, I do think it creates this question of how to balance that space. In one sense you need to be intentional and forward, and on the other, you can’t be overly pushy. I think one thing that is helpful in navigating this space is knowing that you are not trying to sell your organization’s program to the funder. Instead, you are attempting to make a connection between the program and the funding institution’s interest areas. Moreover, to avoid being pushy, it is important to know when the funder’s interests don’t necessarily align with your program. And thus, it’s important to have other programs in mind to present as backups. This is an idea outlined in the text. However, a part of me wonders if continuously throwing different interests at the funder, hoping one sticks, seems a little pushy and desperate. Furthermore, I wonder if the funder will start to think that the interests are disingenuous if there’s so many of them.
One interesting thing about this chapter was the emphasis on not becoming overburdensome to whatever organization you want to fund your grant. For example, when emailing the grant contact, let them invite you to a meeting; don’t push them into a meeting. I found this interesting because applying for a grant is such a heavy-handed process. When writing a proposal, one must research individuals at the company, the company itself, past grants that were given, etc. Additionally, there are multiple documents/letters that need to be sent to an organization to even qualify for potential grants. So, I found it slightly ironic that when trying to connect with the people you do all this work for, it’s important to take a step back. I’m not trying to say it doesn’t make sense or it’s a bad approach, it just stood out to me that, of all things, the actual dialogue with the company is where you should take a step back.
I believe the most helpful part of this chapter was the reality check and the example of the letter of interest. Developing relationships with funders and establishing positive contact is crucial to the world of grant seeking. However, the book indicates that less is more in the way of making connections to potential funders. This makes sense logistically, but I would imagine this would be very difficult in practice do not contact someone too much about meeting even if your intentions are positive.
Additionally, I believe the example letter of interest is very helpful in illustrating a concise and respectful way of initiating a second contact with a grant funder. I read through it twice and identified several parts that were addressed in the video we watched last week. For example, this LOI builds the credibility of the organization, while laying out how the nonprofit will improve and further its mission with more funding. This letter exemplifies how concise and clear grant writing and all writing that surrounds it must be. This chapter was a good reminder of what grant funders and therefore grant seekers must prioritize.
9 thoughts on “JOURNAL # 6”
What got my attention the most in this chapter was the process of making connections and inquiring for meetings or phone calls with funders. First off, I thought it was interesting how they suggested to reach out to prior grantees about their experience. I’m not sure why, but I had the impression that this would be something deemed “not okay” in the realm of funding. That it would seem like an organization was being sneaky in how they are obtaining information about a funder. In reality, it’s good to get as many sources and as much information as possible. In addition to this, I wanted to mention the “reality check” the authors included on page 21 of the chapter. It really sold to me the caution one must take in networking and establishing connected. That having a connection to a funder through your organization can be good, but it can also be detrimental. The way to strike a balance is to show interest but not be too eager that it reads as overbearing. I thought the “soft hand” versus “heavy hand” was a great way to put it. Lastly, I had a question regarding how grant seekers can reach out to funders. It suggests that one can send an email (or make a phone call), but only if permitted. I’m curious as why funders would disallow emails or phone calls from grant seekers because, in my opinion, it only prevents the ability to connect. The chapter doesn’t provide much relief on why a funder would prevent such channels either. This is something we could possibly discuss in Wednesdays meeting.
The most notable part of this chapter for me was complexities around building a relationship with the funder. The reality check on page 21 specifically stuck out to me, as it talks about not being too pushy when trying to build a relationship with a funder. I would be curious to explore this more in class and talk about how to feel out these boundaries with funders. I was also surprised that it might be appropriate for funders to visit grantseeker’s organizations in person, as I thought this would not be allowed. The amount of information that is put in the letter of interest was completely new to me too, as I assumed the letter would be more to the point. So far, the letter seems like an overall view of the organization, rather than an introduction, which is different from what I initially thought.
I found it interesting and clever how it mentions looking for existing relationships between one’s organization and the funding foundation. It is important to use any resources that one has as effectively as possible, as it makes the grant-seeking process less time-consuming and for more impactful grant proposals. Having that relationship allows the funder to have existing insight into the organization’s reputation, making it easier for them to make a decision, typically a positive one, if funding was provided to the organization in the past. Speaking with other grantees about developing a relationship with the funder is also a notable tactic to use, as it yields information about what the funder is looking for in an organization and ideas on what is successful in obtaining grants from the funder. I also find it very crucial to consider whether it is appropriate to use a contact to introduce one’s organization to a funder, as it can lead to pressured decisions by the foundation that will, in the long run, lead to failure or a lack of truth when it comes to finally deciding who gets the grant, possibly wasting a lot of time. A genuine relationship and interest should be developed between the funder and the organization, increasing the likelihood of the organization’s other projects being funded by the foundation and leading to a better reputation for the organization.
I think there wasn’t one thing in this chapter that stood out to me because all of it was relevant and super important. When writing or developing a grant for your program it takes a lot of blood, sweat, and tears. And behind those emotions is a human. The same goes for asking a funder for money. A lot about grant writing and working in a non-profit environment involves the human component that is immeasurable. That’s why reaching out to have a quick chat in person or online is super important to forming that connection that will hopefully gain you an edge on your project. Once you have that meeting, it is polite and shows character that you follow up with the funder that you enjoyed talking to them, and thank them for taking the time out of their busy schedule to talk/listen to what you have to say. The other half of the chapter was about LOI or Letters of Interest. This is important because it gives the funder a better understanding of your organization/project so that way they can make a better decision on your grant. It also helps them better understand you as the grant writer and why is organization/project might be helpful to the community.
On the topic of building connections and making things more personal for the potential funder, appealing to them and telling what they can do for the community instead of what they can do for your organization. It brings me back to the salesman or even subtle showmanship to this. With all the different methods of establishing a connection to your funder either with a phone-call email, or what does stick out to me an event. I wonder if there’s more creativity to this early process, showing off your individuality/uniqueness in establishing connections. A practice in social skills somewhat, obviously within reason and not without the ability to be more formal when it matters when it comes to official proposal’s/letters.
I continue to find myself baffled by the amount of preparation and extensive research that goes into preparing just the letter of intent, let alone a grant. I am sure that as the class goes on, this will seem less daunting, but right now I am definitely a little overwhelmed with the info they are throwing at me. Before even submitting a letter of inquiry, one must essentially already have built a relationship with the funder. Whether it be by having a meeting/interview or by having prior connection, it is kind of necessary in order to even be considered for the potential grant. I also really liked the example of the letter of intent, I found it to be really helpful to actually see one written out, I felt like it made the process seem more manageable. In the reading they talked about how the letter of intent should be really brief, although I found this example one to be rather wordy, so I would like to know further clarification on what the letter of intent actually entails, which I am sure we are going to discuss next time.
I thought it was helpful to learn that one should err on the side of restraint when it comes to relationship building with funders. And this makes sense – if it were me in the position of the funder, being forced into a meeting would set me the wrong way. However, I do think it creates this question of how to balance that space. In one sense you need to be intentional and forward, and on the other, you can’t be overly pushy. I think one thing that is helpful in navigating this space is knowing that you are not trying to sell your organization’s program to the funder. Instead, you are attempting to make a connection between the program and the funding institution’s interest areas. Moreover, to avoid being pushy, it is important to know when the funder’s interests don’t necessarily align with your program. And thus, it’s important to have other programs in mind to present as backups. This is an idea outlined in the text. However, a part of me wonders if continuously throwing different interests at the funder, hoping one sticks, seems a little pushy and desperate. Furthermore, I wonder if the funder will start to think that the interests are disingenuous if there’s so many of them.
One interesting thing about this chapter was the emphasis on not becoming overburdensome to whatever organization you want to fund your grant. For example, when emailing the grant contact, let them invite you to a meeting; don’t push them into a meeting. I found this interesting because applying for a grant is such a heavy-handed process. When writing a proposal, one must research individuals at the company, the company itself, past grants that were given, etc. Additionally, there are multiple documents/letters that need to be sent to an organization to even qualify for potential grants. So, I found it slightly ironic that when trying to connect with the people you do all this work for, it’s important to take a step back. I’m not trying to say it doesn’t make sense or it’s a bad approach, it just stood out to me that, of all things, the actual dialogue with the company is where you should take a step back.
I believe the most helpful part of this chapter was the reality check and the example of the letter of interest. Developing relationships with funders and establishing positive contact is crucial to the world of grant seeking. However, the book indicates that less is more in the way of making connections to potential funders. This makes sense logistically, but I would imagine this would be very difficult in practice do not contact someone too much about meeting even if your intentions are positive.
Additionally, I believe the example letter of interest is very helpful in illustrating a concise and respectful way of initiating a second contact with a grant funder. I read through it twice and identified several parts that were addressed in the video we watched last week. For example, this LOI builds the credibility of the organization, while laying out how the nonprofit will improve and further its mission with more funding. This letter exemplifies how concise and clear grant writing and all writing that surrounds it must be. This chapter was a good reminder of what grant funders and therefore grant seekers must prioritize.