I found this chapter to be fairly interesting, but also slightly confusing as I feel like we have done something very similar to this in a different section of grant writing. The background component needs to be really in depth about the history of the organization in order to show growth and credibility as an organization. I found that the worksheet exercise attached to this section is going to be really helpful when it comes to making this section, as it lays everything out in great detail, you essentially just need to add the connecting words. I also really appreciate how much this chapter emphasizes not only the importance of the background history of the organization, but also the necessity of showing exactly who this program will be helping in the community. This section is very detail oriented, as the specifics of the desired programs need to be written out and explained as well. Overall this section to me feels like a huge summary section of everything we have done thus far (kind of like an executive summary).
The organizational background appears to be the bulk of the proposal where the organization can establish its credibility. Although a glimpse into the mission statement is provided in other sections, the organization’s board members, their expertise, previous accomplishments, and successes all allow for the funder to see whether there is potential that organizations have. Part of this heavily involves specificity, where expertise that is highlighted should be relevant to the proposed project or mission of both the organization and the funder, rather than just filler information that carries no value. While reading the example organizational background of Alyson Eats, I found that it overall incorporates storytelling well into highlighting the realization that there is a problem regarding hunger in Alyson and the establishment of the organization, including its progress towards the amount of credibility they have now. It helps the funder, specifically someone who is an executive within the foundation, remain engaged in the story while learning about why the problem needs to be addressed and being persuaded that the organization is fit to carry out its proposal rather than a liability. A big part of this is the ability to highlight those prior accomplishments or existing expertise in directly related fields, whereas it is not the focus in other parts of the section.
One thing I found important during this reading is to include the company’s history in order to make the funder understand if you are a reliable company with a trackable record. Without a trackable record, a funder might be very hesitant to fund your project. Another thing I found interesting during the reading was to make sure to address the community you will be working with in order to see if your track record fits with the group you are trying to serve. For example, a funding group that just works with food kitchens might get hesitant funding if they try to branch out to things like building a public park. Staying in your lane type beat. Finally, the other thing I found interesting was to not be afraid of flexing your achievements. When other funders get to see your record and the achievements you get, this will instill confidence in anyone who looks at your record.
The most interesting part of this chapter for me was the details needed in the background statement. I knew there would be some kind of background component to fill the funder in on who exactly is applying for their grant, but I did not expect it to be so detailed. The how unique, accomplishments and summary of need statement sections were very surprising to me, as these were not pieces I would expect in this section. A lot of grant writing is very repetitive, and most of this piece of the proposal seems very repetitive to other parts. It would make perfect sense, though, that funders want examples of past success, as without proof of success, they have nothing to go off when giving their grant.
To the question of the three big takeaways of the chapter/”Step”, they are clearly presented on page 92. These three big content components are such: the history of the organization, including when it was founded; the demographics of the community served, followed by the ways in which both the board members and the staff reflect those demographics – this is important to share so that the funder can ensure that the nonprofit is reflective of the community is seeks to serve; and finally, descriptions of innovative programs or special services the organization provides as well as any awards, credential, and/or special recognition. I think within these content components there is room for nuance, but more importantly there is room to really show off an organization. In other words, the power of the Organization Background statement isn’t in the creativity of the statement itself, it’s in the background of the organization. With this in mind, it might actually be better to fit within the (rigid) structure of the outline presented in the text. This is because it makes more space for the organization to show off, instead of having to worry about the appeal of the statement itself. Finally, I thought it was interesting how there is a desire to prove that the organization connects and reflects the community. I would’ve thought that this revealed itself more in the actual project. But now that I think of it, there is power in substantiating and showing a history of community connection as being an integral part of the organization, and thus something to mention in describing its’ background.
This chapter highlighted another part of grant writing that I had no idea existed. Honestly my first instinct while reading was that it felt like a resume, but in narrative form. A list of qualifications was my first big takeaway. Like a resume this section aims to show all the concrete strengths the grantseeker has and what they can do with them. Secondly, this chapter emphasizes the narrative structure of the organizational background. While being rather economical with words, like the Alyson Eats example, there is a solid story told. Lastly, this story includes a lot of information, but it does not seem forced. The example did a very effective job at chronicling the history of the organization, its past shortcomings, and how their organization helps their specific community by using the skills of its staff. The “why and when” are so important to contextualize the mission of an organization to grant funders. It shows that the non-profit emerged out of a time and a need to fill a specific void or underserved area.
So this chapter focuses more on addressing yourself to the donor, I think we’ve been mostly working on how to make ourselves more appealing to the donor with the whole grant proposal rising process we’ve done so far, so writing what the organization in a more honest way is what sticks out to me. Also like the project itself you have to show why your organization is special and worth taking note, researching your own history and finding what you can use to seem the most fitting/credible. The background exercise is good at giving you a grand scope of what you have to keep in mind, and that any factor is important, and showing every factor written in the exercise is essential, there’s a lot of moving parts in this and this step is no exception.
It’s important to show in your background statement who you are and what you stand for. You have to be able to tell potential funders that you care and are passionate about your cause. Another thing to take into account is your credibility. Funders don’t want to give tens of thousands of dollars to an organization that doesn’t seem responsible. A good way to show this is by providing an example or two of past successful projects that were gran funded and being able to explain how you used your grant money efficiently. Having the credibility of being fiscally responsible and a “man of your word” can help reassure funders that their money is not going to waste. Another important thing funders look for is if your project meets an unmet need. Being unique in that way and able to say that your organization is stepping up to the plate to solve a community problem.
8 thoughts on “JOURNAL # 14”
I found this chapter to be fairly interesting, but also slightly confusing as I feel like we have done something very similar to this in a different section of grant writing. The background component needs to be really in depth about the history of the organization in order to show growth and credibility as an organization. I found that the worksheet exercise attached to this section is going to be really helpful when it comes to making this section, as it lays everything out in great detail, you essentially just need to add the connecting words. I also really appreciate how much this chapter emphasizes not only the importance of the background history of the organization, but also the necessity of showing exactly who this program will be helping in the community. This section is very detail oriented, as the specifics of the desired programs need to be written out and explained as well. Overall this section to me feels like a huge summary section of everything we have done thus far (kind of like an executive summary).
The organizational background appears to be the bulk of the proposal where the organization can establish its credibility. Although a glimpse into the mission statement is provided in other sections, the organization’s board members, their expertise, previous accomplishments, and successes all allow for the funder to see whether there is potential that organizations have. Part of this heavily involves specificity, where expertise that is highlighted should be relevant to the proposed project or mission of both the organization and the funder, rather than just filler information that carries no value. While reading the example organizational background of Alyson Eats, I found that it overall incorporates storytelling well into highlighting the realization that there is a problem regarding hunger in Alyson and the establishment of the organization, including its progress towards the amount of credibility they have now. It helps the funder, specifically someone who is an executive within the foundation, remain engaged in the story while learning about why the problem needs to be addressed and being persuaded that the organization is fit to carry out its proposal rather than a liability. A big part of this is the ability to highlight those prior accomplishments or existing expertise in directly related fields, whereas it is not the focus in other parts of the section.
One thing I found important during this reading is to include the company’s history in order to make the funder understand if you are a reliable company with a trackable record. Without a trackable record, a funder might be very hesitant to fund your project. Another thing I found interesting during the reading was to make sure to address the community you will be working with in order to see if your track record fits with the group you are trying to serve. For example, a funding group that just works with food kitchens might get hesitant funding if they try to branch out to things like building a public park. Staying in your lane type beat. Finally, the other thing I found interesting was to not be afraid of flexing your achievements. When other funders get to see your record and the achievements you get, this will instill confidence in anyone who looks at your record.
The most interesting part of this chapter for me was the details needed in the background statement. I knew there would be some kind of background component to fill the funder in on who exactly is applying for their grant, but I did not expect it to be so detailed. The how unique, accomplishments and summary of need statement sections were very surprising to me, as these were not pieces I would expect in this section. A lot of grant writing is very repetitive, and most of this piece of the proposal seems very repetitive to other parts. It would make perfect sense, though, that funders want examples of past success, as without proof of success, they have nothing to go off when giving their grant.
To the question of the three big takeaways of the chapter/”Step”, they are clearly presented on page 92. These three big content components are such: the history of the organization, including when it was founded; the demographics of the community served, followed by the ways in which both the board members and the staff reflect those demographics – this is important to share so that the funder can ensure that the nonprofit is reflective of the community is seeks to serve; and finally, descriptions of innovative programs or special services the organization provides as well as any awards, credential, and/or special recognition. I think within these content components there is room for nuance, but more importantly there is room to really show off an organization. In other words, the power of the Organization Background statement isn’t in the creativity of the statement itself, it’s in the background of the organization. With this in mind, it might actually be better to fit within the (rigid) structure of the outline presented in the text. This is because it makes more space for the organization to show off, instead of having to worry about the appeal of the statement itself. Finally, I thought it was interesting how there is a desire to prove that the organization connects and reflects the community. I would’ve thought that this revealed itself more in the actual project. But now that I think of it, there is power in substantiating and showing a history of community connection as being an integral part of the organization, and thus something to mention in describing its’ background.
This chapter highlighted another part of grant writing that I had no idea existed. Honestly my first instinct while reading was that it felt like a resume, but in narrative form. A list of qualifications was my first big takeaway. Like a resume this section aims to show all the concrete strengths the grantseeker has and what they can do with them. Secondly, this chapter emphasizes the narrative structure of the organizational background. While being rather economical with words, like the Alyson Eats example, there is a solid story told. Lastly, this story includes a lot of information, but it does not seem forced. The example did a very effective job at chronicling the history of the organization, its past shortcomings, and how their organization helps their specific community by using the skills of its staff. The “why and when” are so important to contextualize the mission of an organization to grant funders. It shows that the non-profit emerged out of a time and a need to fill a specific void or underserved area.
So this chapter focuses more on addressing yourself to the donor, I think we’ve been mostly working on how to make ourselves more appealing to the donor with the whole grant proposal rising process we’ve done so far, so writing what the organization in a more honest way is what sticks out to me. Also like the project itself you have to show why your organization is special and worth taking note, researching your own history and finding what you can use to seem the most fitting/credible. The background exercise is good at giving you a grand scope of what you have to keep in mind, and that any factor is important, and showing every factor written in the exercise is essential, there’s a lot of moving parts in this and this step is no exception.
It’s important to show in your background statement who you are and what you stand for. You have to be able to tell potential funders that you care and are passionate about your cause. Another thing to take into account is your credibility. Funders don’t want to give tens of thousands of dollars to an organization that doesn’t seem responsible. A good way to show this is by providing an example or two of past successful projects that were gran funded and being able to explain how you used your grant money efficiently. Having the credibility of being fiscally responsible and a “man of your word” can help reassure funders that their money is not going to waste. Another important thing funders look for is if your project meets an unmet need. Being unique in that way and able to say that your organization is stepping up to the plate to solve a community problem.