Before I began working as a grant consultant, I did not understand all the details and intricacies of grant budgets, including the difference between restricted and unrestricted funds. I remember working with one nonprofit that was thrilled to receive a significant grant for program staff salaries, only to realize later that they could not move those funds elsewhere when a staff member unexpectedly left the position, and it took three months to find a replacement. They could not use any of that money for other programming or general operating expenses, which made the organization feel they had missed out on money on which they previously budgeted. This experience taught both me and the nonprofit the benefits and challenges of having restricted funding in their budgets. If you are working with grants as a consultant, or even working as a grant professional within a nonprofit, getting a handle on the differences between restricted and unrestricted grants is going to make a big impact on how you approach funding and budget development.

Many organizations lack the qualified staff to conduct a program evaluation. While some organizations do have the capacity and expertise, many need to contract with an external evaluator for one or several reasons. For instance, using an external evaluator can be more economical and efficient, can provide a more credible report due to objectivity, and is sometimes a grant requirement.

Observation is a method to gather data by watching events or behaviors that can give information beyond what you can draw from numbers and is helpful in several situations:
  • To collect data that is unavailable through other methods. People are sometimes unable or unwilling to participate in surveys or interviews.
  • To understand an ongoing situation or process. For example, you want to identify efficiencies/inefficiencies in the process of college registration process as students meet with advisors to create a semester schedule.
  • To know more about a physical setting. For example, you want to determine if a residential rehabilitation center’s facilities are conducive to recovery.
  • To understand more about interactions. For example, you want to determine if a motivational guest speaker sparks interest in at-risk youth in a college preparatory program.

With increased focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion in recent years, more funders are asking for the specific demographics of the populations served by nonprofits. Funders want to know, for example, how many Black individuals or Hispanic families will benefit from the program. While there are many challenges in reporting demographic data, understanding and communicating the differences in race, ethnicity, and nationality is the first step.

Congratulations! You have received notice that a local foundation will gladly support your organization and/or program during the coming year. The foundation board or staff are excited about your mission, your plans, and helping serve your community. You record the amount in your donor and accounting software, generate a letter acknowledging the gift, and move on to managing the implementation of program activities. Right? Well, no.

Writing a successful grant proposal is a challenging task that requires careful planning, a clear vision, and a well-structured approach. Among the essential components of a grant proposal are goals, outcomes, outputs, and objectives. These terms are often used interchangeably or confused with one another, leading to misunderstanding on the funder’s part and potential rejection of the proposal. In this blog, we will delve into the distinctions between these concepts and explore their significance in the context of grant applications.

Nonprofits and not-for-profits share many similarities and, in practice, the terms are often used interchangeably. The key similarities and differences between these types of organizations are nuanced. Nonprofits and not-for-profits are mission-driven organizations with a shared purpose of serving the public or charitable needs. They are...

Are you laboring too much over grants? Grants are great to have, and they’re often crucial to an organization’s mission, but there are only so many hours in the day to apply for and manage those grants. Grant professionals are susceptible to burn out from the heavy responsibility and high-pressure, deadline-driven work, which continues day in and day out in our profession. Grant applications and management can even get in the way of your organization’s mission. I was recently on a call with a client who was looking for help managing their grant portfolio. When I asked why they were seeking support, the client shared a striking comment: “We are so busy trying to get the money that we struggle to actually carry out the work.” I understood completely because I’ve seen this state of affairs before.

You want me to write about what? How can I write about progress when the right data wasn’t collected to measure progress? Grant professionals are frequently faced with the reality of gaps in data in pre-award, and post-award. We are asked to respond to sections which require a discussion of national, regional, and local data to justify need; as well as sections requesting data-supported rationale for the proposed intervention, and finally a proposed series of measurable objectives indicated by an improvement over baseline. Sometimes there is something to work with. Oftentimes we are asked to work magic!

Do you remember the first time you wrote a report for a funder and had to explain away an undesirable outcome (or more)? Picture it: coffee on drip. Report questions pulled, outcomes and program-related questions sent to program staff. Me, a rookie grant professional at the time, ready to tackle the report…or so I thought. And then I got the email: one of the program’s stated outcomes fell significantly short of the goal. As in, the targeted outcome was 80%, but the actual outcome was 40%. *Insert appropriate amounts of rookie-level panic here, then breathe.*