What We Look For In Grant Proposals

What we look for in choosing partners to help us carry out our work is summarized in the grant criteria listed below. In addition to the criteria, we'd like to share some further insights and suggestions about the process of grant review:

Your first question: In approaching any funder, one of the first questions you should ask is, "Why are they giving away money?" Take time to read what they say their grants are about and what they are trying to achieve through them: this will give you insight into the lens that they will use to review your application. That lens will be different in important respects from the one you use to describe your program.

Follow directions: We use a standard application form to help us find information that we use to evaluate your proposal. Having everyone use the same form levels the playing field so that presentation does not trump content and it makes it possible for us to find information we need to understand what you are proposing. We are not finicky sticklers for detail, but it does matter if you follow directions: apparent carelessness in an application where you're trying to put your best foot forward does not engender a sense of confidence.

The primary materials we use to evaluate proposals (for most grants) are your responses to the application questions related to the problem or opportunity addressed, your description of your program or project and your responses to the items on outcome, outputs and indicators.

• The opportunity or issue: When we ask you to describe an opportunity or issue in the community that you want to address, we really do want to learn your perspective about that issue: you have experience and expertise that can help us to understand issues and to know how to direct our grantmaking. So, if you start off by describing your program instead of what you're responding to in the community, you leave us without information and perspective that is essential to evaluating your application.
• Describing your program and its outcome: In responding to the item that asks you to describe your program, don't assume we have the same level of detailed understanding about how programs run that you do. We want you to walk us through how the program works, what the important parts are, how they build from one to another, and what the main steps are from start to finish. Give us as clear and logically organized a picture as you can of how you will be addressing the issues you described in question number one.
• Will your program produce the result you propose? An important part of what we're evaluating in your response is the relationship between the need or opportunity you described and the actions you propose to take that lead to changing that need/opportunity. What we try to assess is whether the activities you will undertake with our grant will lead to the outcome that you proposed and whether that outcome will address the issue/opportunity you started with. See especially item 4 in the grant criteria below.

1.  APPROPRIATENESS: 

• Is the proposed project an obvious match with the grant program being applied to: how strongly and directly does the project address the specific criteria for that grant program?
• Is this project one that we would point to as a model of the kind of grant that CFSC wants to make?

2.  SIGNIFICANCE: 

• Is the specific problem/opportunity one that is significant in our community?
• Are the project's proposed outputs sufficient to cause useful change and, if the project succeeds, will it make a meaningful impact? (Note: even if a project affects small numbers of people, will that small group be meaningfully affected?)
• Does the project involve an important innovation or advance on current practice in Sonoma County?

• Is there a true, viable organization and infrastructure behind the project or is the project basically the work of one or two individuals?
• Is there an appropriately sized and composed board of directors that exercises true fiduciary responsibility for the organization?
• Does this organization have a credible record of performance with the issue addressed by this proposal?
• Does the applicant's staff have experience working with the issue/populations/services involved?
• Does the applicant have sufficient staff to carry out the project?
• Does the applicant have sufficient organizational stability to carry out the project?
• Is the project's budget appropriate for the level/types of activities proposed?
• If appropriate, will this grant allow the applicant to secure significant leverage funds?

4.  METHODS: 

• Is there a clear, logical relationship connecting the problem/opportunity to the proposed program and to the program's outcome(s)?
• Does the plan of action give you a clear enough picture of how the project will proceed? Is any basic information missing? Are all parts of the narrative consistent with one another?
• Can this project succeed in achieving the outcomes it proposes?
• Is the proposal realistic in terms of the complexities and contingent forces that can affect its outcome(s)?
• If this is a new program, is there a credible basis for the plan of action?
• Where appropriate, does this organization seek relationships with other organizations and a resource that either improves outcomes for the populations served or reduces duplication of expenses/efforts?
• Does this project/program appear to be fully accessible to its target population?