Fulfilling Responsibilities
after the Project Ends
Considering Possible Alternatives
for Unfunded Grants
Receiving official word
Requesting reviewer comments
Discussing unfunded applications with project officers
Considering whether to revise and resubmit
Glossary of Grant-Related Terms
Introduction
The reality of being faculty members in research universities in the
2000’s is that tenure and promotion will be closely related to
the amount of research funding that these faculty bring to the university.
The situation is no different at Texas Tech University. In fact, according
to The Chronicle Higher Education (January 2003, Volume 49, Issue 17,
Page A18), Tech is one of the “wannabe” public universities
“striving to squeeze into the top tier” of research universities.
In order to achieve the lofty dream of being “among the 50 best
public universities, the top 75 research institutions, and in the top
100 for endowment,” for this “university in the flatlands
of West Texas to be recognized as a rising star,” faculty will
be hired, tenured and promoted on the basis of their ability to bring
in research funds.
Another reality of the situation for faculty in research universities
is that graduate schools do not always prepare potential faculty to
become the funded researchers that research universities are seeking.
To this end, the purpose of this guide or manual is to provide faculty
members in the College of Education with detailed information about
submitting and managing grants; however, specific policies and procedures
related to submitting grants in the College of Education at Texas Tech
will be found under Policies on this website.
Seeking Grant Opportunities
The federal government of the United States is the largest single grantor
in the world with an estimated $90 billion in 1990. Foundations and
corporations together spend about $21.6 billion annually. It stands
to reason, then, that faculty should be seeking federal funds. The Department
of Education has a very good web site where you can routinely find grant
opportunities. The state of Texas, through TEA also posts state grants
on its web site.
While the two most popular grants research systems at colleges and
universities: Projects Information System (SPIN) and the Illinois Research
Information System (IRIS), are not available at Texas Tech, Tech does
provide access to the Community of Science Funding Opportunities, which
is very useful if you are careful about your use of keywords on which
your search will be based. Also, the Office of Grant Development will
send you COS’s weekly list of grants available related to your
keyword. Each year the Office of Research Services offers workshops
on how to use COS. ORS also notifies individuals of grant opportunities
in their areas, as will the Office of Grant Development, if the individuals
let them know their keywords.
There are also many ways to locate private sources of funds. For example,
professional organizations that you may be a member of often offer grants
and post them on their sites. The Internet will lead you to many other
sites that list grant opportunities. The Office of Grant Development
also has FC Search. This database covers over 52,000 foundations, corporate
givers, and hundreds of grant-making public charities, which can be
searched for you. If you wish to apply to a private foundation, you
must first obtain clearance from Texas Tech’s Office of Development.
Tech seeks to avoid having any one foundation receive hundreds of grant
applications from Tech. In order to receive clearance, you will fill
out a form which you will pick up in the College of Education’s
Office of Development, or if you wish, the Office of Grant Development
will get the form for you.
Another way to learn of grant opportunities is to develop a network
of grant seeking colleagues who will share what they find with you.
Preparing a Grant Application
Studying the RFP
Almost all competitive government grants will release a Request for
Proposals (RFP) or Request for Applications (RFA) as part of the announcement
of a grant opportunity. One of the most important parts of grant writing
is to study the RFP very carefully to assure that the grant application
is prepared accurately and efficiently. In particular, you should look
for the following information from the RFP.
• The funding priorities or objectives of the grant program.
Make sure that there is a solid match between what you are proposing
to do and the stated priorities, objectives, and purposes of the grant.
If there is not a good match or if you are uncertain, you may wish to
contact the project officer to gain his or her input. However, the best
advice is not to proceed with writing a grant that does not match the
stated priorities. “Stretching” your idea to match the stated
priorities may divert you from the project you have in mind. Spend your
time instead in looking for an appropriate grant competition.
• The specific requirements to address in the grant application.
If any special requirements exist, they will be specifically stated
in the RFP. For example, if the grant project must include participants
from a certain geographic region or if the participants must be of a
certain age, those requirements will be specified in the RFP. Make note
of these special requirements, so you can include them in your outline
of the grant application.
• The evaluation criteria. Generally, the RFP will provide the
criteria by which grant applications will be judged. Read these criteria
very carefully, and begin to make notes about how your project will
address each of these criteria. The sections and subsections of the
evaluation criteria should be used as the outline for your grant proposal
(see next section). If the evaluation criteria are not provided, then
the RFP generally will present an outline to be followed in preparing
the grant application.
• The submittal requirements, page limits, and deadlines. The
RFP will provide specific directions on how the grant proposal should
be prepared and submitted. These directions must be followed very carefully.
In some grant competitions, failure to follow established directions
may result in your application being removed from the competition. Look
specifically for the maximum number of pages for the proposal. Sometimes
the page limit will apply only to the narrative (with appendices not
included in the page count), but in other instances the page limit is
inclusive of the entire proposal. Also, some competitions limit the
number of pages that can be placed in the appendices. The only way to
know the specific requirements of your competition is to read the RFP
very carefully and adhere to the specifications. Also look for information
on submittal of the manuscript. The deadline for submission may be a
postmark date or a receipt date. This varies widely across competitions.
In the case of most federal grant, proposals that do not adhere to the
deadline date requirements will not be reviewed. Make notes of any specific
directions or requirements and post them on your computer or in some
other convenient location. Also, remember that the College and University
have deadlines that must be met in submitting a grant that will precede
the final submittal date for the grant proposal.
Preparing the Abstract
As soon as you have a general idea of the parameters of your project,
prepare a concise abstract. Some competitions will specify the length
of the abstract that ultimately will go in the proposal, but the preliminary
abstract is needed mostly for communicating with administrators in the
College of Education and for requesting letters of support and/or cooperation.
The Abstract should begin with a descriptive title for the project.
Avoid acronyms or abbreviations that are not defined. In some instances,
your project will be assigned to a review panel based solely on the
title. The abstract should present a clear, but very concise, overview
of the project. Include a brief description of the goals and their relationship
to the specific competition. Include information on the problem that
will be addressed and the importance of and need for your project to
address that problem. A funding agency will not fund a project that
does not address a topic of importance and concern. Then describe your
methods and the anticipated outcomes of your project. Given the importance
of the abstract, have a copy editor review it for clarity and conciseness
before distributing it to administrators and others.
Gaining Initial Approvals
According to policy in the College of Education, you must gain approvals
from the program faculty and the Department chair prior to preparing the
grant application. In both cases, two central issues must be addressed.
First, does the grant project match with your research agenda and/or
teaching focus? Second, what amount of buy-out time will be needed for
you to direct the grant and how will this impact teaching assignments
in the program area.
To address the first issue, be prepared to share your research and
teaching goals with the members of your program faculty. Discuss with
them how the proposed project would help you further your scholarship
and teaching in the College of Education. Prior to this discussion,
it will be helpful if program faculty have an opportunity to read your
abstract and, if possible, to review a written description of research
agenda. Then discuss the amount of time that you anticipate will be
needed for you to direct and manage the project. To make this determination,
outline the major duties for which you will be responsible on the project.
Then consider how many minutes or hours you will need to devote to each
task during a typical week, month, or throughout the year. A Personnel
Loading Chart is sometimes used to represent the time required to complete
major project activities for the key project personnel (as illustrated
in Figure …). Finally, calculate the percentage of time that will
be needed each week or month to carry out your duties. In general, grant
reviewers and funding agencies will want to know that the key project
personnel will be able to devote enough time to the project to make
it successful. Therefore, it is not helpful to try to minimize your
time on the project. While it may be helpful in trimming your budget,
it sends a red flag to the reviewers that you will not be engaged enough
in the project to make it a success. According to COE policy, 15% of
your salary must be included for each course that is “bought out.”
After you gain the program faculty’s approval, then have a similar
discussion with your Department chair. He or she will want to know the
way in which the proposed project will further your scholarship, the
amount of buy-out time that you would need to direct the project, and
the impact that this would have on teaching assignments. Be prepared
to suggest possible individuals who could teach the courses that you
typically teach. Your chair will also ask about the outcome of the faculty
discussion. This outcome will be used by the Department Chair along with
other information in making a decision on whether to give you initial
approval to pursue the grant opportunity.
Preparing the Grant Narrative
The grant narrative is the central piece of information that will determine
whether your grant will be recommended for funding. Therefore, it must
respond directly and concisely to the specification detailed in the
RFP.
To begin the process of writing the grant narrative, review the information
that you gathered from the RFP (e.g., funding priorities, specific requirements,
deadlines). Then develop a comprehensive outline for your proposal that
corresponds directly to the selection criteria or the requirement components
as specified in the RFP. If selection criteria are available, point
values for each section often will be given. This will help you decide
which areas to emphasize the most in your writing. However, given the
highly competitive nature of most grant programs, the entire proposal
must be impeccably written and presented.
As you begin, revisit your abstract. A few days have probably lapsed
between the time that you wrote the initial draft of the abstract, and
you have probably fine-tuned the idea in your head. Make sure your abstract
matches your current thinking on the project. (You will revisit the
abstract at the end of the writing process to make any final revisions
prior to submitting the proposal.)
If you are writing in a team, make writing assignments among members
of the team. You will probably find that some members are best suited
for certain tasks. For example, you will want the person with the most
expertise to write the section on research and design (if you are submitting
a research proposal). On the other hand, if someone is new to the writing
process, you might assign that individual the review of literature section
(if one is required). The point is to select the best person to write
the initial draft of each section. Given that grant deadlines tend to
come up quickly, you should establish deadlines for each draft section
and encourage your team to adhere to those deadlines.
If you are writing a proposal alone, it will still be helpful to outline
the proposal and to set deadlines for yourself. The process of writing
a grant can be quite hectic, so sticking to clearly established deadlines
can be very helpful.
Hints for Preparing Grant Narratives
• Stick to the selection criteria or outline as specified in the
RFP. Do not deviate from the established structure, even it what is
requested does not make sense to you.
• Use the numbering system for sections or parts of the grant
as provided in the RFP if possible. This will assist the peer review
panel in evaluating your proposal.
• Be clear, but concise, in presenting information in each section.
Grant reviewers are most impressed with short, clear explanations.
• Follow exactly the guidelines for writing the proposal as specified
in the RFP, especially in regard to the length of the manuscript.
• Include only those items in the appendix that are essential
for understanding your project or that are requested specifically in
the RFP. Peer reviewers are more likely to be irritated at you for include
a lot of peripherally related materials in the appendix than they are
to be impressed.
• Have a copy editor carefully proofread your proposal. While
high quality content is very important, your grant proposal will be
reviewed less favorably if it contains grammatical errors, misspellings,
and weak sentence structure or if the format appears unprofessional.
Preparing the Budget
Begin the process of preparing your budget by examining the RFP for
specific requirements or restrictions. In particular, look for information
on the following:
• Allowable indirect costs. Each grant program will have a policy
on how much of the project budget, if any, can be included for indirect
costs. These costs cover items, resources, or services that are necessary
to run your project, but that are not included directly in the budget.
These items may include costs for janitorial services, electricity and
other utilities, office space, university accounting services, and so
forth. The RFP will state if there are any restrictions in the amount
of indirect costs that can be included in the budget. For example, personnel
preparation grants from the United State Department of Education typically
restrict indirect costs to 8% of the modified total budget (not including
the costs for scholarships or stipends). On the other hand, the National
Science Foundation generally places no restrictions on the indirect
cost rate for research proposals. In such situation, the total amount
allowable should be included in the budget. In the 2002-03 school year,
the indirect costs rate or “facilities and administration”
rate at Texas Tech was 46%.
• Contributed costs. Some grant competitions require that the
agency submitting the proposal “contribute” a certain amount
to the total budget. This is sometimes referred to as “matching
costs.” For example, if a specific requirement of the grant is
a “50% match,” the grantee is required to contribute 50%
of the total cost of the project. For example, if a grantee requested
$100,000 from the grantor and a 50% match was required, then the grantee’s
agency would have to contribute $50,000 to the total budget of $150,000.
• Allowable and non-allowable expenses. Finally, when examining
the RFP, look specifically for budget expenses that are allowed or not
allowed. Generally, if there are restrictions, they will be specifically
stated. Then the grant writer may assume that all other expenses are
allowable. However, sometimes there are “unwritten rules”
that should be followed, and the only way to know these is to talk with
others who have been successfully funded. For example, many grant competitions
frown on excessive (or any) funds being used to purchase equipment.
While there may be no stated restriction in the RFP, others will tell
you to avoid such requests in the budget. Also, such information can
be asked directly of the project officer or individual who is responsible
for a specific competition.
Specifics on Budget Preparation
The Office of Grant Development is available to help you throughout
the budget-preparation process. The Office will calculate salaries,
fringe benefits, and indirect costs and provide any other guidance that
you may need.
As soon as a complete preliminary budget is completed, the Office of
Grant Development will ask the Office of Research Services to review
it. Generally, they will identify a number of issues that need to be
addressed or figures that need to be corrected. Also, you may find that
as you prepare the grant narrative, additional changes will need to
be made in the budget. This is a typical part of grant writing. The
guiding rule, though, is to keep the Office of Grant Development informed
of any changes in your budget.
Once the Office of Research Services has approved your preliminary
budget and when you have an abstract prepared and an overall plan for
your grant outlined, then you should meet with your Department Chair and
Dean to keep them apprised of your progress. They will be particularly
interested in how your grant project will interface with your research
agenda, how the budget will be used to support your project, how much
buy-out time you will need to administer the project, and alternatives
for staffing the courses that you typically teach.
Sample Personnel Loading Chart
Major Activities Days*
PI RA #1 RA #2
Meet with Management Committee. 5 0 0
Meet with Advisory Board, Steering Committee, and Research Team. 10
5 5
Collaborate with and assist Research Associates on supporting studies.
10 15 15
Collaborate with assessment consultant to design and refine data collection
instruments and procedures for longitudinal study. 5 10 10
Train cooperating teachers in longitudinal data collection procedures;
provide yearly retraining for high interrater reliability. 10 10 10
Recruit and retain children and families for longitudinal study. 5 30
30
Compile and send data collection forms to participating teachers. 0
10 10
Enter annual longitudinal assessment data into database. 0 25 25
Conduct data analysis each year. 10 5 5
Write reports and disseminate findings. 6 0 0
Provide ongoing project management for TTU subcontract. 5 0 0
Total 66
110
110
*Based on 220 work days per calendar year. The PI will devote 30%
to the project (66 equivalent days) and each research assistant will
devote half-time to the project (110 equivalent days).
Finalizing the Grant Narrative
At this point in the process, you should be finished or almost finished
with drafting the narrative, and your attention should shift to polishing
your document. First, take time to compare your proposal with the selection
criteria or outline that was provided in the RFP. As you reread your
proposal, make sure that the content is accurate and complete. If there
are any missing elements, prepare new text for those sections. Then
look at the overall length of the manuscript to see how much you will
need to cut, if any, to bring your proposal into compliance with any
page limits that are imposed in the RFP. Under no reasonable circumstance
should you take the change of exceeding the stated page limits. Generally,
a few to several pages of text can be trimmed by simply tightening the
writing throughout the proposal.
If time permits: (a) ask a peer to review your proposal according to
the stated selection criteria and provide feedback for improving the
narrative, and (b) ask the Office of Grant Development to review your
proposal and recommend changes to sentence structure, grammar, spelling,
voice, and so forth. Make changes in the proposal based on this feedback.
After the narrative is complete and page numbers have been assigned,
prepare the table of contents and double-check the page numbers. A table
of contents with inaccurate page references will be highly irritating
to grant reviewers, so be sure that it is complete and accurate. Also,
go throughout the entire document to make sure that references to other
sections, other pages, tables, figures, and appendices are accurate.
It is not uncommon to omit a table or rearrange appendices as you prepare
the final narrative, so double checking these references throughout
the proposal is an important step at the end of the writing process.
At the end of the writing process, your proposal should look clean,
sharp, and professional. The format should be consistent throughout
(e.g., make sure your various levels of headings are consistently formatted),
the print should be clear (make sure that the toner cartridge is in
good shape), the tables and figures should be carefully presented in
the surrounding text, and headings should always have at least two lines
of text beneath them. Your proposal should look like one that you would
want to read. Last minute attention to formatting details and appearance
likely will have a beneficial impact on the grant reviewer’s first
and lasting impression of your grant proposal.
As a technical matter, there are a variety of forms (e.g., lobbying
disclosure, compliance with drug-free work environment) that are required
for government grants. The specific forms may vary from competition
to competition, so it is important to check the RFP to assure that the
correct forms are attached. You can ask the Office of Grant Development
to determine which forms are needed. That office will also help in preparing
the forms for signatures. In almost all instances, a designated official
in the Office of Research Services will sign all official forms. If
not, ORS personnel will notify you of forms that you need to sign personally
(though this is very rare).
Internal Routing Procedures
Prior to submission of any grant by Texas Tech University, your completed
grant application must be routed to your Department Chair and the Dean
for review and signatures. This must occur before the grant is submitted
to the Office of Research Services. A standard routing sheet (see attachment)
is required, which you must sign as the principal investigator. The
COE Office of Grant Development will assist you in preparing the routing
sheet and in facilitating it through the routing process for signatures.
If you have kept your Department Chair and the Dean informed of your progress
throughout the grant-preparation phase, the routing process should go
smoothly. If not, however, you may set the stage for any number of last-minute
changes that must be made prior to gaining signatures or, in the worst-case
scenario, that your grant proposal would not be approved for submission.
Submission to Office of Research Services
After the routing sheet has been signed by the Department Chair and Dean,
then it is ready to be submitted to the Office of Research Services.
The COE Office of Grant Development will assist with this process by
walking the narrative to ORS.
Effective February 15, 2003, completed proposals should be submitted
to ORS by 12:00pm (noon) the day BEFORE it needs to be submitted to
the funding agency. This will allow our staff adequate time for a final
review before the proposal is copied and mailed. Principal Investigators
who bring proposals in after the 12:00pm deadline will be responsible
for copying and mailing the proposal
After the application is submitted to the ORS office in Holden Hall,
personnel in that office will make sure that all of the compliance forms
are signed by the appropriate University personnel and will review the
budget one final time. They ORS will duplicate the manuscript and mail
it as per your directions on the routing sheet. Given that the deadline
dates and submittal requirements vary widely across granting agencies,
it is imperative that the information provided on the routing sheet
be specific and accurate. If a grant application does not follow the
established procedures, it is highly possible that it will be returned
without being reviewed.
If this deadline for submitting the application to ORS is not met,
then the principal investigator becomes responsible for the logistical
aspects of submitting the grant. However, appropriate signatures must
be obtained from ORS before the principal investigator can take care
of these final details, such as duplicating the proposal and mailing
it. Under no circumstance is it allowable to submit a grant application
without official university signatures from the designated authority
in ORS.
On the day that the grant application is submitted to ORS, it is highly
advisable for the principal investigator to remain available for any
last-minute questions or revisions that may be necessary. Ideally, the
principal investigator will remain in his or her office throughout the
day. If this is not possible, he or she should provide a phone number
or other contact information. As an alternative, someone who is knowledgeable
of the details of the grant can be designated to handle any last-minute
questions or concerns.
If ORS mails the grant application, they typically will send the PI
a copy of the proposal and a copy of the mailing receipt. When the application
is processed by the granting agency, the PI typically will receive notification
in the mail. This practice varies, however, from agency to agency.
Awaiting a Decision
After a grant proposal is submitted, it may take a few to several months
to receive word on whether your proposal will be funded. For grants
submitted to the U.S. Department of Education, the date for completing
the review will be posted in the RFP. During the review period, it is
not advisable to contact the granting agency to ask for information
on its status. Such contacts may be deemed as an attempt to get “inside
information” on the outcome of the review process. However, after
the deadline for completing the review has passed by a few weeks, then
it is permissible to contact the Project Officer who is responsible
for the competition to ask for an update on the status of your application.
You may wish to have personnel in ORS make this contact for you.
Being Notified of Grant Awards
Generally the notification that a proposal has been accepted, whether
public or private, is received by the Office of Research services. They
in turn notify the Associate Dean for Reseach and the PI of the application.
The Federal Government will respond in one of five ways:
Accepted,
Accepted with budget modifications (Let’s talk about the budget),
Approved but not funded,
Supportable but nor fundable, or
Rejected.
Responding to and Dealing with the Funder’s Decision
Regardless of the response you get from either public or private sources,
you should send a thank-you letter and ask for the reviewers’
comments. Even if your proposal is accepted, it is helpful to know what
the reviewers liked. If you are responding to “rejected,”
however, you must be careful that your follow-up will be viewed as a
positive, not negative.
Negotiating the Contract
According to the Office of Research Services, negotiating the conditions
that a funding agency mandates, occurs only very rarely. Generally,
the funding agency tells the Office of Research Services what they are
going to do, and the university accepts those terms. If negotiation
does take place, it is usually about budgets; and although you as the
principal investigator might be called upon by the Program Director
of a grant to negotiate budgets, it is always imperative that
ORS be brought into those discussions.
Finalizing Contract and Getting Official Documentation
The Office of Research Services finalizes the contract and does the
official documentation that has to be done in order to create accounts
and to complete other standard documents. The Office of Grants and Contracts
is also involved in this process.
Types of Grant Payments
Payment of grant funds are of two types: cash-in-advance-of-expenditures
or reimbursement. Some private agencies do send grant funds directly
to the principle investigator, especially is this true of very small
grants. According to How to Evaluate and Improve Your Grant Efforts,
(p.205) if you are to be paid in advance, you need to
• Monitor you cash needs carefully,
• Limit the amount requested to the minimum required to accomplish
your objectives,
• Refrain from building up extra cash,
• Move the cash through your books swifly, and
• Deposit federal funds in minority banks.
Generally, however, most grant funds, private or public, are paid on
a reimbursement basis. In other words, when you as the PI charge an
expense to his account, the university pays thus bills and then the
funding agency reimburses the university for the amount spent.
Ongoing Management of the Grant
The first thing that will happen after you are notified that a proposal
has been funded will be to receive and account number for your grant
funds. This is the number that will allow the university to be reimbursed
for your expenditures.
As you manage the grant budget, you will need to be fully apprised
of what the Office of Management and Budget specify as allowable costs.
The Office of Research Services will help you with this, as complying
with federal regulations regarding expenditures can be one of the most
difficult parts of having grant funds. The university has many safeguards
in place so that it is difficult for mismanagement to take place. If
you want to see the regulations for yourself, OMB Circular 1-110, Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions
of Higher education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations and
OMB Circular A-21, Cost Principals for Educational Institutions, are
good places to start. OMB Circular 1-110 outlines pre and post award
standards and include provisions for property, procurement standards,
reports and records. OMB A-21 defines cost principles for grants to
educational institutions and governs direct and indirect charges that
can be made by educational institutions to the federal government (from
How to Evaluate and Improve Your Grant Efforts (pp.206-211).
Pursuing Grant Activities
Grantees often ask what is required for them to do their projects
‘right.’ In fact, there is more than one answer to that
question since a grant project is really a combination of different
efforts: performing the substantive activities related to the project’s
professional discipline or field of endeavor, managing the personnel
and the other administrative aspects of a project, learning and following
the various requirements of law and regulation that govern federally
funded projects, and undertaking the whole project within the framework
of the organization that has received the grant and is sponsoring the
project activities. This section presents some of the most frequently
asked questions grantees have about trying to do it ‘right.’
As your project progresses, you will undoubtedly think of others.
What responsibilities do I have under a discretionary grant or cooperative
agreement?
You have the following major responsibilities when undertaking a project
funded by the Department of Education:
• performing the work promised in the application;
• exercising proper stewardship of federal funds;
• complying with all legal and regulatory requirements;
• demonstrating and/or measuring progress towards achievement
of project goals; and
• reporting all required information to the Department.
In addition, each award for a discretionary grant or cooperative agreement
imposes specific responsibilities on a grantee, depending on the program
from which you receive funding.
Requesting Changes in Grant Activities or Budget
If you need to alter some portion of your project’s activities,
the first step is to determine whether or not the planned change requires
prior approval. Many changes do NOT require the prior approval of the
grant team. Recent amendments to EDGAR have given grantees greater flexibility
in managing their projects and have reduced the need for prior written
approval from the Department. Known as the ‘expanded authorities’
regulations, these amendments to Part 75 of EDGAR renew the Department’s
emphasis on partnership with grantees by giving them more autonomy in
carrying out the activities of their projects. The new provisions permit
grantees to undertake the following administrative actions without seeking
prior approval from their grant team although, in some cases, a routine
notification to the Department might still be required:
• extend the grant at the end of the project period for a period
of up to one year;
• carry funds over from one budget period to the next;
• obligate funds up to 90 days before the effective date of the
grant award; and
• transfer funds among budget line items. Grantees are urged to
contact their grant team to get full details of the requirements.
The amendments significantly reduce regulatory and administrative burdens
and give grantees more flexibility in planning and implementing program
activities, provided that all administrative actions are consistent
with the approved goals and objectives for the project, the program
regulations, EDGAR, and OMB cost principles. If you are still not certain
whether prior approval is required after reading the regulations, contact
the grant team member shown on your Grant Award Notification for technical
assistance.
It is the goal of the Department to reduce the paperwork burden on grantees,
including those related to administrative actions, to the full extent
allowable. However, if prior approval is required, you need to send
your request by e-mail, fax, or regular mail to your grant team. Changes
that require prior approval might take up to 30 days to process. The
grant team will provide a written statement regarding the approval or
disapproval of your request. Grantees are urged to use electronic communications
such as e-mail and faxes as much as possible to expedite processing
of their requests.
Getting Changes Processed Quickly
You can take a number of steps that greatly add to the speed with which
grant teams can process your request for a change to a project. Although
most of them seem minor, multiplied over thousands of grants, such small
items add up to great gains in efficiency and help the grant team and
your project’s staff to work together more effectively. For example:
• Always use your PR/Award number. Also called your ‘grant
number,’ this number gives the grant team a great deal of information.
We recommend you even put it on the outside of your envelopes so that,
in the event your grant is reassigned to another staff person, your
correspondence can be properly redirected before we even open the envelope.
The PR/Award number is the only quick and accurate way we have to access
your official file or your records in our data system. Always have it
handy and leave it with any phone message as well.
• Always check your computations in budgets more than once. We
recommend that you ask others on your staff to proof the math portions
of your application and any other materials associated with your grant
that you send to your grant team. Computation errors are one of the
biggest causes of delays in processing requests.
• Read carefully the attachments and enclosures that came with
your Grant Award Notification. The attachments and enclosures sent with
your Grant Award +Notification contain important information that can
simplify the administration of your grant in regards to receiving payment,
sending required reports, and following special terms and conditions.
• When in doubt, ask. If you are not sure about something, do
not hesitate to contact a grant team member assigned to your grant.
That person is here to give technical assistance and to help you understand
grant regulations and the award documents. Their guidance can ensure
that your documents are complete the first time so you can avoid unnecessary
paperwork.
Source: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/KnowAbtGrants/pt698.html
Preparing Required Reports
Finishing project activities by the end of a budget or project period
is only half the story of a grant project. The other half is telling
the sponsoring agency--in this case, the Department of Education--about
it. You should put as much care into timely, accurate, and comprehensive
reporting of activities you undertake as you put into planning those
same activities when writing the application. Your reporting, in turn,
becomes the basis for the grant team’s evaluation of the effectiveness
of its programs, as well as its own reporting to Congress, the General
Accounting Office, and the public. This section answers some frequently
asked questions about the required reports and points you toward staff
members in the Department who can help you complete them.
After the Project is Completed
The grant team begins steps to officially close out a grant after
the expiration or termination of grant support (i.e., usually after
the end of the project period). During grant closeout, the Department
makes sure that all applicable administrative actions, as well as the
required work of a grant project, have been completed and that all federal
funds have been properly accounted for.
Responsibilities after the Project
Grantees are responsible for preparing a FINAL Performance Report
after the project has ended. (Cooperative agreements might require additional
items as well.) The Department requires that all grantees send this
final report within 90 days after the end of the project period. Attachment
B of the Grant Award Notification provides details about the report
that must be submitted under your program. Be sure that you always provide
complete and accurate information in the report and include the PR/Award
number of your project.
Final Report and Due Date
If you have not completed the work of your project, you may extend
the project period for up to twelve months by notifying your grant team
of the extension at least 10 days before the expiration date specified
in the grant award. While extending your grant does not require prior
approval by the grant team, you must still clearly justify your reasons
for extending the project period and demonstrate that: 1) a statute,
regulation, or other condition of the award does not prohibit the extension;
2) the extension does not involve the obligation of additional federal
funds; and 3) the extension is to carry out the activities in the approved
application. The final reports must be submitted 90 days after the end
of the newly specified grant expiration date.
.
Work of the Project Completed but Final Report Not
The grant team might extend the due date for your final report or
other required documents if you send a request in writing with a strong
justification of the need to do so.
Hhelp completing the report
Your grant team can give you guidance on the content and format for
the performance report(s) you are required to send.
Sending in the Report
Grantees should send one original and one copy of the final performance
report to the Department unless told otherwise by the grant team. Refer
to the attachments and enclosures with your Grant Award Notification
for the address where you must send your report (or other required documents).
Always write your PR/Award number on all documents.
Required Reports Not Sent
Not sending reports or other required documents can place your organization
in noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the grant award. Noncompliance
jeopardizes your chance for future funding from the Department. Therefore,
it is critical that you send all your reports by the due dates to the
proper persons.
Keeping Records Related to Grant Project
Yes, almost all of the Department’s programs fall under the
record retention provisions of the General Education Provisions Act
(GEPA), which require you to maintain grant records for three years
after the completion of the activities for which grant funds were used
(usually interpreted by the Department as three years after the end
date of the project period). Your grant team can answer any questions
you have about record retention.
Source: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/KnowAbtGrants/pt698.html
Considering Possible Alternatives for Unfunded
Grants
Receiving Official Word
Bite your tongue. Avoid the temptation to lash out at the funding agency.
Remember, it’s likely that you will seek funds from them again
in the future. Always send a thank-you letter. They will remember you
fondly for that.
At some point, call and ask for some time to speak with the person
that reviewed your application. You want to find out why you were rejected.
It’s one of several reasons: your agency or your project were
deemed ineligible for funding, you failed to document the need, your
project was not considered to be an effective response to the need,
or you simply ranked just out of the money.
Requesting Reviewer Comments
So while agencies may not always be forthcoming, it is always good
to request the review’s comments. If you can do this by email,
do so by all mean. If you wish the comments mailed to you by standard
mail, enclose a self-addressed stamped envelope for convenience.
If you were considered ineligible, look elsewhere. You are wasting
your time with this program. If you didn’t make the case for having
a severe need, ask what measures you could apply to your client population
to prove the necessity of the funds.
If the agency agrees that you showed need, but didn’t solve the
problems that you found, ask how you could design a more effective program.
If the agency liked your proposal, but simply ran out of money, ask
what happens next. In some instances, the funding agency sets up a "pipeline"
for projects that finished just below the level of funding. If funded
projects fall apart, money might be freed up to move down the pipeline
to fund more proposals.
So long, therefore, as you are not angry, it is acceptable to talk
to the funding official about your failing to be funded. Ask for suggestions;
ask if it could be funded some other way, as a pilot projects or needs
assessment study. Don’t hesitate to ask if the there are ways
that the agency can assist you in getting read for the next submission.
You might even want to know what their assessment is of your getting
funded if you resubmit. Finally, you might ask to become a reviewer
for the agency so that you can learn exactly what the agency is looking
for.
Source: http://granthelp.clarityconnect.com/lesson7.htm
Soutce: How to evaluate and Improve Your Grants Effort, p.
117.
Considering Whether to Revise and Resubmit
If you proposed project was ineligible, you probably want to revise
it and send it to another agency, not spend more time getting it ready
to go back to the agency that found it ineligible.
Glossary of Grant Related Terms
Application: The formal document submitted by a potential Grantee seeking
funds. The application is the most complete presentation of the project
and is often the basis for the Grant Agreement. See also PRE-APPLICATION
and GRANT AGREEMENT.
Audit (Financial): A examination of an agency’s
accounting documents by an outside expert. Upon review, the expert prepares
an opinion as to consistency and conformity with Generally Accepted
Accounting Principals. Audits are generally conducted after the end
of the fiscal year. Some grant programs require an audit of grant funds
at the end of the project.
Audit (Program): A review of the accomplishments of a
grant funded program by the staff of the funding agency. A program audit
may be mandatory or random. Also know as Monitoring.
Authorization: Authorization is the legal authority upon
which a program is based. Sometimes known as Enabling Legislation.
Beneficiary: A member of the target population for whom
the grant was prepared. For example, a student attending adult literacy
classes would be the beneficiary of a grant, while the school district
would be the grantee. See also TARGET POPULATION, GRANTEE, and SUB-GRANTEE.
Bricks and Mortar: An informal term for capital funds
generally used for building renovation or construction.
Brownfield: A property that has real or perceived environmental
contamination. Often Brownfields are associated with abandoned, decaying
urban properties. See GREENFIELD.
Challenge Grant: A grant that must be matched with money
raised by the recipient.
Davis-Bacon Act: A federal law that mandates payment of
specified wage rates for laborers and mechanics on construction and
renovation projects funded with Federal dollars. Rules and instruction
for the Davis-Bacon Act are published in Title 29 CFR Parts 1, 3, 5,
6 and 7. See PREVAILING WAGES
Drawdown: A drawdown is the method by which a successful
grantee requests payment from the funding agency. Frequency of drawdowns,
also known as draws, range from weekly electronic wire-transfers to
a single lump sum payment at the end of the project. Quarterly drawdowns
are very common.
Eminent Domain: The power of a public body to take private
property for a public purpose. The agency that is doing the taking must
pay just compensation to the property owner.
Enabling Legislation: See AUTHORIZATION.
Fiscal Year (FY): A 12-month accounting period at the
end of which the books are closed for an agency or governmental unit.
Agency-wide financial audits are conducted after the end of the fiscal
year.
Force Account: Paid labor donated by the grantee to a
project to carry out all or part of the scope of work. The cost of this
labor is not covered by the grant, but is part of the grantee’s
match.
Funder: See GRANTOR.
Funding Agency: See GRANTOR.
Funding Cycle: The schedule of events starting with the
announcement of the availability of funds, followed by the deadline
for submission of applications, review of applications, award of grants,
issuance of contract documents and release of funds. If funds are reappropriated
or remain on hand after the first funding round, the cycle starts again.
See APPLICATION, PRE-APPLICATION, and GRANT AGREEMENT.
Grant Agreement: A contract entered into by a grantee
and a grantor. Typically based on the application submitted by the grantee,
the Grant Agreement commits the grantee to carry out certain activities,
within a stipulated time frame, for a specific amount of money. The
Grant Agreement often refers to, or incorporates, regulations that govern
the use of grant funds. It is important to note that the Grant Agreement
may include more restrictive conditions than were proposed by the grantee
or are required by law. The Grant Agreement may also be for less money
than originally sought.
Grantee: The recipient of grant funds. Also known as Recipient.
See GRANTOR and SUB-GRANTEE.
Grantor: The agency, foundation, or governmental unit
that awards grants. Also known as Funder or Funding Agency. See GRANTEE
and SUB-GRANTEE.
Greenfield: A property that has not been previously developed
and therefore is considered to be environmentally clean. See BROWNFIELD.
In-Kind: A non-cash donation of labor, facilities, or
equipment to carry out a project. Typically, skilled and professional
labor can be valued at the prevailing rate for the field. Work performed
by a professional or skilled laborer outside of their field, however,
is generally computed at some standard or minimum wage.
Lead Agency: For the purposes of conducting an environmental
review, the agency with the primary responsibility for approving or
funding a project is the lead agency. The lead agency conducts the review,
notifies other involved agencies and issues the determination of the
environmental impact of the proposed action.
Letter of Intent: A letter of intent expresses a grantor's
willingness to commit funds to a project if other conditions are met.
This letter allows the grantee to seek other funds without firmly committing
the grantor to the project.
Leveraging Ratio: The proportion of grant funds to funds
or non-cash donations from other sources. For example, a leveraging
ratio of 1:1 means that for every grant dollar awarded to a project,
the grantee will secure one dollar from another source. The term implies
that grant dollars are used to "leverage" other dollars. See
MATCHING FUNDS.
Matching Funds: Many funding sources will pay only a percentage
of the cost of a project. The grantee is required to pay the difference
with money or non-cash donations from other sources. The non-grant funds
are known as Matching Funds or the Match. See FORCE ACCOUNT, IN-KIND,
LEVERAGING RATIO.
Monitoring: See AUDIT (PROGRAM).
Not For Profit: An incorporated organization in which
stockholders and trustees do not share in profits. Nonprofits are usually
established to accomplish some charitable, humanitarian, or educational
purpose. See also 501(c)(3).
On spec: An informal abbreviation for "on the speculation".
Consultants, including grant writers, architects, lawyers, and others,
may do preliminary work "on the speculation" that if the project
is funded more work will be forthcoming. The on spec portion may be
done for free or at a reduced rate in the hopes of securing the additional
work. This arrangement may raise ethical concerns with funding agencies.
Pass Through: The act of a grantee receiving grant funds
and dispersing those same funds to a sub-grantee. It is common for the
Grantee to perform the Program Audit of the Sub-Grantee. A portion of
the grant funds are often retained by the Grantee to cover the cost
of administration. See AUDIT (PROGRAM), GRANTEE and SUB-GRANTEE.
Phase I Environmental Audit: A preliminary review of potential
environmental issues or liabilities for a property. Typically, a Phase
I includes a review of public records and a visual examination of the
property. The purpose is to identify potential concerns. Testing of
suspected contaminants is not part of a standard Phase I Audit. See
PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT.
Phase II Environmental Audit: When a completed a Phase
I Environmental Audit has identified potential environmental hazards,
a Phase II Audit may be recommended. The Phase II Audit entails testing
of potential contaminants identified by the Phase I Audit. See PHASE
I ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT.
Pipeline: An informal term for grant applications that
score well, but fall just short of being awarded. If additional money
is allocated to the program, or if funded projects do not materialize,
a grant application "in the pipeline" may be funded.
Pre-Application: A condensed version of an application.
A pre-application is submitted before a full application is prepared.
It is often used by Grantors to determine which applicants will be invited
to submit a full application. See APPLICATION.
Prevailing Wages: The wage rates for laborers and mechanics
that must be paid for projects covered by the Davis-Bacon Act. The wages
are determined by the U.S. Department of Labor. See DAVIS-BACON.
Pro forma: Latin for "as a matter of form".
A pro forma is a projected, proposed or hypothetical set of numbers
for a project, typically the budget.
Program Income: Gross income or revenue generated by a project. This
may include sale of real estate or equipment, rental income, fees, interest
on loans, proceeds from the sale of loans, interest earned, and funds
collected through special assessments. Program income may be subject
to all of the conditions of the original grant award.
Recipient: See GRANTEE.
Request For Proposals (RFP): A solicitation by a grantor
seeking applications from potential grantees. Also used by grantees
to hire professional services.
Soft Costs: Costs associated with building or renovating
project exclusive of the labor and material cost of the project. Typical
soft costs include architects and lawyers fees, closing costs, title
searches, permits, and fees.
Sub-Grantee: A recipient of pass through grant funds from a grantee
and not directly from the Grantor. A subgrantee is held to all of the
regulations of the original grant plus any conditions added by the Grantee.
Also known as Sub-Recipient. See PASS THROUGH, GRANTEE, AND GRANTOR.
Sub-Recipient: See SUB-GRANTEE.
Triple Net Lease: A lease requiring the tenant to pay
utilities, taxes, and insurance.
Turnkey: A project that is constructed by a developer
and sold or turned over to a buyer in a ready to use condition. The
buyer has only to "turn the key" to begin operations.
Source: http://granthelp.clarityconnect.com/glossary.htm