Grants Reviews – What Reviewers Do and What They

Look For

Tarrant County Public Health

January 22, 2009

Jamie Schield, Planning Council Coordinator

321-4743 / jlschield@tarrantcounty.com

External Review Process

Federal, federal pass-through, state, state pass-through, most regional government agency-based funding, and many private funders require a documentable External Review Committee (ERC – sometimes called an ORC – Objective Review Committee) to impartially review grant applications submissions.

External Review Committee

Comprised of NON CONFLICTED: Professionals in the field; Consumers; Budget analysts; and Ordinary Citizens

6 – 8 persons on an ERC panel ERCs have equal weight to the other

components in the review process, but are the first step in the review process, which also includes by the: Project Officers. Budget Office.

Committee Types & Responsibilities

Face to FaceTeleconferenceField Reviews

Reviewer RolesChair Primary

ReviewerSecondary Reviewer ReaderReader Panelist

Writing a Well-Received Grant

How to write for my eyes and brain

Read and address Reviewer’s Criterion first, then other parts of the Program Guidance or Request For Proposals.

On your application repeat, word for word, the question being asked.

Even if the question is duplicative of another question, repeat the answer. Only refer the reviewer to an answer already covered in another section as a last resort, and to meet page limitations

How to write for my eyes and brain

Document, cite, reference… and if those are not available, provide an example: Do not expect the reviewer to believe you. Never refer to a website for additional

information. Acronyms and Terminology. Avoid Acronyms – use key words instead, (e.g.

North Central Texas HIV Planning Council, “Council” not “NCTHIVPC”).

Break up the Page. Use text boxes, insert tables, graphs, etc for

visual interest.

How to write for my eyes and brain

Use of client testimonials: Supportive or Coerced?

Elected Official endorsements? Only if requested by the guidance.

Make sure every page of your application reproduces on a copy machine (not from a printer) in black and white.

Ensure an effective use of white-space. Call-outs, small charts or diagrams, etc, that can be interspersed in text to ensure there is some visual relief from a page full of text.

Needs Section. Response (or Methodology). Evaluation. Impact. Resources and Capacity. Support (includes Budget). Collaboration.

Application Criterion

Application Criterion

Need: Paint the picture – honestly:

Continuation grants should indicate progress.Use of Charts for data comparisons (if possible).Partner, Referral and potential Competing

Agencies are your friends.Rates, Ratios and Baseline Data.

Application Criterion

Response: Work and Business Plans:

Timelines,Measurable Baselines,Who is doing the work, andShould contain all budgeted items.

Evaluation: Process. Outcome.

Application Criterion

Impact: How it affects and addresses the items in

the Need section. How the project can be replicated.

Resources and Capabilities: Support or other funding. How the project will be sustained. Don’t go overboard on you!

Application Criterion

Support and Budget: Use same programmatic terms and

personnel position names in the budget that are found in the narrative.

Often Budget sections are written by an accountant or person in the business office – needs to be proofed and rewritten by the same grant writer who wrote the project narrative

Everything in your budget should have some mention in the narrative…. and relate to the scope of work you are proposing.

Application Criterion

The budget should also support the work plan. If your work plan says you’re going to provide 40 acres and a Llama to every client, they better show up in the budget somewhere – even it is inkind.

Describe vast salary differences.

Polishing It All Up

Read and understand any assessments which would support your project.

Proof read the application by someone who is not the grant writer.

Proof read the application by someone who is not funded by the project being applied for.

Are all attachments referenced included?

Is it Grants for Dummies quality?