PROPOSAL WRITING - NOTES ADOPTED FROM foundationcenter.org

Resource mobilization is grounded in the conviction that a partnership should develop between the nonprofit and the donor. When you spend a great deal of your time seeking money, it is hard to remember that it can also be difficult to give money away. In fact, the money contributed by a donor has no value until they are attached to solid programs in the nonprofit sector. The nonprofits have the ideas and the capacity to solve problems, but no money with which to implement them. The donor has the financial resources but not the other resources needed to create programs. If the two are infused together effectively, the result is a dynamic collaboration.

Types of proposal

1.      Solicited proposal

2.      Unsolicited proposal

Gathering Background Information

The first thing you will need to do in writing your proposal is to gather the documentation for it. You will require background documentation in three areas: concept, program, and expenses.

This data-gathering process makes the actual writing much easier. And by involving other stakeholders in the process, it also helps key people within your agency seriously consider the project's value to the organization. 

·         Concept
It is important that you have a good sense of how the project fits with the philosophy and mission of your organization. The need that the proposal is addressing must also be documented. These concepts must be well-articulated in the proposal. Funders want to know that a project reinforces the overall direction of an organization, and they may need to be convinced that the case for the project is compelling. You should collect background data on your organization and on the need to be addressed so that your arguments are well-documented. 

·         Program
Here is a check list of the program information you require:

• The nature of the project and how it will be conducted;
• The timetable for the project;
• The anticipated outcomes and how best to evaluate the results; and
• Staffing and volunteer needs, including deployment of existing staff and new hires.

·         Expenses
You will not be able to pin down all the expenses associated with the project until the program details and timing have been worked out. Thus, the main financial data gathering takes place after the narrative part of the master proposal has been written. However, at this stage you do need to sketch out the broad outlines of the budget to be sure that the costs are in reasonable proportion to the outcomes you anticipate. If it appears that the costs will be prohibitive, even with a foundation grant, you should then scale back your plans or adjust them to remove the least cost-effective expenditures. 

Components of proposal writing

Executive summary

Umbrella statement of your case and summary of the entire proposal

Statement of the need – why this project is necessary

Establishes that your nonprofit understands the problems and therefore can reasonably address them You want the need section to be succinct, yet persuasive. Like a good debater, you must assemble all the arguments. Then present them in a logical sequence that will readily convince the reader of their importance.

Project description; this section entails

·         Objectives

Objectives are the measurable outcomes of the program. They define your methods. Your objectives must be tangible, specific, concrete, measurable, and achievable in a specified time period.

·         Methods

By means of the objectives, you have explained to the funder what will be achieved by the project. The methods section describes the specific activities that will take place to achieve the objectives. It might be helpful to divide our discussion of methods into the following: how, when, and why.

How: This is the detailed description of what will occur from the time the project begins until it is completed. Your methods should match the previously stated objectives. 

When: The methods section should present the order and timing for the tasks. It might make sense to provide a timetable so that the grants decision-maker does not have to map out the sequencing on his or her own. The timetable tells the reader "when" and provides another summary of the project that supports the rest of the methods section. 

Why: You may need to defend your chosen methods, especially if they are new or unorthodox. Why will the planned work most effectively lead to the outcomes you anticipate? You can answer this question in a number of ways, including using expert testimony and examples of other projects that work.
The methods section enables the reader to visualize the implementation of the project. It should convince the reader that your agency knows what it is doing, thereby establishing its credibility.

·         Staffing/administration

In describing the methods, you will have mentioned staffing for the project. You now need to devote a few sentences to discussing the number of staff, their qualifications, and specific assignments. Details about individual staff members involved in the project can be included either as part of this section or in the appendix, depending on the length and importance of this information.

·         Evaluation

An evaluation plan should not be considered only after the project is over; it should be built into the project. Including an evaluation plan in your proposal indicates that you take your objectives seriously and want to know how well you have achieved them. Evaluation is also a sound management tool. Like strategic planning, it helps a nonprofit refine and improves its program. An evaluation can often be the best means for others to learn from your experience in conducting the project. 

There are several types of formal evaluation. One measures the product; others analyze the process and/or strategies you've adopted. Most seek to determine the impact on the audiences you serve and the measurable outcomes of your grant project. Either or both might be appropriate to your project. The approach you choose will depend on the nature of the project and its objectives. Whatever form your evaluation takes, you will need to describe the manner in which evaluation information will be collected and how the data will be analyzed. 

Most sound evaluation plans include both qualitative and quantitative data. You should also present your plan for how the evaluation and its results will be reported and the audience to which it will be directed. For example, it might be used internally or be shared with the funder, or it might deserve a wider audience. A funder might even have an opinion about the scope of this dissemination. Many funders also have suggestions about who should conduct the evaluation, whether it be your own program staff or outside consultants. Some funders allow for the inclusion of the cost of evaluation as part of the project budget. 

·         Sustainability

A clear message from grant makers today is that grant seekers will be expected to demonstrate in very concrete ways the long-term financial viability of the project to be funded and of the nonprofit organization itself. 

It stands to reason that most grant makers will not want to take on a permanent funding commitment to a particular agency. Rather, funders will want you to prove either that your project is finite (with start-up and ending dates); or that it is capacity-building (that it will contribute to the future self-sufficiency of your agency and/or enable it to expand services that might generate revenue); or that it will make your organization attractive to other funders in the future. Evidence of fiscal sustainability is a highly sought-after characteristic of the successful grant proposal.

It behooves you to be very specific about current and projected funding streams, both earned income and fundraising, and about the base of financial support for your nonprofit. Here is an area where it is important to have backup figures and prognostications at the ready, in case a prospective funder asks for these, even though you are unlikely to include this information in the actual grant proposal. Some grant makers, of course, will want to know who else will be receiving a copy of this same proposal. You should not be shy about sharing this information with the funder.

Budget

The budget for your proposal may be as simple as a one-page statement of projected revenue and expenses. Or your proposal may require a more complex presentation, perhaps including a page on projected support and notes explaining various items of expense or of revenue.

As you prepare to assemble the budget, go back through the proposal narrative and make a list of all personnel and non-personnel items related to the operation of the project. Be sure that you list not only new costs that will be incurred if the project is funded but also any ongoing expenses for items that will be allocated to the project. Then get the relevant costs from the person in your agency who is responsible for keeping the books.

Organization/community information
Normally a resume of your nonprofit organization should come at the end of your proposal. Your natural inclination may be to put this information up front in the document. But it is usually better to sell the need for your project and then your agency's ability to carry it out. 

It is not necessary to overwhelm the reader with facts about your organization. This information can be conveyed easily by attaching a brochure or other prepared statement. In two pages or less, tell the reader when your nonprofit came into existence; state its mission, being certain to demonstrate how the subject of the proposal fits within or extends that mission; and describe the organization's structure, programs, leadership, and special expertise.

Discuss the size of the board, how board members are recruited, and their level of participation. Give the reader a feel for the makeup of the board. (You should include the full board list in an appendix.) If your agency is composed of volunteers or has an active volunteer group, describe the function that the volunteers perform. Provide details on the staff, including the numbers of full and part-time staff, and their levels of expertise.

Describe the kinds of activities in which your staff engage. Explain briefly the assistance you provide. Describe the audience you serve, any special or unusual needs they face, and why they rely on your agency. Cite the number of people who are reached through your programs.

Letter Proposal

Many funders today state that they prefer a brief letter proposal; others require that you complete an application form. In any case, you will want to refer to the basic proposal components as provided here to be sure that you have not omitted an element that will support your case. Sometimes the scale of the project might suggest a small-scale letter format proposal, or the type of request might not require all of the proposal components or the components in the sequence recommended here. The guidelines and policies of individual funders will be your ultimate guide.

What are the elements of a letter request? For the most part, they should follow the format of a full proposal, except with regard to length. The letter should be no more than three pages. You will need to call upon your writing skills because it can be very hard to get all of the necessary details into a concise, well-articulated letter.

Here are the components of a good letter proposal:

·         Ask for the gift: The letter should begin with a reference to your prior contact with the funder, if any. State why you are writing and how much funding is required from the particular foundation.

·         Describe the need: In a very abbreviated manner, tell the funder why there is a need for this project, piece of equipment, etc.

·         Explain what you will do: Just as you would in a fuller proposal, provide enough detail to pique the funder's interest. Describe precisely what will take place as a result of the grant.

·         Provide agency data: Help the funder know a bit more about your organization by including your mission statement, brief description of programs offered, number of people served, and staff, volunteer, and board data, if appropriate.

·         Include appropriate budget data: Even a letter request may have a budget that is a half-page long. Decide if this information should be incorporated into the letter or in a separate attachment. Whichever course you choose, be sure to indicate the total cost of the project. Discuss future funding only if the absence of this information will raise questions.

·         Close: As with the longer proposal, a letter proposal needs a strong concluding statement. Offer to provide more details or meet with the funder.

·         Attach any additional information required: The funder may need much of the same information to back up a small request as a large one: a board list, a copy of your IRS determination letter, financial documentation, and brief resumes of key staff.

Conclusion

Every proposal should have a concluding paragraph or two. This is a good place to call attention to the future, after the grant is completed. If appropriate, you should outline some of the follow-up activities that might be undertaken to begin to prepare your funder for your next request. Alternatively, you should state how the project might carry on without further grant support.
This section is also the place to make a final appeal for your project. Briefly reiterate what your nonprofit wants to do and why it is important. Underscore why your agency needs funding to accomplish it. Don't be afraid at this stage to use a bit of emotion to solidify your case.

What Happens Next?

Submitting your proposal is nowhere near the end of your involvement in the grant seeking process. Grant review procedures vary widely, and the decision-making process can take anywhere from a few weeks to six months or more. During the review process, the funder may ask for additional information either directly from you or from outside consultants or professional references. Invariably, this is a difficult time for the grant seeker. You need to be patient but persistent. Some grant makers outline their review procedures in annual reports or application guidelines. If you are unclear about the process, don't hesitate to ask.

If your hard work results in a grant, take a few moments to acknowledge the funder's support with a letter of thanks. You also need to find out whether the funder has specific forms, procedures, and deadlines for reporting on the progress of your project. Clarifying your responsibilities as a grantee at the outset, particularly with respect to financial reporting, will prevent misunderstandings and more serious problems later.

Nor is rejection necessarily the end of the process. If you're unsure why your proposal was turned down, ask. Did the funder need additional information? Would they be interested in considering the proposal at a future date? Now might also be the time to begin cultivation of a prospective funder. Put them on your mailing list so that they can become further acquainted with your organization. Remember, there's always next year.

PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT APPROACHES

Participatory approaches are a product of long lasting interaction between researchers, development workers, government agents and local populations. Participatory approaches offer a creative approach to investigating issues of concern to poor people, and to planning, implementing, and evaluating development activities. They challenge prevailing biases and preconceptions about people's knowledge. The methods used range from visualization, to interviewing and group work. The common theme is the promotion of interactive learning, shared knowledge, and flexible, yet structured analysis.

The history of participatory methods in development co-operation began in the late 1970s with the introduction of a new research approach called rapid rural appraisal (RRA), which immediately became popular with decision-makers in development agencies. Building on close collaboration with local populations RRAs were designed to collect first-hand data from the local people about their perceptions of their local environments and living conditions in rural areas. A limitation of RRA, however, was that it was extractive; the role of the local people was limited to providing information, while the power of decision-making about the use of this information remained in the hands of others.

PARTICIPATORY RURAL APPRAISAL

PRA can be described as a family of approaches, methods and behaviours that enable people to express and analyze the realities of their lives and conditions, to plan themselves what action to take, and to monitor and evaluate the results. Its methods have evolved from Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA). The key elements of PRA are the methods used, and - most importantly - the behaviour and attitudes of those who facilitate it. PRAs use similar methods and tools as RRA, but the underlying philosophy and purpose changed. While RRAs aim at extracting information, often in a single event, PRAs were designed to follow more the peoples’ own concerns and interests.

One of the most important principles in PRA is the sharing of results of analysis, decisions and planning efforts among the community members by open and public presentation during meetings. PRAs strongly supported and facilitated the introduction of more demand-responsive ways of managing development interaction, and process-oriented thinking. It built up rural people's own capacities for analyzing their circumstances of living, their potentials and their problems in order to actively decide on changes.

PRA employs a wide range of methods to enable people to express and share information, and to stimulate discussion and analysis. Many are visually based, involving local people in creating, for example: maps showing who lives where and the location of important local features and resources such as water, forests, schools and other services; flow diagrams to indicate linkages, sequences, causes, effects, problems and solutions; seasonal calendars showing how food availability, workloads, family health, prices, wages and other factors vary during the year; matrices or grids, scored with seeds, pebbles or other counters, to compare things - such as the merits of different crop varieties or tree species, or how conditions have changed over time. PRA activities usually take place in groups, working on the ground or on paper.

The core principles are:

• sustained learning process: enhancing cumulative learning for action by participants is the focus and has three outputs: identifying strategies for improvement, motivating people to undertake these strategies, and enhancing their capacity for solving problems 
• Different perspectives in group-based analysis: PRA explicitly seeks insights from and an understanding of the needs of different individuals and groups, which may be conflicting but will better show the complexity of local situations 
• key role for facilitators: to include different perspectives often means challenging local traditions of communication, which requires sensitive facilitation (often someone from outside the area but also increasingly a role taken on by someone with a local stake in the process); 
•  systemic and methodological basis: creating a structured process that explores problems within the wider context and not just focusing on a narrow slice of reality - from description to analysis and action; and 
•  Context-specific: unique social/physical conditions means building a process of discussion, communication and conflict resolution - which by necessity evolves out of the specifics of the local context.

 PAME

Participatory monitoring & evaluation (PM&E) is a process through which stakeholders at various levels engage in monitoring or evaluating a particular project, program or policy, share control over the content, the process and the results of the M&E activity and engage in taking or identifying corrective actions. PM&E focuses on the active engagement of primary stakeholders.

Participation is increasingly being recognized as being integral to the M&E process, since it offers new ways of assessing and learning from change that are more inclusive and more responsive to the needs and aspirations of those most directly affected. PM&E is geared towards not only measuring the effectiveness of a project, but also towards building ownership and empowering beneficiaries; building accountability and transparency; and taking corrective actions to improve performance and outcomes.

Conventionally, monitoring and evaluation has involved outside experts coming in to measure performance against pre-set indicators, using standardized procedures and tools. PM&E differs from more conventional approaches in that it seeks to engage key project stakeholders more actively in reflecting and assessing the progress of their project and in particular the achievement of results.

Core principles of PAME are;

• primary stakeholders are active participants - not just sources of information 
• building capacity of local people to analyze, reflect and take action 
• joint learning of stakeholders at various levels 
• catalyzes commitment to taking corrective actions 

 PARTICIPATORY POVERTY ASSESSMENT

According to the World Bank, participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA), is an iterative, participatory research process that seeks to understand poverty in its local, social, institutional, and political contexts, incorporating the perspectives of a range of stakeholders and involving them directly in planning follow-up action. PPAs can be defined as an instrument for including poor people's views in the analysis of poverty and the formulation of strategies to reduce it through public policy.

The purpose of PPAs is to improve the effectiveness of public actions aimed at poverty reduction. PPAs are generally carried out as policy research exercises, linked to governmental policy processes, aimed at understanding poverty from the perspective of poor people – and what their priorities are in terms of actions to improve their lives. PPAs can strengthen poverty assessment processes through:

1. ­broadening stakeholder involvement and thereby increasing general support and legitimacy for anti-poverty strategies;
2. enriching the analysis and understanding of poverty by including the perspectives of the poor;
3. providing a diverse range of valuable information on a cost-effective, rapid and timely basis, ­
4. creating new relationships between policy-makers, service providers and people in poor communities

PARTICIPATORY LEARNING ACTION

Participatory learning and action (PLA) can be defined as “a growing family of approaches, tools, attitudes and behaviors to enable and empower people to present, share, analyze and enhance their knowledge of life and condition and to plan, act, monitor, evaluate, reflect and scale up community action.”

Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) represents an umbrella for a wide range of similar approaches and methodologies, including Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA), Participatory Learning Methods (PALM), Participatory Action Research (PAR), and Farming Systems Research (FSR)

Local people have a rich knowledge base and experience of making a living in a complex environment. Within PLA the role of outsiders is more of facilitating a process, where by local people identify priorities and analyze their own problems, and develop their own solutions.

Common principles of PLA:

• A defined methodology and systematic learning process: the focus should be on communal learning by the stakeholders through a system of joint analysis and interaction. 
• Multiple perspectives: it is important to reflect the various interpretations of reality and solutions for problems by the different stakeholders (seeking diversity and differences). 
• Group learning process: revealing this complexity of the world can only be done through group analysis and interaction. 
• Context specific: methods and approaches should as much as possible be designed or adapted to the local situation, preferably by the actors involved (ownership). 
• Facilitating experts and stakeholders: the role of outsiders (researchers and/or practitioners who are not members of the community or group with whom they interact) is to act as catalysts (facilitators) for local people to decide what to do with the information and analysis they generate. Outsiders may also choose to further analyze the findings generated by PLA, to influence policy-making processes, for example. In either case, there should be commitment on the side of the facilitating organizations to do their best to assist or follow up on those actions that people have decided on as a result of PLA, if local people feel that such support is needed. 
• Leading to change: the process of joint analysis and dialogue helps to define changes which would bring about improvement and seeks to motivate people to take action to implement the defined changes. 
• Triangulation: It is best to use as many tools as possible while diversifying team members and data sources to cross check information and neutralize biases 
• Multiple Perspectives: Inherent to the PLA methodology is the practice of valuing all participant perspectives and exploring different worldviews. 
• Group Learning Process: A PLA approach to a project should involve a group learning process that mirrors the interactions and reflects the complexity seen in the community. As a result, group learning and instruction will be iterative, changing as people’s perceptions evolve. It is important to remember that communities will not necessarily have homogeneous opinions.