Megan Mayzelle’s Post

How to impress a faceless grantor you've never met, even if you're not a good writer: Show off your teams' ability to perform on SWOT analysis. Grantors want to know that you're clear-eyed on your team's Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. If you're all hopeium, they'll believe you're missing something. And if you're all doom, they'll believe you're not the right fit. (Just like an investor...but non-dilutive.)

How to write about bad news in your grant application? Don your robe. Grantors don't like surprises. Just like with investors (and bosses), your best bet by far is to be honest with your grantor. If you manage to fix the issue later, they'll be impressed. And if you don't, they'll be forewarned. They might even help you adapt. Grantors are looking to fund solutions to wicked problems. So tell where you expect the challenges will lie. A too-rosy outlook will set expectations unrealistically high. If there's no obstacles, you'll be able to race to revolutionary successes, right? Follow up with why you're the best team for the job. And the areas of the work where you're confident your team will shine. Above all, be OBJECTIVE. No blame or criticism. And no chest-thumping. Imagine you're a judge evaluating a case, and use the language they would use. The result: your writing will reveal you to be a fair, analytical, and realistic team. Just the sort of folks they would trust with their money -- and their mission.

Not all grants will help you. So get picky. Here's some filters to help you focus only on the ones worth your time: - Would getting this funding enable or amplify what we're *already* doing (versus dividing our attention by requiring us to tack on a disparate effort)? - Tally up the application, reporting, and management efforts required across the life of the grant. Is the award amount worth more than that? - Does my current stage align with the grant type? (e.g., research, innovation, pilot, scale...) - Do the grantor and I agree on the change we want to create in the world? - Do we agree on the most effective approach to creating that change? - Do(es) my focus area(s) align with their current priorities? If you answered no to ANY of the above, STOP. Do not apply. All yes on the basics? Here are a few bonus checks on how competitive you really are: - If we win, do we have the capacity to implement what we've promised? - Have the partner organizations been a joy to work with so far? - How similar is my organization to past winners? - Do I have an all-star cast in my bio section? - Do we have a strong local presence? There are a lot of grants out there, and most of them aren't for you. After you've gone through this for a few grants, you'll notice yourself developing a sniff test that lets you quickly pass on the iffy ones and laser beam all your attention on those matches made in heaven. You can do it!

The grant unicorn: unrestricted funding. The bummer: it's usually by invitation only. First, check out my post from 2 days ago on leveraging your board. No board? You can still do this. But you'll have to play an even longer game. It's all about building relationships. But without a board, you're relying on YOU. First, identify and prioritize the highest potential grants for you. You have limited resources, so you have to focus on the great-fit grants. A junior team member can help you research who's got ties to that invite-only grantor. And who you know that's one degree removed. Now start working that LinkedIn and conferencing game. Remember, you've got to earn up some social capital with folks before you start asking them to spend it on your behalf. Give them plenty of time to get to know and like you. Let the conversation you're hoping to have come up naturally -- if you set an agenda, it will feel pushy. Not happening? Let it go and turn your attention to watching for the next opportunity. It won't happen this week, and it might not even happen this year. Remember, it's a long game. But put in the reps, and you'll meet your funding goal. You can do this!

We all know it's true. No matter how many objective evaluation processes we set up, at the end of the day, it's STILL all about relationships. You've probably experienced this in the job hunt. Did you get the job because you applied? Or did you get the job because you had relationships and connections that made you more than words on paper? That's because no one wants to invest in a great idea or a strong background. We ALL want to invest in someone we trust to get the job done RIGHT. Trust is key. And to trust someone, you have to know them, at least a little bit. Same goes for grants. Yes, you still need to submit an application. AND you can also improve your chances by giving the grantor a chance to get to know you. #1 rule: Don't be creepy! #2 rule: DO be friendly, engaged, and professional. Follow them on Linkedin. Ask great questions about their posts. Call or email them with a **great** question about the application. (Great = remains unanswered, even after carefully reviewing all the material provided.) Attend any information sessions and complete any trainings they provide. In short, let them see your face and start to feel like you're a trustworthy person who's committed to getting the job done right. When they read your polished, impressive application, they'll be able to connect the words on paper to the trust they already have in you. Now that's an advantage that's tough to beat.

Unrestricted funding: the golden ticket of the grant world. The catch? It's often by invitation only. The secret sauce to receiving that coveted invite? **Your board.** Compile a list of folx who work at the funder's office. Do your board members know any of them? Ask them to check for 2nd-degree connections on LinkedIn. Help the board members resist the urge to make a pushy ask. Instead, guide them in nurturing those connections: like content, make helpful comments, ask great questions, have coffee. Invitations incoming!

Have you ever heard of the Vasa? It's sitting in its own multi-story museum in Stockholm. The Vasa was designed and built by the premier ship architects of the day. Its maiden voyage down the river and out to sea was a flagship event. Everyone came out to wave off the Vasa, and nearly every passenger was on deck happily waving back. And then it sunk. Immediately, directly, right there in the river, right in front of everyone. It never even made it to sea. It wasn't damaged. It was just poorly built. It tipped too easily in the wind and began taking on water in the too-low windows. Most people were able to escape, thanks to the nearby riverbanks and myriad onlookers. The few that didn't were perfectly preserved in the river silt along with the Vasa herself. And then, centuries later, the Vasa was raised, all in one piece, just as she was built. And there she stands today in the Vasa museum. The Vasa is perhaps the biggest ship-building failure of ALL TIME. And yet she's unabashedly celebrated as a success. If she hadn't failed so fully, so quickly, so NEATLY....well, we just wouldn't have all the rich knowledge of ship technology and Swede's everyday lives that is now housed in the Vasa Museum. Not to mention that, had she failed in a more, let's say, normal way...out at sea, in a storm, cut all from the world...then all her passengers would likely not have survived. Getting to know the Vasa taught me more than Swedish history. As I meandered through the stories entwined around Vasa, that thing we all hear but have trouble believing finally hit home. Failing is OK. Heck, failing can be great. It can be *celebrated*. Failing in itself can be a victory. And failing quickly, fully, right at the start -- before you get too far -- might just be the best way to LEARN a ton without LOSING a ton. I'm not saying move fast and break things ; in mission-driven work, we can't afford to break things more than they already are. But I am saying don't be afraid to fall in front of everyone. Bump your nose -- it's OK. Who knows? They might even applaud.

Think you might start looking for grants? Do this first: 1. capture your organizational strategy [in a recording or writing, doesn't matter] 2. articulate your theory of change 3. build a project plan 4. draft a budget If you don't have these, you don't know what grants you're looking for. You might tweak your project plan and its budget once you see the grant landscape. Grantors' interests change based on emerging research, market shifts, political priorities, and buzzwords. But your organizational strategy and theory of change shouldn't change. (Save the rare event that your initiative has an identity crisis and totally reinvents what it's about...In which case it's definitely not the right time to apply for funding.) If your org doesn't have them yet, the exercise of creating and capturing these 4 elements will do a lot more than prepare you for grant-winning. - You'll finally have your elevator pitch. - You'll know what partnerships will be most fruitful. - You'll have great copy for your website and brochure. - You'll be ready to present a pitch deck at the drop of a hat. - And your teammates will feel more aligned and motivated than ever. So take time to define who you are. And say it out loud. It's the first step to everyone else knowing what you're about.

Think of applying for grants like applying for jobs. You don't start earning your degree after the job announcement goes up. You first figure out your personal strategy and theory of change. That is, you consider what you enjoy, what you're skilled in, and what value you want to bring to the world. Based on all that, you select a career path, and double down on your decision by earning credentials. (Yes, this means reducing your optionality. It's part of becoming highly skilled and highly sought-after.) Only THEN do you start watching for job announcements. And you don't contort your resume to force a fit with EVERY...SINGLE...job description. You wait for *those* jobs -- the handful for which you know you have an unfair advantage. The ones that make you think, 'If they don't hire me, they are missing out!' Do the same with grants. Don't *react* to every call for applications by trying to become who they are looking for. Instead, define your work FIRST. And then watch for the grantors who are looking to fund work that sounds an awful lot like yours. The result: you'll submit fewer applications, win more of them, and feel like you spent less emotional energy doing it.

Winning grants is a numbers game. Just like good investing, don't hinge all your hopes on this one grant. Plan to apply for 10 or more. It's a virtuous cycle -- the more you win, the more you win. That's because -- just like investors -- grantors like to see that their peers think you are up to snuff. And they like to see that you have diversified funding sources. That you're not hinging all your hopes on them. (Yep, that's why many grants require matching funds...or disallow key expenses like salaries.) There's another virtuous cycle. The more your grant writer writes for you, the better she'll write for you. She'll know by heart what you're about, your history, your lingo, your budget. So if you want non-dilutive funding, get committed. It's the way to win.