Jen Blackledge, COWPU Web Mistress, said it best...
Central Oregon Blogger Meet-up!
Wednesday, April 30, 5:30ish at the Summit (in the O'Kane Building on Oregon), Downtown Bend
Please RSVP. To RSVP on the Central Oregon Web Professionals Usergroup's site (yes, the acronym is COWPU) and click "I'm Going!", or leave a comment, or email me at jenblackledge at gmail.com.
The first blogger meetup was a big success! Since then there's been a lot of growth and new folks have popped up in our local "blogosphere". Meetups like this are a nice chance for all of us to gather, unwind, and put some faces together with the blogs. This event is primarily intended for bloggers who wish to meet other bloggers. If you don't have a blog, then this may not be the get-together for you. So, if you just can't stand not being there and don't already have a blog... what are you waiting for?!
I'll see you there!
Thứ Ba, 29 tháng 4, 2008
Chủ Nhật, 27 tháng 4, 2008
How To Be A Modern Nonprofit Board Member, Or, Nonprofit Leaders, Willing To Take A Look At Yourself for the Good of the Nonprofit You're Working For?
Nonprofit Board of Directors, Board of Trustees, even Nonprofit Board Advisers, and the like should take a tip or two from these adorable fellows.
Board leadership requires the ability to stand one one's own, if need be. Last week I watched an episode of "Charlie Rose" while he happened to be interviewing actor George Clooney. By the way, I remember when George was in that half hour comedy about an emergency room (no, before "ER"). I remember the mullet and the Walkman that was forever around his neck. So, I think 'he's one of us', he's struggled a bit to get where he is. I surprised myself when I was pretty impressed with a comment that Mr. Clooney made. It's stuck with me. Sage words from George Clooney? I guess so.
Charlie Rose asked George about being asked to be a peace ambassador on behalf of the United Nations. He responded joking, self deprecatingly, about probably not being the natural choice as a representative of 'peace'; and then he made a small but excellent point. He said that when he accepted the position, he told the UN that he would lead as a huge proponent of the program and its goals, and he would also be its greatest critic.
Jon Stewart has said something similar in an interview that I read or heard. He said that he learned, while doing stand up comedy, that you do better as the one on stage (I extrapolate the meaning to be able to include 'leading'), if you don't fall in love with your audience.
I think that there are pearls of wisdom in these actors' experiences! These are even nonprofit sector pearls!
Nonprofit board directors, board trustees, even nonprofit board advisers, and the like should take a tip from these stars. Volunteering one's time is as generous as any financial donation. Giving one's time, attention, and expertise to a cause IS generous. If you are a board member, you probably got involved because you cared about the issue, wanted to contribute, and found a nonprofit working on the cause that you believe does great work. This is all really and truly powerful, generous, advantageous for your community, and more.
I had a friend in college who used to say 'if you know that you can't do the job, don't take the job offer'. His point was sage, too, though he was not a movie star.
Nonprofit leaders, while you mean well, I ask you to consider the following list.
10. Nonprofit leaders must know when to stand apart from popular opinion; be willing to go against the rest of the leaders when necessary; and be willing to speak up and stand on their own if their conscience, morals, understanding of the law, or their understanding of modern nonprofit management, transparency, and operations is not being met.
9. Nonprofit managers must be proactive in their own understanding of modern professional nonprofit management, operations, transparency, federal and state requirements, oversight, and more. Don't wait for your agency's board president or executive director to say 'OK, we're going to get a consultant in here to educate you, the board, about modern professional governance, planning, oversight, and fundraising'. Learn about the current concepts, be a professional about your volunteer position, and take responsibility. You're expected to retain these responsibilities by the federal government and by each donor.
8. If you aren't willing to learn what a nonprofit leader is expected to know and do, according to contemporary nonprofit professional ethics and standards, why are you taking the volunteer position?
7. The only responsibility you have is to the law/ethics and the nonprofit's mission statement and its goal/work. If your work, planning, education, and leadership is not guided first and foremost by the nonprofit's mission, what is it being guided by and why? If you can't change it around to put the mission first, resign.
6. We all know that it is nice to be liked. We all know, too, that leaders are not always liked, and that's part of being a leader. If you can't both tout the organization you volunteer for, and also be its worst critic in some fair ratio to one another during your leadership tenure; you aren't serving the organization, its mission, or the constituency or issue you're supposed to be making better. Volunteering for a nonprofit is not supposed to be a social opportunity, easy and fun, nor a popularity contest. It is actually hard, difficult, challenging, professional and exceptionally rewarding work. Read my post, What Is A Well Run Nonprofit Agency? I'll Tell Ya...
5. Do you and your colleagues at your organization keep open, in touch with the latest nonprofit governance paradigms and issues, staying willing to always review your nonporfit's work, leadership, staff, bylaws, volunteers, and mission to ask about each of these, 'are we relevant; are we effectively serving the need our organization was created to; are we achieving organizational and operational goals; do we have honest frank tough but fruitful discussions (client to staff, staff to staff, volunteer to volunteer, and volunteer to staff); does everyone involved listen to one another; does everyone involve stay open to self criticism for the good of the mission; is everyone open to the community ready to remain positive about other nonprofits doing similar work in the region, willing to communicate professionally with colleagues in the field, do your organization's people stay open to collaboration?' If not, why not? The mission and your clientele or cause is the most important 'thing' and why your agency exists.
4. If your organization has gone through something tough such as getting negative press, or maybe going through an internal scandal, or having to go to court and taking some heat, etc.; did you, your colleagues at the nonprofit, and the total organization learn from the experience(s)? Was everyone willing to look at themselves, at their role in the issue, was your organization communicative with your community through the rough patch, was there an independent investigation, were findings and the solutions shared with your constituents and community? Was your organization able to deal with the bad press or rumors in a modern, transparent, communicative, open, fair, professional way? Were appropriate, effective, thorough, and ethical changes made? If not - are you arguing amongst your peers for these professional and modern steps to take place?
3. Could you do all of the necessary work (for instance, the work and qualities of a modern educated nonprofit leader, as describe above), without once hearing a 'thank you'; getting recognition, or listing this volunteer work on your resume'? Are you a leader who wants to do the work; show up for the meetings; and speak from your professional experience, conscience, and with an eye to the mission, or are you just needing a resume' bullet point?
2. I admire that you've read this far down the list. It says a lot of your ability and willingness.
1. Are you more in love with your community than willing to do the leadership work, that may not keep you in the comfortable or perhaps 'popular' light?
There are no scores to indicate where you may fall on the 'quality leadership spectrum'. This is one of those rhetorical discussions. Also, there are no saints. I don't expect you are one or that you'll turn into one. I do expect, though, that you can read this entire list, consider it, and maybe even look at yourself in comparison to it. Ultimately, what I say or think doesn't matter, but your organization's mission and its work does. That's why I bring this up.
Board leadership requires the ability to stand one one's own, if need be. Last week I watched an episode of "Charlie Rose" while he happened to be interviewing actor George Clooney. By the way, I remember when George was in that half hour comedy about an emergency room (no, before "ER"). I remember the mullet and the Walkman that was forever around his neck. So, I think 'he's one of us', he's struggled a bit to get where he is. I surprised myself when I was pretty impressed with a comment that Mr. Clooney made. It's stuck with me. Sage words from George Clooney? I guess so.
Charlie Rose asked George about being asked to be a peace ambassador on behalf of the United Nations. He responded joking, self deprecatingly, about probably not being the natural choice as a representative of 'peace'; and then he made a small but excellent point. He said that when he accepted the position, he told the UN that he would lead as a huge proponent of the program and its goals, and he would also be its greatest critic.
Jon Stewart has said something similar in an interview that I read or heard. He said that he learned, while doing stand up comedy, that you do better as the one on stage (I extrapolate the meaning to be able to include 'leading'), if you don't fall in love with your audience.
I think that there are pearls of wisdom in these actors' experiences! These are even nonprofit sector pearls!
Nonprofit board directors, board trustees, even nonprofit board advisers, and the like should take a tip from these stars. Volunteering one's time is as generous as any financial donation. Giving one's time, attention, and expertise to a cause IS generous. If you are a board member, you probably got involved because you cared about the issue, wanted to contribute, and found a nonprofit working on the cause that you believe does great work. This is all really and truly powerful, generous, advantageous for your community, and more.
I had a friend in college who used to say 'if you know that you can't do the job, don't take the job offer'. His point was sage, too, though he was not a movie star.
Nonprofit leaders, while you mean well, I ask you to consider the following list.
10. Nonprofit leaders must know when to stand apart from popular opinion; be willing to go against the rest of the leaders when necessary; and be willing to speak up and stand on their own if their conscience, morals, understanding of the law, or their understanding of modern nonprofit management, transparency, and operations is not being met.
9. Nonprofit managers must be proactive in their own understanding of modern professional nonprofit management, operations, transparency, federal and state requirements, oversight, and more. Don't wait for your agency's board president or executive director to say 'OK, we're going to get a consultant in here to educate you, the board, about modern professional governance, planning, oversight, and fundraising'. Learn about the current concepts, be a professional about your volunteer position, and take responsibility. You're expected to retain these responsibilities by the federal government and by each donor.
8. If you aren't willing to learn what a nonprofit leader is expected to know and do, according to contemporary nonprofit professional ethics and standards, why are you taking the volunteer position?
7. The only responsibility you have is to the law/ethics and the nonprofit's mission statement and its goal/work. If your work, planning, education, and leadership is not guided first and foremost by the nonprofit's mission, what is it being guided by and why? If you can't change it around to put the mission first, resign.
6. We all know that it is nice to be liked. We all know, too, that leaders are not always liked, and that's part of being a leader. If you can't both tout the organization you volunteer for, and also be its worst critic in some fair ratio to one another during your leadership tenure; you aren't serving the organization, its mission, or the constituency or issue you're supposed to be making better. Volunteering for a nonprofit is not supposed to be a social opportunity, easy and fun, nor a popularity contest. It is actually hard, difficult, challenging, professional and exceptionally rewarding work. Read my post, What Is A Well Run Nonprofit Agency? I'll Tell Ya...
5. Do you and your colleagues at your organization keep open, in touch with the latest nonprofit governance paradigms and issues, staying willing to always review your nonporfit's work, leadership, staff, bylaws, volunteers, and mission to ask about each of these, 'are we relevant; are we effectively serving the need our organization was created to; are we achieving organizational and operational goals; do we have honest frank tough but fruitful discussions (client to staff, staff to staff, volunteer to volunteer, and volunteer to staff); does everyone involved listen to one another; does everyone involve stay open to self criticism for the good of the mission; is everyone open to the community ready to remain positive about other nonprofits doing similar work in the region, willing to communicate professionally with colleagues in the field, do your organization's people stay open to collaboration?' If not, why not? The mission and your clientele or cause is the most important 'thing' and why your agency exists.
4. If your organization has gone through something tough such as getting negative press, or maybe going through an internal scandal, or having to go to court and taking some heat, etc.; did you, your colleagues at the nonprofit, and the total organization learn from the experience(s)? Was everyone willing to look at themselves, at their role in the issue, was your organization communicative with your community through the rough patch, was there an independent investigation, were findings and the solutions shared with your constituents and community? Was your organization able to deal with the bad press or rumors in a modern, transparent, communicative, open, fair, professional way? Were appropriate, effective, thorough, and ethical changes made? If not - are you arguing amongst your peers for these professional and modern steps to take place?
3. Could you do all of the necessary work (for instance, the work and qualities of a modern educated nonprofit leader, as describe above), without once hearing a 'thank you'; getting recognition, or listing this volunteer work on your resume'? Are you a leader who wants to do the work; show up for the meetings; and speak from your professional experience, conscience, and with an eye to the mission, or are you just needing a resume' bullet point?
2. I admire that you've read this far down the list. It says a lot of your ability and willingness.
1. Are you more in love with your community than willing to do the leadership work, that may not keep you in the comfortable or perhaps 'popular' light?
There are no scores to indicate where you may fall on the 'quality leadership spectrum'. This is one of those rhetorical discussions. Also, there are no saints. I don't expect you are one or that you'll turn into one. I do expect, though, that you can read this entire list, consider it, and maybe even look at yourself in comparison to it. Ultimately, what I say or think doesn't matter, but your organization's mission and its work does. That's why I bring this up.
Fellowship for Undergraduate and Graduate Students of Color
From The Foundation Center...
William Randolph Hearst Endowed Fellowship for Minority Students
Deadline: July 15, 2008 (Fall 2008 Program)
The Nonprofit Sector and Philanthropy Program ( http://www.aspeninstitute.org/nspp ) of the Aspen Institute ( http://www.aspeninstitute.org/ ) in Washington, D.C., offers the William Randolph Hearst Endowed Fellowship three times annually. The fellowship, which is based on academic excellence and need, is open to both undergraduate and graduate students of color. The Hearst Fellow serves as an intern with NSPP. Through this fellowship, NSPP seeks to introduce a diverse group of students to issues relating to philanthropy, volunteerism, and nonprofit organizations. Recipients may arrange with their colleges or universities to receive academic credit for this experience.
The ideal candidate for this fellowship is a highly motivated continuing graduate or undergraduate student from an under-represented community. She or he should have an excellent academic record and also have the following: outstanding research skills; demonstrated interest or experience in the nonprofit sector; excellent writing and communication skills; demonstrated financial need; and American citizenship.
The student must be able to intern for ten to fifteen weeks at the Washington, D.C., office of the Aspen Institute. It is generally expected that the fall and spring internships will be part-time (ten to twenty hours a week) and summer internships will be full-time. All travel and housing costs must be covered by the student. A fellowship grant of between $2,500 and $5,000 will be awarded, depending on the recipient's educational level, financial need, and time commitment.
See the Aspen Institute Web site for complete program information and application procedures. RFP Link: http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012651/nonprofitsearch
William Randolph Hearst Endowed Fellowship for Minority Students
Deadline: July 15, 2008 (Fall 2008 Program)
The Nonprofit Sector and Philanthropy Program ( http://www.aspeninstitute.org/nspp ) of the Aspen Institute ( http://www.aspeninstitute.org/ ) in Washington, D.C., offers the William Randolph Hearst Endowed Fellowship three times annually. The fellowship, which is based on academic excellence and need, is open to both undergraduate and graduate students of color. The Hearst Fellow serves as an intern with NSPP. Through this fellowship, NSPP seeks to introduce a diverse group of students to issues relating to philanthropy, volunteerism, and nonprofit organizations. Recipients may arrange with their colleges or universities to receive academic credit for this experience.
The ideal candidate for this fellowship is a highly motivated continuing graduate or undergraduate student from an under-represented community. She or he should have an excellent academic record and also have the following: outstanding research skills; demonstrated interest or experience in the nonprofit sector; excellent writing and communication skills; demonstrated financial need; and American citizenship.
The student must be able to intern for ten to fifteen weeks at the Washington, D.C., office of the Aspen Institute. It is generally expected that the fall and spring internships will be part-time (ten to twenty hours a week) and summer internships will be full-time. All travel and housing costs must be covered by the student. A fellowship grant of between $2,500 and $5,000 will be awarded, depending on the recipient's educational level, financial need, and time commitment.
See the Aspen Institute Web site for complete program information and application procedures. RFP Link: http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012651/nonprofitsearch
Chủ Nhật, 20 tháng 4, 2008
Grants For Middle and High School Newspapers Partnering With Their Communities
From The Foundation Center...
Newspaper Association of America Foundation to Support Middle and High School Student Newspaper Projects
Deadline: May 16, 2008
The Newspaper Association of America Foundation ( http://www.naafoundation.org/ ) encourages middle and high schools to partner with professional newspapers in their com- munities and seek funding to start, relaunch, or revitalize student newspapers, whether online or in print.
All public and private schools serving grades 7 through 12 and working in partnership with daily or non-daily professional newspapers are eligible to receive Student/Newspaper Partnership Grants from the NAA Foundation. Schools are also encouraged to seek a university or a college as an additional partner. Funding priority is given to start up student newspapers. However, grant applications to relaunch or revitalize former or current programs also will be considered. The NAA Foundation especially welcomes grant applications from urban, rural, or minority-majority schools.
The NAA Foundation will fund up to twelve partnerships in 2008-09. Each partnership may receive up to $5,000 in Year One, plus an additional $2,500 in Year Two. Grant funds may be used for equipment, software, adviser training, and printing.
Visit the NAA Foundation Web site for complete program information and application procedures. RFP Link:
http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012518/naafoundation
Newspaper Association of America Foundation to Support Middle and High School Student Newspaper Projects
Deadline: May 16, 2008
The Newspaper Association of America Foundation ( http://www.naafoundation.org/ ) encourages middle and high schools to partner with professional newspapers in their com- munities and seek funding to start, relaunch, or revitalize student newspapers, whether online or in print.
All public and private schools serving grades 7 through 12 and working in partnership with daily or non-daily professional newspapers are eligible to receive Student/Newspaper Partnership Grants from the NAA Foundation. Schools are also encouraged to seek a university or a college as an additional partner. Funding priority is given to start up student newspapers. However, grant applications to relaunch or revitalize former or current programs also will be considered. The NAA Foundation especially welcomes grant applications from urban, rural, or minority-majority schools.
The NAA Foundation will fund up to twelve partnerships in 2008-09. Each partnership may receive up to $5,000 in Year One, plus an additional $2,500 in Year Two. Grant funds may be used for equipment, software, adviser training, and printing.
Visit the NAA Foundation Web site for complete program information and application procedures. RFP Link:
http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012518/naafoundation
Virtual Person to Person Fundraising; What the Widget's Going On Here?
Some social virtual portals, such as Facebook.com offer their users online nonprofit communities to join up with, either as donors or simply as interested parties. Other sites, such as Kevin Bacon's aptly named Six Degrees, provides widgets that anyone can create (for free), for the cause or organization of their choosing, that become fundraising 'badges' to place on one's own web page, to raise money.
Is all of this good will in the ether working? Virtual fundraising isn't dead. It's experiencing a cold. "Haaa chooo!"
The popular use of the Internet began about ten years ago. Nonprofits, in their ever-existing goal to grow their constituency, educate the public about their cause, and to raise support began learning about these new fangled websites, the Internet, computers, etc. Online fundraising gurus sprouted, as the Internet maintained its foothold on our culture. These wise techies on the mount, to this day consult and teach nonprofits how, through the Internet, they can access people.
Of those nonprofits who bought or received a computer for their office, way back when, some understood that at the very least, that the Internet was a new media outlet. We nonprofits are really still in this stage, in the larger scope of our field. See my post, Foundations Think of Your Nonprofit Constituents Before You...
Nonprofits either raise constituents well, or they go by the wayside. The math is that dire and simple. So, in their month to month budgetary reality, some nonprofit leaders have thought, 'maybe the Internet is a way to raise money that will cost us less overhead?' It's a good question. The answer is...it depends.
How do you get there? Learn, learn, learn. Check out the latest virtual fundraising options and keep up (ha!). Ask colleagues with other organizations what they've done and what their experience is. Share your own, with others. Read. Go to your professional nonprofit affiliation's next meeting or class on the topic. Learn. And then...with any new technology, as with any new fundraising method, the only way to know anything such as 'did we succeed?!!', 'how much is this costing us?!!' (in this case, virtual face to face fundraising) is to plan, before launching the method, and then track results. For instance, one free tool that can help your organization track online successes, goals, and benchmarks is Google Analytics.
Nonprofits would be wise to track (and the following are going vary, nonprofit to nonprofit, as they should):
__ Costs (overhead, direct costs, etc.),
__ Projected Outcome (what do we reasonably hope to achieve through this new method?),
__ Goals (what are your nonprofit's goals in launching this new method, and at what point in time, e.g. 'we expect to have a 10% uptick in new visits to our website from Facebook.com Causes one year after posting our organization, and a 2% uptick in total donations'),
__ Success (numbers of people reached, of those who are reached how many donate, how many of those acquired through this new outreach method wind up investing fully with our nonprofits (e.g. volunteering for us, donating, etc.)),
__ Cost Benefit Ratio at various points over a set timeline (e.g. ' in a year from starting this new method, if we have not increased total donation receipts by 5%, we can not afford to continue this method, at that point; if we are not invested in our using this method over a five year period, minimum').
__ Other goals, concerns, etc.
Virtual face to face fundraising is experiencing growth spurts. Nonprofits must determine which modes of virtual fundraising work for them, individually, (e.g. in this case, face to face fundraising, donation web pages on own site, virtual auctions, email newsletters including a donation request, etc.). Water rolls to the lowest point, and as these various and even new virtual fundraising options linger, we nonprofit professionals who stay up on this fundraising method will learn which virtual fundraising methods are effective and those that are not.
Ultimately, there's no virtual funeral to attend, but rather, nonprofits have (as always!) something to roll up their sleeves over, learn about, plan, implement, and then track their own goals and needs against results. Face to face fundraising will stabilize (or get over its cold) as virtual fundraising methods are understood by nonprofits, tested, and ultimately as they succeed.
[In this month's Giving Carnival (open monthly group blogging session), Peter Deitz, co-author of the "about micro-philanthropy" blog hosts and he provides the question "Is person to person fundraising dead, or is it just getting started?" To join us, see the directions on his post or my post, Join The Philanthropy Discussion... and chime in!]
Is all of this good will in the ether working? Virtual fundraising isn't dead. It's experiencing a cold. "Haaa chooo!"
The popular use of the Internet began about ten years ago. Nonprofits, in their ever-existing goal to grow their constituency, educate the public about their cause, and to raise support began learning about these new fangled websites, the Internet, computers, etc. Online fundraising gurus sprouted, as the Internet maintained its foothold on our culture. These wise techies on the mount, to this day consult and teach nonprofits how, through the Internet, they can access people.
Of those nonprofits who bought or received a computer for their office, way back when, some understood that at the very least, that the Internet was a new media outlet. We nonprofits are really still in this stage, in the larger scope of our field. See my post, Foundations Think of Your Nonprofit Constituents Before You...
Nonprofits either raise constituents well, or they go by the wayside. The math is that dire and simple. So, in their month to month budgetary reality, some nonprofit leaders have thought, 'maybe the Internet is a way to raise money that will cost us less overhead?' It's a good question. The answer is...it depends.
How do you get there? Learn, learn, learn. Check out the latest virtual fundraising options and keep up (ha!). Ask colleagues with other organizations what they've done and what their experience is. Share your own, with others. Read. Go to your professional nonprofit affiliation's next meeting or class on the topic. Learn. And then...with any new technology, as with any new fundraising method, the only way to know anything such as 'did we succeed?!!', 'how much is this costing us?!!' (in this case, virtual face to face fundraising) is to plan, before launching the method, and then track results. For instance, one free tool that can help your organization track online successes, goals, and benchmarks is Google Analytics.
Nonprofits would be wise to track (and the following are going vary, nonprofit to nonprofit, as they should):
__ Costs (overhead, direct costs, etc.),
__ Projected Outcome (what do we reasonably hope to achieve through this new method?),
__ Goals (what are your nonprofit's goals in launching this new method, and at what point in time, e.g. 'we expect to have a 10% uptick in new visits to our website from Facebook.com Causes one year after posting our organization, and a 2% uptick in total donations'),
__ Success (numbers of people reached, of those who are reached how many donate, how many of those acquired through this new outreach method wind up investing fully with our nonprofits (e.g. volunteering for us, donating, etc.)),
__ Cost Benefit Ratio at various points over a set timeline (e.g. ' in a year from starting this new method, if we have not increased total donation receipts by 5%, we can not afford to continue this method, at that point; if we are not invested in our using this method over a five year period, minimum').
__ Other goals, concerns, etc.
Virtual face to face fundraising is experiencing growth spurts. Nonprofits must determine which modes of virtual fundraising work for them, individually, (e.g. in this case, face to face fundraising, donation web pages on own site, virtual auctions, email newsletters including a donation request, etc.). Water rolls to the lowest point, and as these various and even new virtual fundraising options linger, we nonprofit professionals who stay up on this fundraising method will learn which virtual fundraising methods are effective and those that are not.
Ultimately, there's no virtual funeral to attend, but rather, nonprofits have (as always!) something to roll up their sleeves over, learn about, plan, implement, and then track their own goals and needs against results. Face to face fundraising will stabilize (or get over its cold) as virtual fundraising methods are understood by nonprofits, tested, and ultimately as they succeed.
[In this month's Giving Carnival (open monthly group blogging session), Peter Deitz, co-author of the "about micro-philanthropy" blog hosts and he provides the question "Is person to person fundraising dead, or is it just getting started?" To join us, see the directions on his post or my post, Join The Philanthropy Discussion... and chime in!]
Chủ Nhật, 13 tháng 4, 2008
Foundations, Think of Your Nonprofit Constituents Before You Require Applicants Must Apply On Your Website
It is a new shiny era. We can access information quickly (while hoping that it's accurate and the truth). We can disseminate information quickly (hoping that what we intend to get across is reaching everyone we mean for it to).
As grant writers, today, more than ever before, we often locate potential grant donor's giving guidelines, their IRS tax form 990, their websites (to get to know the organization's history, culture, preference, and style), and other helpful information when prepping a grant proposal. We love the easy and quick access.
We grant writers also apply for grants, online, more than ever before. It is an interesting fact that more and more I see foundations have either completely switched to only accepting grant proposals online, or they have a hard date set when they will no longer accept paper grant proposals (applications), and it's often sooner than later.
It's great on the one hand. Everyone uses less paper. The foundation staff probably reads through applications at a faster pace because the web application prompts can be programmed to send received information to the proper staff, and can even be written to read the documents itself (though, I do not know of any foundations doing this, yet).
The downside is that nonprofits must have access to a computer, know how to use them, and have access to the Internet. Grassroots organizations, in particular, are hit hard by this turn in foundation culture, towards the technology. I wonder how many of these foundations, while I am sure meaning the best for everyone, have conducted surveys or asked their applying nonprofit constituency, 'do you know how to use a computer?', 'do you have regular easy access to the Internet?', 'could you successfully submit the grant proposal on line, that you want to get to us?' I know that for every foundation that I see only accepts applications, online; I've never seen one explain or expound sharing that they have studied their constituent (applying) nonprofits' needs, and the community thinks applying online is easier.
And that's always the implication. There is this idea in our culture, and within the global economy-world that if it's online - a foundation is "modern", "up with the times", and "helping" nonprofits access grants (perhaps even "faster"). I am not sure that any of that is true.
Foundations are not monsters. Nonprofit organizations do the same thing. Many nonprofits do have websites (though, not all). They are using the sites as a part of their marketing or cause outreach. They are fundraising, providing I&R (information and referrals), providing study findings such as statistics, they are keeping in touch about the most recent findings through blogs and email, etc. The fact is, though, for example, if a bottle nosed dolphin is wrapped in free floating fishing net - and in peril, animal welfare or oceanic nonprofits do not, for the large part, require that that the dolphin gets help by contacting them through their website.
I know, I know. Foundations get inundated and receive a lot of applications during a giving cycle deadline. It is a lot of work.
I guess I'd suggest that if foundations accept grant applications online:
1. Foundations should not require that all grant proposals must be submitted to them online. It is a detrimental bias in favor of those nonprofits wealthy enough and organized enough to afford a computer and regular Internet access.
2. Foundations who do accept grant proposals, online, I understand need to provide a word (not character) limit for each question they ask or for the information they request, but it must be realistic and appropriate for nonprofits to make their cases well.
3. Those foundations who do accept applications online need to provide a word (or character) counter next to each and every proposal response prompt on their site. Nonprofits who are applying for grants have enough work to do in writing a proposal and compiling attachments. We do not have the time to count each word (let alone each letter) as we apply. We need to spend our time (and resources) on the work of our mission statement; not your virtual application.
4. Of all of the foundations or companies offering grants, technologists offering grants (e.g. in kind web services, hardware donations, etc.) should not require that all applications be submitted online. When they do, they are biasing the grant recipient to likely be an organization who already has technology in place, knows how to use it, and is already operating in the tech world, at least in part. Yet, the organizations who need expert tech help (perhaps the most) are the nonprofits (and often start ups or grassroots organizations) who have no computer or Internet connection at all. If the goal of the technology company or donor is to assist nonprofits in THE NONPROFIT's mission work, then all nonprofits must have access to the grant. There is a tradition in the United States that donors (all donors) give to connect and effect a cause that they want to get involved in. It is usually not to benefit the donor. Yes, you could say 'It depends on what services or items the grant is offering, for instance, we offer grants for search engine optimization' (SEO).' Yes, this is a service that requires that a nonprofit already have a website, and of course it's great that you're giving to nonprofits, at all. I guess I am urging that technology donors keep in mind that it would be great to level the playing field so that all kinds of nonprofits could benefit (not just website-owning ones). For example, in this example, state that if a nonprofit does not already have a website, your grant will assist them with that AND their SEO.
All nonprofits need less barriers to partnerships, support, and access to the community.
When foundations require that nonprofits apply for their grants only online, they are forcing nonprofits to: use a lot of resources, perhaps more resources than may be feasible; they are biased towards nonprofits who are already net savvy and able to access the net; they are not necessarily asking questions of nor listening to their constituents; they are making assumptions that may benefit them more than nonprofits; but undenyably, they are saving paper.
Is maybe ten sheets of paper, per applicant, more important or even just as important as any nonprofit's mission statement work?!
As grant writers, today, more than ever before, we often locate potential grant donor's giving guidelines, their IRS tax form 990, their websites (to get to know the organization's history, culture, preference, and style), and other helpful information when prepping a grant proposal. We love the easy and quick access.
We grant writers also apply for grants, online, more than ever before. It is an interesting fact that more and more I see foundations have either completely switched to only accepting grant proposals online, or they have a hard date set when they will no longer accept paper grant proposals (applications), and it's often sooner than later.
It's great on the one hand. Everyone uses less paper. The foundation staff probably reads through applications at a faster pace because the web application prompts can be programmed to send received information to the proper staff, and can even be written to read the documents itself (though, I do not know of any foundations doing this, yet).
The downside is that nonprofits must have access to a computer, know how to use them, and have access to the Internet. Grassroots organizations, in particular, are hit hard by this turn in foundation culture, towards the technology. I wonder how many of these foundations, while I am sure meaning the best for everyone, have conducted surveys or asked their applying nonprofit constituency, 'do you know how to use a computer?', 'do you have regular easy access to the Internet?', 'could you successfully submit the grant proposal on line, that you want to get to us?' I know that for every foundation that I see only accepts applications, online; I've never seen one explain or expound sharing that they have studied their constituent (applying) nonprofits' needs, and the community thinks applying online is easier.
And that's always the implication. There is this idea in our culture, and within the global economy-world that if it's online - a foundation is "modern", "up with the times", and "helping" nonprofits access grants (perhaps even "faster"). I am not sure that any of that is true.
Foundations are not monsters. Nonprofit organizations do the same thing. Many nonprofits do have websites (though, not all). They are using the sites as a part of their marketing or cause outreach. They are fundraising, providing I&R (information and referrals), providing study findings such as statistics, they are keeping in touch about the most recent findings through blogs and email, etc. The fact is, though, for example, if a bottle nosed dolphin is wrapped in free floating fishing net - and in peril, animal welfare or oceanic nonprofits do not, for the large part, require that that the dolphin gets help by contacting them through their website.
I know, I know. Foundations get inundated and receive a lot of applications during a giving cycle deadline. It is a lot of work.
I guess I'd suggest that if foundations accept grant applications online:
1. Foundations should not require that all grant proposals must be submitted to them online. It is a detrimental bias in favor of those nonprofits wealthy enough and organized enough to afford a computer and regular Internet access.
2. Foundations who do accept grant proposals, online, I understand need to provide a word (not character) limit for each question they ask or for the information they request, but it must be realistic and appropriate for nonprofits to make their cases well.
3. Those foundations who do accept applications online need to provide a word (or character) counter next to each and every proposal response prompt on their site. Nonprofits who are applying for grants have enough work to do in writing a proposal and compiling attachments. We do not have the time to count each word (let alone each letter) as we apply. We need to spend our time (and resources) on the work of our mission statement; not your virtual application.
4. Of all of the foundations or companies offering grants, technologists offering grants (e.g. in kind web services, hardware donations, etc.) should not require that all applications be submitted online. When they do, they are biasing the grant recipient to likely be an organization who already has technology in place, knows how to use it, and is already operating in the tech world, at least in part. Yet, the organizations who need expert tech help (perhaps the most) are the nonprofits (and often start ups or grassroots organizations) who have no computer or Internet connection at all. If the goal of the technology company or donor is to assist nonprofits in THE NONPROFIT's mission work, then all nonprofits must have access to the grant. There is a tradition in the United States that donors (all donors) give to connect and effect a cause that they want to get involved in. It is usually not to benefit the donor. Yes, you could say 'It depends on what services or items the grant is offering, for instance, we offer grants for search engine optimization' (SEO).' Yes, this is a service that requires that a nonprofit already have a website, and of course it's great that you're giving to nonprofits, at all. I guess I am urging that technology donors keep in mind that it would be great to level the playing field so that all kinds of nonprofits could benefit (not just website-owning ones). For example, in this example, state that if a nonprofit does not already have a website, your grant will assist them with that AND their SEO.
All nonprofits need less barriers to partnerships, support, and access to the community.
When foundations require that nonprofits apply for their grants only online, they are forcing nonprofits to: use a lot of resources, perhaps more resources than may be feasible; they are biased towards nonprofits who are already net savvy and able to access the net; they are not necessarily asking questions of nor listening to their constituents; they are making assumptions that may benefit them more than nonprofits; but undenyably, they are saving paper.
Is maybe ten sheets of paper, per applicant, more important or even just as important as any nonprofit's mission statement work?!
Financial Awards for Innovative Journalists and Media That Got the Public Involved In Civic Issue
From The Foundation Center...
Entries Invited for Knight-Batten Awards for Innovations in Journalism
Deadline: June 11, 2008
The Knight-Batten Awards for Innovations in Journalism spotlight news and information providers who offer more than multimedia journalism. Funded by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation ( http://www.knightfoundation.org/ ) and administered by J-Lab:
The Institute for Interactive Journalism ( http://www.j-lab.org/ ) at the University of Maryland's Philip Merrill College of Journalism, the awards honor "novel efforts that seize and create opportunities to involve citizens in public issues and supply entry points that invite their participation or spark their imagination."
The awards honor pioneering approaches to journalism that encourage new forms of information sharing; spur non-traditional interactions that have an impact on community; enable new and better two-way conversations between audiences and news providers; foster new ways of imparting useful information; and create new definitions of news. Entries could consist of such things as online news experiences, news games, mobile news ideas, citizen media, creative use of cell phones, Webcams, blogging, podcasting, social networks, computer kiosks, new applications of software, content management systems, and other advances in interactive or participatory journalism. Entries may also demonstrate simple efforts that notably connect in new ways with a community.
Entries must consist of journalism content created by a news- producing initiative. Individuals must have been affiliated with such initiatives at the time of publication to enter. The contest is open to all news efforts originating between May 1, 2007, and June 11, 2008.
Among the prizes to be awarded are a $10,000 Grand Prize; up to $5,000 in Special Distinction Awards, including a Wild Card Award, to be given at the judges' discretion; and a $1,000 Citizen Media Award.
Complete program guidelines and application are available at the J-Lab Web site.
RFP Link:
http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012354/j-lab
Entries Invited for Knight-Batten Awards for Innovations in Journalism
Deadline: June 11, 2008
The Knight-Batten Awards for Innovations in Journalism spotlight news and information providers who offer more than multimedia journalism. Funded by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation ( http://www.knightfoundation.org/ ) and administered by J-Lab:
The Institute for Interactive Journalism ( http://www.j-lab.org/ ) at the University of Maryland's Philip Merrill College of Journalism, the awards honor "novel efforts that seize and create opportunities to involve citizens in public issues and supply entry points that invite their participation or spark their imagination."
The awards honor pioneering approaches to journalism that encourage new forms of information sharing; spur non-traditional interactions that have an impact on community; enable new and better two-way conversations between audiences and news providers; foster new ways of imparting useful information; and create new definitions of news. Entries could consist of such things as online news experiences, news games, mobile news ideas, citizen media, creative use of cell phones, Webcams, blogging, podcasting, social networks, computer kiosks, new applications of software, content management systems, and other advances in interactive or participatory journalism. Entries may also demonstrate simple efforts that notably connect in new ways with a community.
Entries must consist of journalism content created by a news- producing initiative. Individuals must have been affiliated with such initiatives at the time of publication to enter. The contest is open to all news efforts originating between May 1, 2007, and June 11, 2008.
Among the prizes to be awarded are a $10,000 Grand Prize; up to $5,000 in Special Distinction Awards, including a Wild Card Award, to be given at the judges' discretion; and a $1,000 Citizen Media Award.
Complete program guidelines and application are available at the J-Lab Web site.
RFP Link:
http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012354/j-lab
Grants for Native American Financial Education and Home Ownership Programs
From The Foundation Center...
First Nations Development Institute Announces Financial Education Funding Program
Deadline: June 2, 2008 (Letters of Inquiry)
The First Nations Development Institute ( http://firstnations.org/ ), a national nonprofit Native American organization, has announced a funding program to help bolster the educational, home ownership, and financial assets of Native American families and individuals.
With $435,000 in funding from Bank of America ( http://www.bankofamerica.com/foundation ), the Johnson Scholar ship Foundation ( http://johnsonscholarships.org/), the Washington Mutual Foundation ( http://www.wamu.com/about/community/grantsguidelines/ ), and a fourth partner, the Institute's Little Eagle Staff Fund will provide grants and technical assistance to help the residents of reservation communities become better educated consumers of financial products and services.
Eligible applicants will be tribal programs and Native nonprofit organizations that focus on asset and wealth creation programs in Native communities. Grants may be used to strengthen program administration, management, and implementation. Complete LESF program information will be available at the First Nations Web site beginning April 4, 2008.
RFP Link:
http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012345/firstnations
First Nations Development Institute Announces Financial Education Funding Program
Deadline: June 2, 2008 (Letters of Inquiry)
The First Nations Development Institute ( http://firstnations.org/ ), a national nonprofit Native American organization, has announced a funding program to help bolster the educational, home ownership, and financial assets of Native American families and individuals.
With $435,000 in funding from Bank of America ( http://www.bankofamerica.com/foundation ), the Johnson Scholar ship Foundation ( http://johnsonscholarships.org/), the Washington Mutual Foundation ( http://www.wamu.com/about/community/grantsguidelines/ ), and a fourth partner, the Institute's Little Eagle Staff Fund will provide grants and technical assistance to help the residents of reservation communities become better educated consumers of financial products and services.
Eligible applicants will be tribal programs and Native nonprofit organizations that focus on asset and wealth creation programs in Native communities. Grants may be used to strengthen program administration, management, and implementation. Complete LESF program information will be available at the First Nations Web site beginning April 4, 2008.
RFP Link:
http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012345/firstnations
Chủ Nhật, 6 tháng 4, 2008
Your New Program Or Project Design Must Be Clear Before Applying for Grants
You are approaching potential donors asking them for grants and this, in effect, is really raising new donors who are investors in your organization, the need it's meeting, and your organization's effort. Investors deserve to get the 'who, what, where, when, how, why, and how much' of all aspects of whatever it is you're applying for a grant for.
Whether you are the project manager or a fundraiser writing the grant proposal; writing a grant proposal often does a helpful thing. It forces the program or project design to be fully thought through, fleshed out, and finalized; because if you can't describe for a potential donor the full extent of the program or project, you have work to do. In order to raise grants, and more than one or two, project or program details must be honestly, thoroughly, and succinctly conveyed. If you need to, read my post, How Do We Tighten Up Our Grant Proposal?
Grant donors accept applications for grants because they are involved with the cause that you work for, too. They do their work by contributing money, just like your nonprofit does its work by providing programs, resources, research, etc. Know, too, that today's donors are much more savvy than just handing checks out without regard. Read my posts, What Motivates Giving? and Yet Another Example of Donors Expecting Results
Today's donor wants to know:
__ Is your project or program likely to succeed based on the peoples' experience who are running it, the resources allocated to the project, is it designed within a realistic scope of work and designed to be effective, how much need exists for the project, etc.?
__ Will your program be sustainable? Have you figured out how to keep it going, financially, after you've raised a few grants? It won't die on the vine, right?
__ Will their be evaluations or requests from clientele for feedback, during the program and after? Are their expected outcomes in place, now, before the project's begun? How will you know if your project or program is successful? What evaluation methods are you going to use?
__ Does your nonprofit retain good agency transparency, operations management, board oversight, honesty, and mission success histories? If not, you have some public relations work to do; coming clean honestly, copping to the issue, explaining how the issue is being corrected, and expressing that your organization has learned from its mistake(s) and is moving on.
These four requirements must be met to raise grants. Next, your organization must address basic programmatic requirements. They include, but are not limited to:
__ Designing a program that does not try to do a million things, but rather is focused. Define the project or program, explain it, flesh it out to its full extent. State clearly the intended outcome.
__ Designing a program based on actual current needs in your community that were discovered by recently researching or talking with the people or 'thing' needing assistance.
__ Designing a program that can succeed. It will truly meet the community or issue's need, it will be allocated all of the resources necessary to be successful, it will run over the proper amount of time (if not indefinitely), it will be easily accessible to those or that which needs it, etc.
__ Planning. Enough time, before the program or project is going to begin, must be given to planning. The project must be designed, a team put together in which everyone knows who is responsible for what, by when, how, where, and to what goal. Fundraising must be decided, BEFORE the program begins, and the plan to implement it must be put into place. Locations, transportation, meals, literature, access to doctors, etc. or whatever is necessary for the program must be arranged for, given time to respond, and contingency must be made, just in case.
__ Staffing must be appropriate given modern paradigms in your field. It must be planned out, and the proper amount of people must be allocated to the project for it to realistically succeed. Whether volunteers or hired contractors or staff, there must be enough time to design job descriptions, advertise for assistance, interview and check references on, hire, and train any new staff. All hiring requirements (e.g. experience, degrees, licensing, etc.) must meet the current legal and professional expectations for the work to be done.
__ Time. I know that the need that your organization is meeting is urgent. It usually is, but giving planning, hiring, design, fundraising, etc. enough time leads to a successful project, and that's what your constituency or cause really needs, even in the midst of its urgency.
__ Budget. Planning and effective fundraising is best done after creating a realistic and complete budget. List what all will be needed (everything), list each item's expense for the time allocated for the program, then list all avenues of income that will be allocated to this project. It's OK if they don't balance, today, as long as you're planning how to make them balance before the project begins. By the time the project begins, you don't need to have all of the money in the bank, yet, for the entire project; but you do need to know that you will realistically have all of the money in the bank that your program will need, month to month, for its full duration.
If you want to raise grants, having these basics answered will up your organization's chances many times over.
Whether you are the project manager or a fundraiser writing the grant proposal; writing a grant proposal often does a helpful thing. It forces the program or project design to be fully thought through, fleshed out, and finalized; because if you can't describe for a potential donor the full extent of the program or project, you have work to do. In order to raise grants, and more than one or two, project or program details must be honestly, thoroughly, and succinctly conveyed. If you need to, read my post, How Do We Tighten Up Our Grant Proposal?
Grant donors accept applications for grants because they are involved with the cause that you work for, too. They do their work by contributing money, just like your nonprofit does its work by providing programs, resources, research, etc. Know, too, that today's donors are much more savvy than just handing checks out without regard. Read my posts, What Motivates Giving? and Yet Another Example of Donors Expecting Results
Today's donor wants to know:
__ Is your project or program likely to succeed based on the peoples' experience who are running it, the resources allocated to the project, is it designed within a realistic scope of work and designed to be effective, how much need exists for the project, etc.?
__ Will your program be sustainable? Have you figured out how to keep it going, financially, after you've raised a few grants? It won't die on the vine, right?
__ Will their be evaluations or requests from clientele for feedback, during the program and after? Are their expected outcomes in place, now, before the project's begun? How will you know if your project or program is successful? What evaluation methods are you going to use?
__ Does your nonprofit retain good agency transparency, operations management, board oversight, honesty, and mission success histories? If not, you have some public relations work to do; coming clean honestly, copping to the issue, explaining how the issue is being corrected, and expressing that your organization has learned from its mistake(s) and is moving on.
These four requirements must be met to raise grants. Next, your organization must address basic programmatic requirements. They include, but are not limited to:
__ Designing a program that does not try to do a million things, but rather is focused. Define the project or program, explain it, flesh it out to its full extent. State clearly the intended outcome.
__ Designing a program based on actual current needs in your community that were discovered by recently researching or talking with the people or 'thing' needing assistance.
__ Designing a program that can succeed. It will truly meet the community or issue's need, it will be allocated all of the resources necessary to be successful, it will run over the proper amount of time (if not indefinitely), it will be easily accessible to those or that which needs it, etc.
__ Planning. Enough time, before the program or project is going to begin, must be given to planning. The project must be designed, a team put together in which everyone knows who is responsible for what, by when, how, where, and to what goal. Fundraising must be decided, BEFORE the program begins, and the plan to implement it must be put into place. Locations, transportation, meals, literature, access to doctors, etc. or whatever is necessary for the program must be arranged for, given time to respond, and contingency must be made, just in case.
__ Staffing must be appropriate given modern paradigms in your field. It must be planned out, and the proper amount of people must be allocated to the project for it to realistically succeed. Whether volunteers or hired contractors or staff, there must be enough time to design job descriptions, advertise for assistance, interview and check references on, hire, and train any new staff. All hiring requirements (e.g. experience, degrees, licensing, etc.) must meet the current legal and professional expectations for the work to be done.
__ Time. I know that the need that your organization is meeting is urgent. It usually is, but giving planning, hiring, design, fundraising, etc. enough time leads to a successful project, and that's what your constituency or cause really needs, even in the midst of its urgency.
__ Budget. Planning and effective fundraising is best done after creating a realistic and complete budget. List what all will be needed (everything), list each item's expense for the time allocated for the program, then list all avenues of income that will be allocated to this project. It's OK if they don't balance, today, as long as you're planning how to make them balance before the project begins. By the time the project begins, you don't need to have all of the money in the bank, yet, for the entire project; but you do need to know that you will realistically have all of the money in the bank that your program will need, month to month, for its full duration.
If you want to raise grants, having these basics answered will up your organization's chances many times over.
Join In the Philanthropy Discussion - Is Person to Person Fundraising Dead?
You are welcome to join in the monthly group blog session called the Giving Carnival. If you'd like to sign up for regular notice, month to month, or even volunteer to host subscribe to the Google Giving Carnival Group. Anyone interested in any aspect of philanthropy is welcome.
This month, Peter Deitz, author of the "about micro-philanthropy" blog is hosting and he provides the questions "Is person to person fundraising dead, or is it just getting started?" Click on the question link to read his post with all of the details. Submit a response to Peter by April 24th 6pm, EST at peterdeitz at gmail dot com or by posting a "Comment" on his post detailing this month's giving carnival (if you don't have a blog to write a response on). Then, check back on April 25th to see all of the responses he received, discover where your colleagues are on the topic, and perhaps even discuss further!
This month, Peter Deitz, author of the "about micro-philanthropy" blog is hosting and he provides the questions "Is person to person fundraising dead, or is it just getting started?" Click on the question link to read his post with all of the details. Submit a response to Peter by April 24th 6pm, EST at peterdeitz at gmail dot com or by posting a "Comment" on his post detailing this month's giving carnival (if you don't have a blog to write a response on). Then, check back on April 25th to see all of the responses he received, discover where your colleagues are on the topic, and perhaps even discuss further!
Grants for Many Different Kinds of Community Organizations Assisting Family Caregivers
From The Foundation Center...
Weinberg Foundation Announces Grant Program to Support Family Caregivers
Deadline: June 12, 2008
The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation ( http://www.hjweinbergfoundation.org/ ) has announced an innovative new program to provide $9 million in grants to assist caregivers across the United States.
The Family and Informal Caregiver Funding Program was developed by the Weinberg Foundation to provide the critical resources necessary to support caregivers in innovative ways and facilitate partnerships among agencies and organizations. The primary goal of the program is to increase support for family and informal caregivers who assist older adults living in the community.
Eligible grant recipients include nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations; faith and other community-based organizations; tribal organizations; and units of local government nationwide.
The grant program will support from twelve to twenty community-based projects with grants ranging from $100,000 to $300,000 each (for a total of $300,000 to $900,000 for each grant recipient from March 2009 through February 2012).
Complete application details and additional information are available at the foundation's Web site or by contacting the foundation's offices.
Contact Information:
Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation
Tel: (410) 654-8500
Email: CaregivingRFP@theweinbergfoundation.org
RFP Link:
http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012257/weinberg
Weinberg Foundation Announces Grant Program to Support Family Caregivers
Deadline: June 12, 2008
The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation ( http://www.hjweinbergfoundation.org/ ) has announced an innovative new program to provide $9 million in grants to assist caregivers across the United States.
The Family and Informal Caregiver Funding Program was developed by the Weinberg Foundation to provide the critical resources necessary to support caregivers in innovative ways and facilitate partnerships among agencies and organizations. The primary goal of the program is to increase support for family and informal caregivers who assist older adults living in the community.
Eligible grant recipients include nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations; faith and other community-based organizations; tribal organizations; and units of local government nationwide.
The grant program will support from twelve to twenty community-based projects with grants ranging from $100,000 to $300,000 each (for a total of $300,000 to $900,000 for each grant recipient from March 2009 through February 2012).
Complete application details and additional information are available at the foundation's Web site or by contacting the foundation's offices.
Contact Information:
Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation
Tel: (410) 654-8500
Email: CaregivingRFP@theweinbergfoundation.org
RFP Link:
http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/15012257/weinberg
Đăng ký:
Bài đăng (Atom)