ACET, Inc. Blog

At ACET we like to keep up-to-date on grant opportunities and we recently came across one of particular interest for education professionals. As you may know, Target commits 5% of its income to the communities in which Target stores are located and funds programs such as “Meals for Minds,” a program that helps feed K-12 students in need, and school library makeovers to help schools improve their library facilities and collections.

Recently, Philanthropy News Digest included an announcement stating that Target will be offering Field Trip Grants this year. Target is offering 5,000 Field Trip Grants of $700 each to schools for the 2010-2011 school year for the purpose of executing a field trip that will provide a “demonstrable learning experience” (http://foundationcenter.org/pnd/rfp/rfp_item.jhtml?id=306900023) for students. In particular, the goal of the Field Trip Grants is to connect the classroom curriculum with students’ experiences out of school.

To be eligible for the grant, one must be an education professional who is at least 18 years of age and employed by an accredited non-profit public, private, or charter school. Applications are due by September 30^th, 2010. Selection is managed entirely by Scholarship America.

For further details, an online application, and an idea generator see the following link: http://sites.target.com/site/en/company/page.jsp?contentId=WCMP04-031880

Joseph

This July I participated in a “multi-tier” review of grant applications for the U.S. Department of Education. It was a great experience! I learned a lot about how grants are reviewed at the Federal level and would like to share those processes and some advice with you.

Review Processes

Under a multi-tier review, the required proposal elements are divided into sections and reviewers assess and score specific sections of the proposal. Reviewers are assigned to different tiers based on their level of expertise. At the end of each tier of reviewing, the highest scoring applications move on to the next tier for additional review. Checks-and-balances are built into the entire process to ensure that the entire review process is fair and equitable.

For example, I was a Tier II reviewer and the applications had already been scored on four proposal elements. The Tier II reviewers read and scored the applications for two additional sections: the research foundation of the application and proposed evaluation activities (we did have to read the entire proposal, but scored only those two sections). After reading the assigned applications, I participated in a conference call with another reviewer assigned to the same applications and a panel monitor (an employee of the U.S. Department of Education). During the conference calls, the reviewers discussed the merits and challenges of each application and how well each met the scoring criteria. The reviewers also worked towards aligning the assessments so that we were consistent in our application of the review criteria for all of the applications.

Grant Application Advice

Three key themes emerged from my review:

1 – Make sure the application covers all of the required elements outlined in the RFP.
One of the proposals I read did not include background research or theory in the narrative. As a result, the reviewers scored that section quite low. Although this advice may feel self-evident, it’s a pretty good bet that elements listed as ‘required’ in the RFP will be included as scorable criteria in the review phase. It is very important and very beneficial to have someone read the application and verify that it covers all required elements before submitting it.

2 – Ensure space and point allocations are proportional to application pages.
One of the applications I read included more than five pages describing background research (worth up to 10 points) and but fewer than five pages describing the proposed evaluation (worth up to 15 points). While the research section was very detailed (and was scored highly), the description of the proposed evaluation was very short and the lack of detail resulted in a lower score for the proposed evaluation section. When writing a grant application, it’s important that sections that are worth more points be allocated more space in the proposal than sections worth fewer points. This is especially true when there is a page limit to the proposal!

3 – Review, re-read, and edit the application to ensure an appropriate breadth and depth of the narrative.
Several of the applications I scored included descriptions of proposed evaluation activities that were so broad and sweeping it was difficult to determine what the evaluation would be. With highly competitive grant competitions such as the one I reviewed for, it’s very important to give the reviewers enough breadth and depth in the narrative so they get a sense of proposed program activities, why the program is needed, when the program has been successful in the past, and how the proposed program will be evaluated.

I hope this information is useful to you and your agency when you prepare an application for a grant. Please comment below or email me if you have any questions or would like additional information!

Kirsten

Each year the American Evaluation Association (AEA) holds an annual conference at which evaluators from around the country gather to discuss and reflect on evaluations. A large portion of the conference is devoted to evaluators sharing their knowledge with others through poster presentations, round-tables, and paper presentations. And being a presenter at AEA’s conference is a competitive process: Evaluators submit short briefs of their proposed topic which are reviewed and rated by AEA members.

Recently ACET staff learned that two of their proposals were accepted for the November, 2010 conference in San Antonio. Kirsten will be presenting a paper on the evaluation of a Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) grant currently implemented by the Minnesota Office of Higher Education. The presentation will emphasize the initial findings of the impact of GEAR UP on student academic success, review evaluation successes and challenges, and describe lessons learned. Stella will also co-present a paper on Incarnation Family Connections, a child welfare demonstration program implemented by The Wayside House. This presentation will summarize findings from the first six months of the program, the evolution of the evaluation design, considerations made in selecting the final design, and lessons learned.