Grant Writing - Not Reviewing the Literature - Mistake 2 of 7 to Avoid When Approaching Funders

Federal government agencies, foundations and corporations get turned off by grant proposals that:

Are off-topic;
Have been tried elsewhere;
Give a negative tone;
Come from an applicant, not a client perspective;
Lack adequate infrastructure;
Include lots of unsupported assumptions; and
Look for quick fixes. In this article, you will learn mistake 2 of 7 to avoid when approaching funders: not reviewing the literature. Failure to find out if your project or idea has been tried elsewhere could lead to your rejection. The solution is here, too, so you don't make this mistake in the future.

Most of the time, our ideas are not new. In fact, one researchaer (Meador 1985) found that as many as one-third of all proposals submitted to a funder who was seeking innovative ideas were for projects that had been tried elsewhere.

If the idea for which you seek funding is indeed unique, great. If you're anything like most of my students, after reviewing the literature - offline and online - they realize that they are not alone in the universe. In fact, many find programs doing almost exactly what they want to do someplace else.

Solution

Economically, it is far more efficient and far-reaching to build on what has been done successfully than starting from scratch. Surprisingly, you can still make your idea unique, even if it has been tried elsewhere.

To make your idea unique when tried before, here are six steps to reviewing the literature and avoiding this mistake:

Search online - Search on the Internet using keywords that best represent your idea or program, like child care, child development, daycare, early childhood, preschool.
Search offline - Identify professional associations in your industry, such as the National Association for the Education of Young Children, Association for Childhood Education International. Review their journals and websites.
Identify 1-3 programs doing what you want to do, like Montessori.
Interview the director of each program.
Summarize in 1-3 paragraphs what each program has already accomplished, methodologies used, failings, successes, stumbling blocks.
Include this summary in the "methods" section of your proposal. Then, leverage your proposal in a way that builds on the successes of the other programs.
Subtle improvement of what works is easier, faster and more fundable than starting from scratch. In the eyes of the funder, building on a review and summary of the literature - online and offline - will demonstrate that you've done your homework.

And now I would like to invite you to claim your free subscription to the Grant Writing Newsletter when you visit http://GrantWritingNewsletter.com.

From Phil Johncock - The Grant Writing Professor

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.