Investing in Grants Management

Moderator:Guenevere Crum, The Able Trust

Presenters:Deborah Hessler, Edyth Bush Charitable FoundationLoretta Duvall, The Children’s TrustDanette Peters, Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation

Is this your system

?

Can a System Get Betterthan Just a Stack?

• Of Course!• And that is why we are here

In the Next Hour

• Short Activity• Each Presenter on the panel will have 15

minutes• Questions and Answers of the Panel• Final Questions and Comments• Please complete a session survey

Audience Questions

How are you currently invested in grants management?

What are your anticipated investments in the next year or two in grants management?

Investing in Grants Management

Creating A Plan

Deborah HesslerEdyth Bush Charitable Foundation

dhessler@edythbush.org

Creating the Plan

O PreparationOGet the project off and running

O Staff buy-in

Preparation

OClear picture of current process

OHistorical perspective

Optimize Data Systems

OEfficient and powerful use of software

O Invest in software vendor consultant

Workflow

Click icon to add picture

Inquiries

RequestsRFP

Site Visits

Determination

Notification

Payments

Reporting

Accounting

Off and Running

OThink BIGOEngage StaffORemove redundant tasksOStaff meeting to finalize

Staff Buy-in

OValue others opinions and inputOInclude everyone in the processOOrganization-wide change

Benefits of Investing in Grants Management

OEliminate redundancyOOptimal use of software

systemOEfficient use of Staff time and

Foundation resourcesORespect of grantees time and

resourcesOSave Time and Money

Investing in Grants Management

Presenter:

Loretta M. Duvall

Senior Internal Operations Manager

loretta@thechildrenstrust.org

305-571-5700

The Children’s Trust

• Mission: To improve the lives of all children and families in Miami-Dade County by making strategic investments in their futures.

• Vision: The Children’s Trust will become the recognized leader in planning, advocating and funding quality services to improve the lives of children and their families.

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

88 94 87 80 79

$93,088,594

$104,589,983$99,378,634

$107,754,524

$92,188,436

Number of Staff Revenue

The Children’s TrustRevenue and Staff

2007-2011

Reasons to streamline application process

• Early information systems investments in support of funding were intentionally minimal.

• Release of the first funding applications in 2004.

• All major program strategies currently funded were nearing the end of 3-year funding cycles.

• This, combined with an increasingly scarce funding environment, led us to expect we will receive an unprecedented number of funding applications.

What we had and……

• Funding opportunities are posted on website for download and printed for hard copy release.

• Multiple bound paper copies of applications with electronic copies of documents saved on CDs are submitted via mail or in-person delivery, with paper copy of each retained for public records at off-site paper storage facility.

• Submissions, reviewer assignments and ratings, and funding recommendations are tracked manually using multiple spreadsheets and lists, separately for each competitive funding request.

…what did we seek?

• Ability to easily manage and update custom application forms and requirements for various funding opportunities, collected in a centralized database over time.

• Validation of applicant eligibility prior to allowing a submission to save staff time in technical reviews for identification of fatal flaws.

• Reduce applicant frustration in investing time on a submission that is not appropriate.

What did we seek?

• Simplify due diligence by requiring supporting documentation such as Form 990, an automated link to GuideStar to access the tax information so applicants would not have to add those manually.

• Ability for applicants to save and reuse applicant/program information as well as to maintain a complete history of all interactions.

• Online management of reviewer assignment and rating processes.

• Increase reviewer accuracy of scoring and comments since there would be required fields and automated calculations. Reduced time and expense in preparing reviewer materials since all would be accessed online.

Why we needed this change?

• Realize efficiencies and reduce manual errors in receipt and management of large numbers of funding applications.

• Reduce frustration, expense and crunch time for applicants to bind, package and physically deliver applications to our doorstep on time.

• Automatic imported into provider reporting and contract management systems to eliminate staff data entry and reduce time to negotiate contracts.

Why we needed this change?

• To join the modern grants and funding era.• Reduce need to pay for outside storage/archiving of paper

documents.• Reduce cost for monthly pick up and storage of over 600

boxes at a cost of $2,800 per year. • Eight staff is assigned responsibility each month to box,

complete inventory forms and pack documents. We average 10 new boxes a month. Each person assigned spends an average of 8 hours/month readying the materials.

• Reduce need to pay for destruction/disposal of additional copies of submitted applications. Cost is $1,700 per year to pick up three large containers of discarded papers for destruction.

Implementation

• Project planned with involvement of all staff after buy-off from executive management.

• Budget approved by board. • Implementation period was 6 months from idea

to implementation, April 2010 through December 2010.

• Weekly status meetings, weekend work, quick turnaround on key decisions

Impact

• The Children’s Trust engaged an independent third-party survey firm, to collect this anonymous survey applicants experience with on-line application.

• Focus groups with staff and users were also held.• Overall both applicants and reviewers were satisfied with

the on-line system.• The most dissatisfaction was shown in the areas of ease of

navigation, print/preview functions, saving comments and marking forms as complete.

• This issue was discussed within the focus group and most expressed that with practice, the web based review process will help them move towards a paperless process as was intended.

The Reason We Do This

Investing in Grants Management

Danette Peters

Family Foundation founded in 1953 Located in Winston Salem, NC

Our mission: Help to move people and places out of poverty Fund in the Southeastern United States

Current assets $163 million 9 full-time staff and 2 part-time staff

Process approximately 400 summaries & 100 proposals annually

Award approximately 70 grants annually

The Foundation at a Glance

Started accepting online applications in 2006o Application questions revised multiple times since

implementation

Created outcome tracking system in Microedgeo Monitor each grant

o Track outcomes across all grantees

Streamlined proposal review process using Microedgeo Due Diligence Questions and Answers

o Initial and Final Staff Recommendations

Center for Effective Philanthropy (CEP) survey in 2008

Investments made so far...

Progress Report

o Why ask so many questions?

o What do we really need to know?

Final Report

o Why aren’t we getting the information we need?

Had to ask clearer questions!

o Where are my reports? Reports not logged in, missing or LOST in ACTION (LIA)

Launched online reporting Including Outcome and Quantitative data reporting

What still needed to Change...

30

Reporting Decisions

Grantees DO NOT report directly into outcome tracking fieldso WHY? ~~ Garbage In/Garbage Out

One person oversees outcome review and entry processo WHY? ~~ Consistency

31

Online Final Report Show agreed upon

outcomes (read-only)

Quantitative outcomes

32

Reporting in Microedge

Report information automatically populates fields in Microedge

Report attachments

Shows IGAM email account, online report form published and date

33

Reporting on Quantitative Data

Added the ability for grantees to report directly on quantitative outcomes

34

Reporting

Progress and Final reports (with agreed upon outcomes) printed to route for review and approval

35

Outcome Tracking in Microedge

Grantee outcomes

Grantee results

MRBF outcomes

36

Reporting

Streamlined final report process to include closing the grant file

After final report has been received, outcomes approved and entered – grant file is closed, reviewed/scanned and paper file is shredded

Only paper files in office are active grants

Back of Final Report routing form

37

Moving Forward Annual reviews of outcomes in specific focus

areas (i.e., education, housing, jobs)

Continued staff training and learning related to outcomes

Microedge Alta

Communications Plan

Make the Time to Invest in Grants Management

It DOES matterAND

It IS worth it!!

Resources

• Project Streamline – www.projectstreamline.org– 6 specialized resource guides– Online assessment tool

• Grant Managers Network online discussions• Grantmakers for Effective Organizations

– www.geofunders.org

• Association of Small Foundations– www.smallfoundations.org

Contact InformationDeborah HesslerEdyth Bush Charitable Foundation Email: dhessler@edythbush.orgTel: (407) 647-4322

Loretta DuvallThe Children’s TrustEmail: loretta@thechildrenstrust.orgTel: (305) 571-5700

Danette PetersMary Reynolds Babcock Foundation Email: dpeters@mrbf.orgTel: (336) 748-9222

41

Questions and Answers