Category

Grant Management

Feb 14
0

How to Include Overhead in a Grant Request

By | Grant Management, Nonprofit | No Comments
person at laptop computer with dashboard printouts on desk, Grant Request

If you’ve ever completed a grant request, you know that some areas can be confusing. One such example is where to include overhead. Actually, it’s not as confusing as it sounds. It involves accounting for indirect costs that are not directly tied to a specific project but are necessary for the overall operation of an organization. Overhead costs can include administrative expenses, utilities, rent, and other general operational costs.

The Problems with Underestimating Overhead

It’s vital to consider overhead when drafting your grant request. Failing to do so can cut into your margins, making it difficult to run sustainable programs. Everything from rent to utilities must be included in your costs to ensure that the grant funds adequately cover the services rendered. If you don’t include overhead costs in your grant applications, you’ll still end up paying for them, but you’ll have to find the money from other areas of the budget, such as donations.

Using the Indirect Cost or De Minimis Rate Method: Which to Choose?

There are two methods for calculating overhead: the indirect cost method and the “de minimis” rate.

  • The indirect cost method takes a percentage of overhead relative to the direct costs of the program and uses that amount to calculate overhead costs.
  • The de minimis rate is a standard percentage of the modified cost rate. De minimis is easier to calculate but potentially less accurate.

You can choose to use either method, but it is important to choose one and use it consistently for clarity.

Indirect Costs – Overhead

Overhead costs encompass indirect expenses that are not directly allocated to specific programs or projects but are crucial for the overall operations of the organization. These costs play a vital role in maintaining the organization’s infrastructure, supporting its mission, and ensuring efficient day-to-day functioning.

Administrative costs, covering items like salaries for administrative staff, office supplies, utilities, and rent, contribute to the general management and oversight of the organization. Additionally, overhead costs include expenditures associated with technology and information systems, financial management activities like accounting services and auditing, and governance-related expenses such as board meetings, legal services, and compliance activities.

Nonprofits need to strike a balance in managing overhead costs responsibly, aiming to allocate a significant portion of their resources directly toward fulfilling their mission while ensuring the sustainability and effective functioning of the organization.

Comply with Funding Policies

One important tip: When accounting for indirect costs in grant applications, be sure to comply with the funder’s policies. Some funders list a rate not to exceed, while others specify a percentage. When the allowable overhead costs aren’t specified, you have more leeway to request the needed funds and negotiate them as part of the grant process.

Provide Supporting Documents

Along with your indirect cost assumptions and requests, funders typically ask for financial information to back up the request. These may be copies of the organization’s cash flow statement, balance sheet, or similar materials. Some funders may be more stringent, and request only audited financial statements. You may also be asked to sign a form certifying that the information presented is accurate and truthful.

If the organization has some leeway to negotiate indirect costs, providing financial statements offers proof points that back up your request for funds as part of the grant process. It will demonstrate the basis upon which you have calculated the indirect costs.

Supporting Mission with Margin

Lastly, be ready to demonstrate how the grant funds, and especially the portion requested as indirect funds for overhead, support your organization’s mission. Demonstrate how your organization pays careful attention to costs. The narrative around indirect costs and overhead should be about how you will use the funds wisely, not an apology for asking for them. After all, every organization needs a place from which to work and funds to pay rent, utilities, IT support, and so on. To fulfill your mission, you need the margin—and the funding—to run programs and services. Requesting funds for overhead is a necessary step in the grant application process.

Welter Consulting

Welter Consulting bridges people and technology together for effective solutions for nonprofit organizations. We offer software and services that can help you with your accounting needs. Please contact us for more information.

Aug 04
0

4 Types of Awarding Strategies Grant Seekers Should Know

By | Grant Management, Nonprofit | No Comments
grant application and Welter Consulting logo

Grant seekers are always on the lookout for effective awarding strategies that can enhance their chances of securing funding for their projects. In this blog post, we will explore four key types of awarding strategies that grant seekers should know. By understanding these strategies, you can tailor your grant applications to align with the preferences and priorities of funders, increasing your chances of success.

Be Competitive

One commonly used awarding strategy is the competitive approach. Under this strategy, grant seekers submit applications that are evaluated and compared against one another. Funding is then awarded to the most deserving and promising projects, based on predetermined evaluation criteria. To succeed in this strategy, grant seekers should focus on clearly articulating their project’s unique value, demonstrating its impact, and showcasing their organization’s capacity to effectively implement the proposed initiative.

Establish Formulas

Formula awarding strategies allocate funding based on predetermined formulas, or formulas that take into account specific criteria such as population size, poverty rates, or other relevant factors. This approach provides a more predictable and consistent funding framework. Grant seekers should familiarize themselves with the formula used by the funding agency and ensure their project aligns with the criteria outlined to maximize their chances of receiving funding.

Discretion

Discretionary awarding strategies grant decision-making authority to the funder or a designated committee. In this approach, grant seekers must focus on building relationships and effectively communicating the value and importance of their project directly to the decision-makers. Understanding the funder’s priorities and tailoring your proposal to align with their goals is crucial in this strategy.

Collaboration

Collaborative awarding strategies involve partnerships between grant seekers and funders to jointly develop and implement projects. In this approach, grant seekers must actively engage with potential funders, establish shared goals, and demonstrate their capacity to collaborate effectively. Building strong relationships and presenting a compelling case for partnership are key to success in this strategy.

As a grant seeker, it is essential to be aware of the different awarding strategies employed by funders. By understanding and aligning your grant applications with these strategies, you can increase your chances of securing funding for your projects. Whether it’s the competitive approach, formula-based funding, discretionary decision-making, or collaborative partnerships, tailoring your proposals to match the funder’s preferences and priorities is key. Remember to thoroughly research each funder’s guidelines and requirements, communicate your project’s value effectively, and build strong relationships with decision-makers. By doing so, you can navigate the grant-seeking process more strategically and increase your chances of securing the resources needed to bring your projects to life.

If you’re looking for further guidance and assistance in the grant-seeking process, consider reaching out to Welter Consulting. Our team of experts specializes in providing software and services tailored to the unique needs of nonprofit organizations. Contact Welter Consulting at 206-605-3113 for more information.

Mar 28
0

The Top 3 Challenges of Managing Government Contracts

By | Government, Grant Management, Nonprofit | No Comments
person standing in front of sticky notes making decisions

Nonprofit organizations frequently enter government contracts. Whether contracting with town, city, state, or federal government entities, nonprofits provide a valuable service to government entities. This mutually beneficial relationship spans many areas of nonprofit work including education, health and human services, the arts, and much more.

However, there are common challenges that nonprofits face once they have contracted with government entities to provide services. We’re not talking about the obvious initial hurdles that nonprofits must overcome to secure contracts, such as winning RFP bids to be on approved vendors lists and so on. No, we are talking about challenges that arise once the contract is signed and work has commenced.

Below are the top three challenges faced by many nonprofits and possible solutions. Perhaps after reading these, you’ll recognize your own work, and the challenges you face, in similar situations. Some of these dovetail with grant management challenges, so read our article on that topic for additional insights.

Challenge 1: Contract rates do not cover administrative costs

This one can make any nonprofit feel a pinch in the pocketbook. Unfortunately, it’s all too common—in one survey conducted by the state of Oregon, 75% of respondents felt this was the number one challenge when dealing with government-based contracts.

Nonprofits need to clearly assess the overall administrative costs of all contracts and add these costs into the contracted amount. What roles will be required to administer, maintain, and support the contract? What are the salary and related costs associated with the administration, and for what duration should the contract cover them?

To address this challenge requires working with your accounting and finance team to accurately assess costs for future contracts and ensure it is written into the contract itself. If you fail to do so, you could find yourself losing margin on future contracts as administrative costs sap whatever margin you intend to make from the account.

Challenge 2: Timelines are unrealistic

This is another challenge frequently encountered by nonprofits—the timelines given to them by the government agency to achieve a stated goal are considered unrealistic. Perhaps the government wishes to see a change of X percent in Y days, but given your knowledge of the issue, that is impossible.

First, ascertain where this time pressure is coming from within the government entity with which you are conducting business. Is it coming from a politician eager to gain votes? Or is it from a time-pressed bureaucrat who simply doesn’t understand the work itself?

It’s important to determine the source of the timeline pressures so you can address them. If it’s coming from people eager to see results (and enhance their standing within the organization) then sitting down with them and helping them to understand why a slower approach may be beneficial is essential. They may agree with you that more time is needed to get better results, which will also reflect well on them.

But do your part as well when negotiating contracts. Oftentimes nonprofits are so eager to secure government contracts that they do a poor job estimating how long it will take to achieve the desired results—or they do not have all the information necessary during contract negotiations to make a sound estimate. Adding some padding to timelines ahead of the project may give you enough grace to successfully achieve the desired outcomes or at least negotiate a longer timeline.

Challenge 3: Burdensome reporting requirements

Red tape, red tape, and more red tape—if you feel like you’re tangled in it, you’re not alone, as many nonprofits in the previously cited Oregon study also felt that reporting requirements were often burdensome.

To make reporting less burdensome, keep good records along the way. Using a cloud-based fund accounting system can make the financial reporting easier, for example, as it can directly chart expenses and revenues to specific budget lines.

Some nonprofits find that having a staff member on the team dedicated to the government contract and solely responsible for reporting requirements takes the burden off the rest of the team, enabling them to deliver services without worrying about completing the proper reports  You may wish to plan on a portion of a team member’s time for this function for your next government contract to avoid the feeling of always working on reports, rather than the delivery services for which your organization has been contracted.

Welter Consulting

Welter Consulting bridges people and technology together for effective solutions for nonprofit organizations. We offer software and services that can help you with your accounting needs. Please contact us for more information.

Nov 03
0

Five Mistakes Grant Organizations Make

By | Grant Management | No Comments
person with head on desk and open laptop over his head

With over 86,000 granting organizations in the United States alone, there are many opportunities for grants. Most articles about grants talk about applying for, managing, or receiving grant funds. But what about the organizations that grant the money? What advice and information benefits them?

Here, we’ve put together five very common mistakes that grant organizations make. Do any of them resonate with you? Fortunately, they are also mistakes that are very easy to correct.

Mistake 1: Poor Reporting

Reports are a form of communication. Nonprofit directors, boards, and donors require clear communication to better understand how their funds are spent. Without good communication, you may be at risk of losing donations, supporters or even board members.

Poor reporting can also lead to compliance issues. Inadequate or unclear reports may be a red flag to the IRS that a nonprofit requires investigation which is something most wish to avoid!

The way to fix poor reporting is by automating reporting and using a system to manage and monitor grant funding and accounting. If you’re currently utilizing spreadsheets to track and monitor grants, you are missing out on many of the benefits of automating grant reporting, including:

  • Improved accuracy of reports
  • Increased efficiency
  • Better financial visibility (especially when integrated with accounting systems)
  • Enhanced productivity

Although a grant management system is an investment, it is money well spent since it improves reporting tremendously. It makes it easier to report in a clear and transparent manner about grant funds that your board, directors, and donors will appreciate.

Mistake 2: Subjective Review Process

How you assess grant applications is important. Do you utilize a rubric? Ensure anonymity from the submitters? These are important steps to ensure a fair review process.

Yet many grant committees fail to use an objective review process. Inherent biases can creep into a subjective review process.

To ensure full objectivity, use a digital portal in which grant submissions are checked against a standard rubric. A large, diverse review committee can also prevent subjective responses by providing a variety of perspectives during the review process.

Mistake 3: Not Adhering to Compliance Best Practices

If your organization is new to the grant-making process, there’s a lot to learn. If your organization is required to adhere to specific reporting protocols, be sure to ask the right questions upfront to obtain relevant data for reporting purposes. Additionally, if you can only provide grants to valid, registered 501(c)(3) organization, be sure to state this upfront as well.

Mistake 4: Overlooking Eligibility Requirements

Place eligibility questions at the start of the grant submission process so that ineligible applicants know immediately their status and do not waste time completing the submission. Many nonprofits make the mistake of leaving the submission requirements to the end, which is frustrating for applicants.

Mistake 5: Failing to Ensure Equitable Processes

Diversity and equity are becoming an increasingly important part of the grant-making process. To ensure fair and equitable treatment for all applicants, an anonymous, automated submission process is best.

There’s another side to diversity and equity—the reviewers. Make sure you have a large and diverse pool of people ready to review the applications. Ensure that everyone has been briefed on the rubric. They will have both the objective requirements (the rubric) and their own personal viewpoint on the submissions so that if two or more submissions are close by the rubric score, the discussion that ensues will consider multiple viewpoints.

Automating the Grant Process

We’re believers in the power of software to make many processes at a nonprofit easier, faster, and efficient. That includes the grant process. Schedule time with us to review Grant Process Software and we can help you avoid these five potential mistakes.

Welter Consulting

Welter Consulting bridges people and technology together for effective solutions for nonprofit organizations. We offer software and services that can help you with your accounting needs. Please contact Welter Consulting at 206-605-3113 for more information.