Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Just not sure...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Just not sure...

    Let's see if I've got this straight. Sometimes it takes me a little longer to understand than others.

    After reading several of these posts, there are a lot of the same questions and statements being repeated. (keeping bc79er busy) Please allow me to bring a few of these together.

    If I recieved a grant this year, I shouldn't be able to apply again next year?Does that mean that all of our needs should have been fulfilled in one year so let someone else have a chance? If I got a grant this year, what could I possibly think of for next year? How come you think I am going to be any less deserving of a grant next year because I got one this year?

    The peer review process is politically motivated.I'm sure the reviewers would like to hear that. I am also quite certain that we recieved grant awards two years in a row because all of the 4,165 people in my area of the poorest county in the state carry that much weight during an election year.

    The peer review is based on B.S., not on actual need?I barely B.S.'d my way through high school - I wasn't that good at it then either.

    I wrote two successful grants in a row (2002/2003). I barely have a high school education and as I have said earlier - B.S. is not one of my specialties. If our department could afford the ten per cent for all of the items we requested funding for in one year, I would be more than happy to write a bigger application. Due to the difficulty in coming up with the ten %, I am limited by local government to $50,000 per year. This includes other grants applied for, such as state DNR grants for wildland firefighting. Total matching funds per year is $5,000 TOTAL.

    In my opinion, the peer review process works well. This year we applied for replacement SCBA's. Ten complete units. That was the cake. The extra frosting was in the form of the voice modulators in the facepiece. They are nice, not necessary. The total cost for the frosting was just under $5,000. The peer review wiped off the frosting but kept the cake. Someone else was just able to move that much higher up the scale to recieving an award.

    Here's a summary of the last two years: LDH, foam proportioning pump, RIT Training, SCBA's, and a cascade system.

    Next years items: Turnout gear. Why? We have 30 of the most mismatched outfits in the area. (Not that we are in a fashion show or anything) These 30 sets were acquired from three other departments that were replacing theirs. To us, they were good as gold. Did the other departments replace perfectly good gear? No - rips, tears, liners, buckles, snaps, and zippers all had to be fixed or replaced. Not to mention the service life of the gear itself and what conditions it was exposed to. This stuff has been in our station for over 12 years and we don't know when it was actually new. Does this demonstrate a need?

    Should I consider myself lucky for two awards and not persue another? How come we got two in a row and others got nothing for 3 years in a row?

    Yes I feel fortunate for getting funding. Yes I will try and get more. Do I feel greedy? No. Are there others that need more than me? Yes. Do they have as much of an equal opportunity as I do? Yes.

    If you don't apply at all, your chances are 0. If you apply, you are only going up against rocket scientits like me.

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X