Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Second Round of 1199s and 10?s

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

  • Greenacres2
    replied
    Originally posted by timmct
    I guess this is as good a place to ask this question as anywhere...

    Brian mentioned that the timing of the DJ would be a good indication of how your app fared in the evaluation process. Is there any other feedback provided (computer score, peer review scoring or comments) that's available to unsuccessful applicants to use to improve their app for next year.
    The timing give an indication of where an app gets kicked out of the process. Real early--bottom 20-25% on computer scoring--got to review project priority & need. Middle of the process--closer but still not in peer. Letter stating it went to peer--getting better (and later). At the end a few go out that mention that an app may be competitive if additional funds come available. Timing and wording assist in guiding where help is needed. Just a tool, kind of like a stethoscope!!
    earl

    Leave a comment:


  • Greenacres2
    replied
    One of my light bulbs flicked on when i realized that "narrative writing" is just a little piece of "GRANT writing". Narrative is worthless without understanding the rest of the process. One example--I've only worked with a handful of departments, but 4 out of 5 were reporting way more than "operating budget" on the AFG application. No fudging of the books, just a clear understanding of the question helped to turn things around.

    Raven, i was in the next to the last row on the right side of the room. That was time well spent. I sat down for breakfast at the CEDAP training in August and was right next to the LEO from norhtern FL that sat behind me at Kurt's seminar.

    imafireman--Here's my ametuerish view of the process--the computer scoring formula seems to be a pretty closely guarded secret (even Vickers says he can't figure it out!!), but the project priority (see Program Guidance), project mix (laundry list), call volume, budget, injuries/fatalities all seem to be key. Computer scores are ranked and applicants in "the competitive range" are moved to peer review. Competitive range is equal to 200% of the available funds for each project area (i.e. vehicles, EMS, etc). I don't know if they all start over at 0 for peer review or not. To get beyond the computer, i'd figure we got to be in the top half of equipment apps (top 20% for apparatus apps) in the computer scoring. That's why making sure the project is the highest priority possible and fills a need that call volume supports is so important. For apparatus apps, age of fleet and newest vehicle in the class applied for are potential easy killers.

    I got to get to work or i won't be able to do this any more!!

    earl

    Leave a comment:


  • timmct
    replied
    Feedback?

    I guess this is as good a place to ask this question as anywhere...

    Brian mentioned that the timing of the DJ would be a good indication of how your app fared in the evaluation process. Is there any other feedback provided (computer score, peer review scoring or comments) that's available to unsuccessful applicants to use to improve their app for next year.

    I know...it's still early in the process, but our dept is an 0-fer like many others I'm reading posts from. This is also my first year involved in this whole 'grant-thang' so I'm thinking our chances are fairly slim, but you never know, right? [Words of encouragement always appreciated]

    Leave a comment:


  • BC79er
    replied
    Got a floating one going to Mexico....

    I post the open ones on my web site as I confirm dates & locations from the hosting departments. Nothing but private ones scheduled right now, but could change with when the Denial Wagon arrives. Panic mode for the next year hits then.

    Leave a comment:


  • ravenclaw
    replied
    I agree with Brian, we had a grant company come in and tell us they could get us this or that grant no problem. We did not hire them, but a couple of departments near us did, and both failed to get grants, but still had to pay out their fees. We had an assesment done by our local development district, to determine a priority of needs, and it has helped us with all of the grants we have written. Look at some of the past post, and they will clue you in on what to look for. Brian, Kurt, and Alana have great insight and patience to put up with all of the phone calls and emails that are thrown out at them. You can also count on Greenacres and neowia, and bugles to give grfeat advice as well. Hey Brian, what is your seminar schedule, I need to further my education, since I can't talk Kurt into having a class in Hawaii.

    Leave a comment:


  • BC79er
    replied
    Bones (and others) - part of the skills needed to succeed includes being able to determine what projects each department could go for which will give them the best chance at getting past the computer score. On a few select apps, I modified the project, and left the majority of the application alone. 1st rounders, every one. Could it be because other applications weren't as competitive? Maybe. But did the same each year so far with some 0-fers and met with success.

    It's a process. One application a process does not make. It does take a long time to gather proper data to support any project. Which is why if you have someone swoop in and just simply say "I can get you ________" without asking questions, don't waste your money. No one that knows what they're doing can tell you what they can get you without doing a proper assessment of the department's situation. ALL aspects, not just spending time with the narrative. Lots of people wonder why I ask when the denial letter came. That determines whether or not you made it to Peer, and how well you fared there. Hence the importance I place on project design. After all, poorly designed ones never get their narrative read. I did spend a whole article and PodCast on this point. Narrative is #3 on the list, and if you do #1 and #2, then #3 writes itself. Ask the folks that came to my workshops about the $4.5 mil they're about to receive in Round 1. Many never funded before, and none of that amount I had my hands on. That was all from what they were taught. Same as Earl and others that have been to Kurt's seminars. Once you get the process down, it's repeatable for any project. That's how you end up with repeat winners, and also repeat DJs when the process isn't followed.

    Some departments won't ever win, like mine. Too much 'spare' money in the budget to explain why we can't afford something. I consider that a good problem. And also why we don't apply. There is nothing we really need that we can't afford, so I don't believe we should apply and take the chance of taking money someone else needs worse than us. But we are one of a handful of departments in that situation.

    Anywho, it ain't over until Uncle Sam shoots out the DJs, and even then it ain't over. That's what 2007 is for. Start working on it now. Time will get really short really quickly, especially if you are going to look for help from the outside.

    Leave a comment:


  • ravenclaw
    replied
    Oh yeah Kurt, I have already chewed down to the second knuckles still hoping and praying for a SAFER or AFG.

    Leave a comment:


  • ravenclaw
    replied
    I have to encourage at least going to one of the grant seminars, I attended Kurt's back in January, I am still trying to figure out which one was Earl, and he stresses looking at the small points and it really helped me find what I was missing in my grants. The seminar paid off with a new fire safety trailer, and has already gotten two of the departments I wrote for this year their questions on the AFG.

    Leave a comment:


  • imafireman
    replied
    I am going to be asking a similar question as Bones, but with a little different wording. What happens in the computer scoring process? What determines if we are lucky enough to go on to peer review? After discussing this with Kurt, I realize the mistakes I made in this years narrative, but the computer does not read the narrative. How can I improve the application to get to peer review?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bones42
    replied
    Personally, i see a lot of people talking about the "skills" of the grant writer and that may be all fine and dandy, but if you never get past the computer scoring, all the writing skills in the world won't help. And since I am 4 for 4 without getting past the computer, what would anyone suggest? (other than flat out lying with the numbers? (and that will not happen))

    Leave a comment:


  • Greenacres2
    replied
    Man, if you think your posts sound goofy, read the one i posted a while ago!! I don't think that most of the "regulars" on the grants forum take much personally. It's a tough topic, but it lends itself well to discussion. You're pretty level headed and you are staying with the cirriculum--it will come. The funding that is.

    The written "rules" are hard enough to figure out--the unwritten ones are the ones that make or break most of us. I think that was Kurt's point about following the rules. That's where getting outside eyes help. I basically submitted the same app this year as was done in 2004 by our department. But...the budget was corrected which helped with the computer scoring. The narrative painted a picture instead of restating the basic data. We look good this time. I typed it, but about 150 other people wrote it. That's what the forum is.

    earl (going home now, to wait one more week)

    Leave a comment:


  • NewAtThisGame
    replied
    I know, I know.. But thanks for the encouragement. It's just the pressure...and too much Bourbon. Whats the Polaris Grant? First I ever heard of that

    Leave a comment:


  • ktb9780
    replied
    Originally posted by NewAtThisGame
    First off I apologize to anyone who feels I'm being grumpy specifically towards them. I promise you I am not. After going back and reading most of my posts, I can see how rediculous some of what I type sounds. I'ts just EXTREMELY depressing to know what equipment our members need, what O.S.H.A. says we need and reading what NFPA says we should have, taking that to Dept Officers only to hear "That aint gonna happen" or "We can't afford that" . Then I find out about this grant program, study hard, go to three separate Grant Workshops, follow the guidance word for word and watch my neihboring companies get awarded year after year after year. Thanks for letting me vent. I'm sure there will be more until I get the Dreaded "Dear John" letter yet again this year.

    And what might I ask seems to lead you to believe that you are getting a DJ? Do you have a crystal ball? I think you are just suffering from impatience. Dude, there are more than 15 rounds to this grant. So what if you don't have an 1199a update yet! There is still a very long way to go in this program Get a grip on a tall cool one and relax or you are going to have a bleeding ulcer before the first round even drops. You are talking like the party is over and the fat lady hasn't even taken the stage; yet alone sing !! Chill out, live longer. Start focusing on your Fire Prevention Grant or SAFER or the Polaris Grant which opens again next week.

    Leave a comment:


  • batt403
    replied
    Who knows??

    How could anyone possibly tell when the second round would begin with DHS? We received our questions on the morning of the 25th and can not tell from the post if this would be for the 1st or 2nd round, any thoughts??
    Hopefully this will be our third grant and I had no idea that you could check your 1199A for a 06 award number untill I started reading some of the post and sure enough it's there.
    Leave it to a firefighter to find every angle.

    Leave a comment:


  • NewAtThisGame
    replied
    Used as a place to vent

    First off I apologize to anyone who feels I'm being grumpy specifically towards them. I promise you I am not. After going back and reading most of my posts, I can see how rediculous some of what I type sounds. I'ts just EXTREMELY depressing to know what equipment our members need, what O.S.H.A. says we need and reading what NFPA says we should have, taking that to Dept Officers only to hear "That aint gonna happen" or "We can't afford that" . Then I find out about this grant program, study hard, go to three separate Grant Workshops, follow the guidance word for word and watch my neihboring companies get awarded year after year after year. Thanks for letting me vent. I'm sure there will be more until I get the Dreaded "Dear John" letter yet again this year.

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X