A bit discouraged...

[wfd4fireman]

I have observed numerous communities in my state that are well-off receive grants whereas others such as my own has been denied annually and this small city has lost industry a-plenty and tax revenue and thus the apparatus program is on hold. Anybody have a good word of encouragement?

[Flochief]

Hang in there! There still is lots more money to give away! I too have felt this way. Continue to read these forums and learn from this. If you are not sucessful this year, let others (Firefighters) read your grant. A Pro grantwriter does not necessarliy spell success. Start planning for next year!!!

Always, Always have a plan!

[BC79er_OLDDELETE]

Large budgets don't mean that departments have lots of money laying around to do whatever they want. That is one of the killer misconceptions that I teach about in workshops. If you think because you have a small budget, or large population, or old trucks, or any single item that you think should make you a shoe-in for an AFG grant, you're halfway to a denial. Every app needs to be firefighter-proofed, regardless of how easy a sell it may seem to be. I had a bunch this year I think Forrest Gump could have been successful with, but I wasn't about to slack off on them. They got written as well as the others because you never know how things will play out. Bring the A game, don't think you're either in or out before you hear for sure, and definitely learn as much as you can as Glenn mentioned. These forums are a good start, as well as the Grants & Funding section here at FH.com. I've got a few articles and Podcasts floating around here that can give you a half decent base of information. Then come on back and fire away with questions. Discussions on these forums have helped raise a whole lot of money over the past 6 years.

- Brian

[ktb9780]

Glenn and Brian both make excellent points here. Don't bemoan the success that another department has; they properly expressed their need despite what might appear to you to be an abundance of resources. The "details" get you funded in most cases as they represent the "need" and unfortunatley, most failed applications lack sufficient detail that justifies their need. Keep at it, learn from the people in here, and continue to educate yourself about this process. Persistence pays off and practice makes perfect.

[chief206]

been there

I know exactly how you feel, we have a fire engine that is dying and for the last few years tried to get a grant to replace ours. Unfortunately we watch as everyone around us gets money but not us.

[WebFire]

I know exactly how you feel, we have a fire engine that is dying and for the last few years tried to get a grant to replace ours. Unfortunately we watch as everyone around us gets money but not us.

There is usually good reason for this. Make sure you read and follow the Program Guidance. And have you went to those other departments for assistance? If they are willing to help, it can pay off.

[Chief310]

My department's in the same boat. We haven't got our Dear John yet, but I'm sure it's coming soon.

Kurt & Brian, thanks for the encouragement, but if we never get past the computer, how will details help? Unless I'm misinformed, the computer only looks at the numbers, not the narrative, which is where most of the details go. The numbers are what they are, unless we fudge them, and I know you DON'T recommend that.

[deputychief1441]

I understand your pain, we have several local departments that have received the grant 2,3 & 4 years in a row and had new apparatus, equipment before the grants began. Like the others stated though keep your head up and keep trying. we have received denial letters every year beforethe 1st round except this year. We are keeping our fingers crossed. GOOD LUCK to all of you. Also, I agree a prof. grant writer is not always the answer.

[BC79er_OLDDELETE]

310, about the only thing you can do to make a truck app more competitive is to make sure you're asking for the right truck. Since they don't'recognize hybrids sometimes you need to change from pumper to tanker and vice-versa to give yourself a better chance. Applying for the wrong one will get you computer booted.

And trucks are a different animal anyway since it's a 1 in 10 shot to begin with. Now that more and more people are putting in competitive applications the competition is getting tougher.

You are correct, computer only reviews numbers. And in Peer the opposite is true, they only read narratives.

[SLY4420]

My department's in the same boat. We haven't got our Dear John yet, but I'm sure it's coming soon.

Kurt & Brian, thanks for the encouragement, but if we never get past the computer, how will details help? Unless I'm misinformed, the computer only looks at the numbers, not the narrative, which is where most of the details go. The numbers are what they are, unless we fudge them, and I know you DON'T recommend that.

I'm not nearly the pro that Brian and Kurt are, but numbers are something simple that you might not be "lying" about, that could screw you up.

Applying for 60 sets of gear when you have 30 members is a bad thing. Applying for 25 airpacks when you have 6 riding positions is a bad thing.

The big thing is looking at your numbers and I would suggest getting in contact with someone like Brian or Kurt who may be able to help figure out what you may be doing wrong.

We applied for 4 years for Vehicle funding. I was getting more and more discouraged and frustrated each year - denial, denial, denial. I finally got it the 4th year. I never changed my numbers, just my narrative each time. Now I think I've gotten the hang of it a bit more and "Keeping is Simple" is a big key that I've found. Looks like we're going to be going 2/6 this year with an Operations grant.

[Catch22]

We tried three times for a pumper and got turned down while guys all around us were getting awarded. Last year we asked for a pumper/tanker. Low and behold, third round we get an award. I don't know if it's what I learned here and other places (I think that's a lot of it) or if we changed categories (we only had one pumper, a '74 so I don't think it was so much that), but we did something right. Keep trying!

[ktb9780]

We tried three times for a pumper and got turned down while guys all around us were getting awarded. Last year we asked for a pumper/tanker. Low and behold, third round we get an award. I don't know if it's what I learned here and other places (I think that's a lot of it) or if we changed categories (we only had one pumper, a '74 so I don't think it was so much that), but we did something right. Keep trying!

Just looking at your statement above it would appear that in 2002-2004 your truck couldn't pass the " older" and higher mileage" language that was in the PG for where priority would be given, as it was not yet 20+ years of age. In 2005 you surpassed that mark; others with older trucks had been served and were no longer competition and your name obvioulsy rose to the top in terms of need. Just an opinon. Congrats!

[BC79er_OLDDELETE]

Kurt, you starting the morning with Irish Coffees again?

A 1974 was 20 in 1994. Easy math for me, I was born that year. All I had to do is check my license to figure out their truck age, no calculator involved.

[ktb9780]

Kurt, you starting the morning with Irish Coffees again?

A 1974 was 20 in 1994. Easy math for me, I was born that year. All I had to do is check my license to figure out their truck age, no calculator involved.

And they eyes and mind are not what they used to be.....I told that Dr not to put me on decaf... where's my Starbucks? Thanks for correcting that math there Brian.

[Chief310]

[QUOTE=BC79er] 310, about the only thing you can do to make a truck app more competitive is to make sure you're asking for the right truck. Since they don't'recognize hybrids sometimes you need to change from pumper to tanker and vice-versa to give yourself a better chance. Applying for the wrong one will get you computer booted.
QUOTE]

So what's the "right" truck to ask for? We currently operate a 15-year-old pumper, a 33-year-old pumper, and a 13-year-old tanker. Since the tanker is the newest vehicle in our fleet (not counting EMS), I don't see how asking for another one would help our application.

On the application this year, they asked about the age of our fleet with a series of "pull-downs", three of them if my memory is correct. In each case, our answers were the best (oldest) that were possible, with the exception of the question about the average age of our entire fleet, which was the second best selection available (having EMS vehicles included artificially lowers the average fleet age, but that's the subject for another rant).

We requested $315 K for a CAFS pumper

We cover 75 square miles, 5,000 population, and we average 566 runs per year (12 structure fires, 3 vehicle fires, 2 grass fires, 32 rescue calls, 22 hazardous condition, 12 service calls, 75 false alarms, 404 EMS calls & 7 "other")

So, if anyone can tell us the "Right" truck to ask for, we'll give it a try.