In this assignment, each student will analyze his or her individual contributions to all discussion forums and learning activities from the previous weeks. Go back and review y

Discussion 1 Grant funding serves as a pivotal lifeline for both organizations and individuals, offering indispensable support in addressing pressing social, economic, and environmental challenges. Foundations, government agencies, and corporations emerge as influential contributors to the pool of grant funds, each driven by distinct motivations that underpin their grant awarding decisions.

1. Foundation Grants:

Foundations, as non-profit entities, are dedicated to advancing charitable causes aligned with their mission. They channel grants towards specific objectives, such as education-focused initiatives or ecological conservation endeavors, with the overarching goal of effecting positive, lasting change within communities over time.

2. Government Grants:

Governments, operating from the local to federal levels, allocate substantial grant funds to encourage research studies, develop infrastructure projects, and enhance community well-being (Bhalla & Mphale, 2021). These grants play a pivotal role in shaping societal priorities through public policy legislation, addressing economic and social concerns to efficiently achieve broader societal targets.

3. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) & Philanthropy-Driven Funding Initiatives:

Corporations actively participate in philanthropic initiatives, often driven by Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Corporate grants are provisioned during regular business operations, contributing to non-profit organizations aligned with community interests. This not only meets public expectations but also shapes positive perceptions, capitalizing on brand attributes and customer familiarity. Corporate donors extend financial support to diverse fields, from medical healthcare and educational initiatives to renewable energy, fostering humanitarian relief globally (Collings, 2012).

Understanding the motivations behind grant provision is imperative for grant writers. Remaining informed about ongoing focus areas and shifting philanthropic priorities allows them to produce well-targeted proposals that align with institutional objectives. Grant writers strategically organize operational channels, extending the organization's outreach efforts, and adapt proposals to reflect emerging trends and donor expectations (Collings, 2012).

Comprehending these motivations is influential in crafting strong, consistent proposals that creatively adapt to contextual nuances. This approach fosters faster progress towards achieving sustainable development goals globally, creating socially acceptable outcomes that resonate across diverse communities and contribute to broader societal

interests. Ultimately, this understanding represents a necessary component in navigating the dynamic landscape of grant writing, pushing beyond traditional thinking models and embracing innovative approaches for societal impact at unprecedented levels Bhalla & Mphale, 2021).

References

Bhalla, G., & Mphale, M. (2021). Institutional assessment of the Child Grants Programme and Sustainable Poverty Reduction through Income, Nutrition, and Access to Government Services pilot project in Lesotho. Food & Agriculture Org.. https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=INozEAAAQBAJ&lpg=PR6&ots=vgKQbtRvD b&dq=government%20grants&lr&pg=PR6#v=onepage&q=government%20grants&f=fals eLinks to an external site. Collings, S., (2012) FRS 102: How to account for grantsLinks to an external site., Accounting Web.

Discussion 2

There are various types of initiatives that are supported by government and private foundation grants like scientific research and social welfare. Presented here are three distinct classifications for both private grants and government grants, accompanied by a succinct elucidation of their respective objectives:

Government Grants

Research and Development Grants

These grants encourage development in science and technology. They finance studies that focus on innovation, technology, and improvement of society. In some cases, governments may provide funding for universities, research institutions and organizations that engage in up-to-date R&D activities (Coupet & Schehl, 2022).

Community Development Grants

These grants are geared towards improving economic conditions and social needs within particular regions and among specific groups of people through provision of projects addressing issues like poverty, housing, infrastructure, and education (Coupet & Schehl, 2022). These grants are applied by governments to upgrade the underprivileged parts of society and raise its standards in general.

Education Grants

The governments fund initiatives of education across different stages including kindergartens to universities (Coupet & Schehl, 2022). Such grants could focus on issues such as curriculum creation, teacher education, or improved infrastructure. Its objective is to provide quality education that should be accessible for everyone.

Private Foundation Grants

Health and Medical Research Grants

Many private foundations also give grants for medical research such as in connection with diseases, health innovations, and public health initiatives (Price, 2019). Such grants are involved in improving knowledge in medical science, drug development, and healthcare provision.

Environmental Conservation Grants

Organizations involved in conservation, sustainability, and climate change mitigation projects receive grants from foundations dealing with environmental issues (Price, 2019). Such fund facilitates projects ranging from conservation of wild animals to environmentally friendly energy ideas.

Social Justice and Human Rights Grants

Some private foundations that are dedicated to social justice and human rights offer their support to groups working on problems of inequality, discrimination, and violation of human rights (Price, 2019). These grants finance projects meant to foster a more just and fair society.

References

Coupet, J., & Schehl, M. (2022). Government grants, donors, and nonprofit performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 32(1), 97-110.

Price, W. N. (2019). Grants. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 34(1), 1-66.

Week 3 Discussion

Two of the organizations in United States that receive grants are the American Red Cross and Environmental Defense Fund, which are exceptional because of their unique goals and objectives. The American Red Cross is well known for its humanitarian work whereas the Environmental Defense Fund fights for the environment. The program logic models, and grant applications will show how these organizations plan to achieve their goals.

The American Red Cross is a group that assists in times of disaster. Its mission is to prevent and alleviate human suffering during disasters. One of its main purposes is to improve community resilience by ensuring preparedness and effective response capacity among communities before the occurrence of any catastrophe (American Red Cross, 2023). An associated outcome objective for this goal might be increased disaster preparation among families. Due to community training, the organization's program logic model may show this purpose. This may be considered a process objective to expand and enhance disaster preparation training. They may include the number of training sessions, the creation of new training modules and the assessment of program efficacy. The organization's overarching mission is to establish comprehensive, accessible training

programs to make strong communities resilient in responding to emergencies (American Red Cross, 2023).

However, the Environmental Defense Fund prioritizes sustainability and activism. This unit supports Earth's healthy natural systems. EDF goals may include reducing carbon emissions to combat climate change (Environmental Defense Fund, 2019). Reduced carbon dioxide or methane emissions may be an outcome objective for this goal. In certain circumstances, program logic models or grant proposal process objectives include influencing government policy. Strategic programs within EDF affect systemic change policies targeting environmental root causes via research, analysis, policymaker engagement, and public advocacy.

Comparing the American Red Cross and Environmental Defense Fund shows differing grantee goals and procedures. The Environmental Defense Fund promotes environmental sustainability, whereas the American Red Cross provides emergency humanitarian aid and catastrophe response. Both organizations work to strengthen natural disaster-prone populations and climate-changed ecosystems. Each organization applies its process objectives to its strategy. The American Red Cross aids crisis response via community participation and education. Environmental Defense Fund process objectives include policy advocacy and institutional transformation to influence environmental frameworks.

In conclusion, grant-funded organizations improve society in various ways. American Red Cross and Environmental Defense Fund missions vary. For mission fulfillment, a company must reach its goal, result, and process objectives. This suggests that the American Red Cross is an emergency organization, whereas the Environmental Defense Fund promotes long-term environmental sustainability and lobbies congress. ARC offers immediate catastrophe relief. These firms' different techniques show the complexity of grant-funded human and environmental well-being projects.

References

American Red Cross. (2023). American Red Cross. Redcross.org. https://www.redcross.org/

Environmental Defense Fund. (2019). Home. Environmental Defense Fund. https://www.edf.org/

Week 4 Discussion

Devine (2009) presents an interesting perspective on how to write a grant application. The article gives it from the perspective of an investigator, the person seeking the grant to initiate their research. Various approaches can help make a grant application a success. The first is the alignment of the grant application with the interests

and expertise of the grant giver. This makes it easy for them to accept the grant as they understand what you are asking of them, and it is in line with what they want.

The article also asserts the vitality of the basics. This involves proper preparation and the utility of existing tools to get the best results. Devine (2009) also asserts the importance of being attentive to detail. Being meticulous, particularly as it relates to your goals and the justification for your budget needs to be something that a lot of emphasis is placed on. The grant must assure the donors that their money will be well spent. The author also recommends proper planning to prevent manuscript preparation from crashing with grant presentations. This can help avoid mishaps when the sponsors are not properly acknowledged in the manuscript, which can be a source of conflict.

The key points identified in the article to successfully persuade potential sponsors with a well-formulated grant proposal are meticulousness and aligning the proposal with the vision of the sponsors. Meticulousness applies to the writing and the quality of the paper. Aligning the grant with the vision of the donors increases the chances of support for the project.

Reference:

Devine E. B. (2009). The art of obtaining grants. American journal of health-system pharmacy: AJHP: official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, 66(6), 580–587. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp070320

Week 5 Discussion

Grant management hinges on whether internal or external evaluators are best for evaluations. Funders and grant-seeking groups depend on the evaluation process. Internal versus external evaluations are debated in this discourse to determine their pros and cons. As organizations make this decision, credibility, competence, and viewpoint matter. A detailed understanding of this key grant-seeking factor will be gained by exploring the factors and differences that influence internal or external evaluation preferences.

Internal Evaluation

Advantage

Organization Knowledge: Internal evaluators understand the organization's mission, goals, and operations (Blaser-Mapitsa & Chirau, 2019). Experience makes evaluations more nuanced and contextual.

Disadvantage

Lack of Objectivity: Internal evaluators may be biased since they care about program success. Bias affects evaluation objectivity.

External Evaluation

Advantage

Objectivity and Independence: Independent external evaluators are impartial. Their assessments can be more unbiased because they are not involved in the organization's everyday activities (Ólafsdóttir et al., 2022).

Disadvantage

Limited Organizational Understanding: External evaluators may not understand the organization's structure, culture, and difficulties, resulting in a less contextualized analysis.

In grant proposal evaluation, external evaluation is better than internal. External evaluators ensure objective and independent evaluation of grant-funded programs. An unbiased external review is one significant advantage. Internal dynamics, organizational culture, and personal interests do not restrict external appraisers. Evaluation legitimacy is achieved by this independence, as well as transparency and fairness to funders (Blaser- Mapitsa & Chirau, 2019). With their varied experiences, external evaluators can benchmark the grant-seeking organization’s performance against industry standards and best practices. Additionally, external evaluators can defeat their unfamiliarity of the company by involving internal stakeholders. The objectivity and knowledge about the contexts of the grant-seeking organization make its external review reliable, independent, and credible. Thus, external evaluators are the most suitable candidates for a comprehensive and impartial evaluation in the application for a grant.

References

Blaser-Mapitsa, C., & Chirau, T. J. (2019). Institutionalizing the evaluation function: A South African study of impartiality, use and cost. Evaluation and Program Planning, 75, 38–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.04.005

Ólafsdóttir, B., Jónasson, J. T., & Sigurðardóttir, A. K. (2022). Use and impact of external evaluation feedback in schools. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 74, 101181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101181