As in many things in life, grant writers can easily fall into the pitfall of believing that the endeavor is all about themselves. Grants do not exist in a vacuum, however, and once submitted they are read by reviewers who are also individuals with certain backgrounds and biases. Thus, the grants process is relational and community-oriented rather than a solitary task. As discussed previously, the grant writer must consider the reviewer when writing grants and tailor the application to a general audience–that is, one that is unfamiliar with the organization and its work–while still ensuring fulfillment of the stipulations of the granting organization.

While the review process can vary somewhat from organization to organization, there are some general stages that tend to apply in most cases. The first is a preliminary completion screening. In this first step, staff at the granting organization reviews applications for completion and fulfillment of basic requirements. Once applications have made it past this screening, they can move into the more thorough programmatic review and assessment stage. In this stage, the applications are reviewed for their quality, rather than just for their completion. Instead of the granting organization’s staff carrying out this review, this process is often carried out by panels of either independent experts or peer adjudicators. The role of the staff in this process is to monitor these reviewers and ensure that uniform standards are being applied to all applicants.

In some cases, there may be a separate financial review to ensure that the budgetary components of the application are complete, high-quality, and aligned with the rest of the application. If this does not occur separately, it will occur in one of the previous two steps. After these reviews, a decision will be made based on the available funds and the rating system used by reviewers. Some granting organizations allow organizations to appeal these decisions after notifications are made, but in many cases the reviewers’ decisions are final.

While the grant writer may feel solitary and even self-interested in seeking funds for their organization, it is important to keep in mind that the grant making organization seeks to give funds to groups which uphold some aspect of their mission. The reviewers and the staff are people as well, and the staff in particular are often accessible to the grant writer to some extent. Grant writers should consider reaching out to the staff of the organizations they are applying to for grants. These individuals can serve as invaluable resources in strengthening their applications, as the staff knows precisely what the agency is looking for and what their priorities are. This is an insight I have gained from my time at the Commission and it is something that was quite surprising to me at first–not only that this was an aspect of the program directors’ jobs, but that the relational aspect seems to be one they embrace.