Grant professionals are often the major breadwinners for nonprofit and public sector organizations. So it stands to reason that if they fail in any significant way, it can cause a devastating impact. This article is going to look at 5 areas of concern, and address them in a calm and sensible way that will hopefully result in a giant collective sigh of relief from anyone who has anything to do with the grant process.
Scary Thing One: Screwing Up Funding
Nonprofit organizations and the public sector are struggling not only with the administration of the grant process but that many institutions are not earning the full value of every dollar allocated to their programs. For example, in a study released in August 2008, U.S. Government Accountability Office reported that in 2006 about $1 billion in undisbursed funding remained in expired grant accounts in the largest civilian payment system for grants--the Payment Management System administered by the Department of Health and Human Services for 12 federal entities. By creating a process and implementing a system, seemingly little things like missing a grant extension deadline or not allocating the right expense item can be avoided. Getting a handle on the little things can help to ensure institutions don’t leave money on the table.
Scary Thing Two: Being Audited
Recent changes in government grant allocation rules have had major implications, in some cases shifting the onus of the auditing process on the receiving organization itself instead of on outside regulators. Grants with complex elements (ex. sub-recipients to manage, very involved grantor reporting requirements, etc.) can be vexing to even the most experienced grant professional. Since being audited ranks only slightly higher than root canal surgery in the realm of desired ways to spend time, one reasonable approach is to simply expect them and to be as proactive as possible.
Grant management software can relieve this burden by creating an organized and transparent system for the grant data relevant to the audit.
Scary Thing Three: Change, and the Possible Disruptions Caused by Adapting to It
In the dark ages before the advent of grant management software, resourceful grant professionals were forced to devise clever processes and cobble together workarounds based on the tools they had on hand.
Chances are there are several disparate systems and processes in place across your organization. There’s also probably a formidable pile of spreadsheets and binders large enough to be seen from space. The problem here is twofold. First, there’s a lack of awareness about available technology solutions that can streamline each stage of the grant process. And second, in many cases, people have invested a lot of time creating a process that works specifically for them. Naturally there’s a reluctance to try something different, especially if there’s a learning curve and a time investment involved.
Grant management software will save organizations time and frustration in the long run. The best software providers have an excellent knowledge of the challenges grant professionals face, and the workarounds they’ve created to make due. But as complexity grows, and more competition for fewer dollars develops, organizations that streamline their processes with effective software will have a distinct advantage. The time spent to create or crystallize a grant process that becomes the internal standard for the organization should be seen as an investment that will save time and effort going forward.
Scary Thing Four: Being Responsible for the Decision to Invest in Grant Management Software
OK, just go on in there and tell everyone on your team that you’re going to change the way they do their jobs. Then explain to your boss that you’ll need money to invest in this “solution” that he’s never heard of before. Sound like a plan?
It all comes down to a choice. Do you keep doing things the current way, or do you jump on the opportunity to improve? Technology isn’t going away, and early adopters will reap the benefits while others clamber to catch up. If you’re a decision maker for your organization, then you owe it to you and your colleagues to do some serious thinking about grant management software.
Do your homework.
- Look for products that are endorsed by professional organizations you trust.
- Sit in on product demos.
- Ask for specifics on how the software can address your organization’s pain points.
- Get references from their customers.
- Ask the software provider about their competitors.
- Find out about their support policy.
- Learn how often they update their products and determine how committed they are to incorporating your feature requests and suggestions in future releases.
Scary Thing Five: Not Being Needed
Smart, passionate people are always needed. Increased efficiency doesn’t always translate into lost jobs. It can mean that people are now able to do a higher volume of work. Instead of organizing mountains of spreadsheets, they can focus on finding new funding sources, manage more projects and spend more time building relationships with grantors and partners.
Bonus Scary Thing: Spiders
Even though they have nothing to do with grant management, they are awfully creepy, right?
To learn more about Grant Management Software, take a tour of AmpliFund Full Cycle today.
StreamLink Software and BoardSource are teaming up to present a multi-part blog series entitled a 360 Degree View from the Board.
Introduction
“Some aspects of board service are constant. Each player in the boardroom, whether it’s the board chair, board member, or chief executive, has a role to fulfill and a set of expectations to meet. Other aspects change with the times. Committee structures change, processes are refined, and strategic plans help both board and staff members refocus organizational direction and work toward greater impact. In recent years, the rise of smartphones and other technology have created a culture accustomed to having any and all data within reach at all times. Have these technological developments changed the way that nonprofit boards interact during and between meetings? Are boards doing all they can to use technological tools to maximize efficiency and focus on exceptional governance?”
Danielle M. Henry
Communications Coordinator, BoardSource
Part Five: A View from an Executive Vice President
The following questions were presented to Michael Weamer, Executive Vice President of the American Heart Association.
What role-specific activities do you have to do in order to prepare for a board meeting, and what is the level of time and effort required?
I look at board preparation like producing a Broadway play. Once the meeting kicks off, ideally I say very little and can just watch all the preparation help drive a very successful meeting. I spend most of my time making sure that we have a highly interactive meeting that focuses on “Mission at Heart” and the “Business of the Business.” I also make certain that we have social opportunities planned and the experience around the meeting is as positive as the meeting itself. Key to success is also working with your Chairman to make certain you are on the same page, there are no surprises and you plan for potential difficulties that may occur.
What’s the biggest challenge in your role as it relates to the board?
My biggest challenge is making certain that I have the absolute best volunteer talent that money can’t buy! I am constantly looking for future directors and officers as having a strong succession plan is critical. I am still a fan of a larger board as long as the members are productive so I also probably have more politics in play than smaller boards.
In what area do you see the most need for process improvement?
I guess what I struggle with most is having board members well informed about all aspects of mission. American Heart Association is a very complicated, large organization and we often do not have the time to fully educate our Directors and this becomes evident when we consider mission related opportunities.
How has technology changed the way you conduct board business?
Absolutely, we use board management software and have virtually gone paperless over the past several years. We also have far less need for storage. And we no longer have to create an endless number of spreadsheets to help in decision making and performance monitoring.
About Michael Weamer
Michael serves as Executive Vice President of the American Heart Association - Founders Affiliate (Northeast Region). Michael has dedicated his career to work with nonprofit organizations. Before joining the AHA, he was president of the National Society to Prevent Blindness and an executive director with the National Easter Seal Society.
Michael and his wife Karen live in Connecticut. They have four children (Mollie, Caitlin, Sean and Daniel), a grandson (Max) and a dog (Jackson). Michael holds a BS in Community Development and Broadcasting from Pennsylvania State University.
Read the Other Interviews in the Series:
Part 1 - A View from a Board Chair
Part 2 - A View from a Board Liaison
Part 3 - A View from a Board Member
Part 4 - A View from a Board Professional
StreamLink Software and BoardSource are teaming up to present a multi-part blog series entitled a 360 Degree View from the Board.
Introduction
“Some aspects of board service are constant. Each player in the boardroom, whether it’s the board chair, board member, or chief executive, has a role to fulfill and a set of expectations to meet. Other aspects change with the times. Committee structures change, processes are refined, and strategic plans help both board and staff members refocus organizational direction and work toward greater impact. In recent years, the rise of smartphones and other technology have created a culture accustomed to having any and all data within reach at all times. Have these technological developments changed the way that nonprofit boards interact during and between meetings? Are boards doing all they can to use technological tools to maximize efficiency and focus on exceptional governance?”
Danielle M. Henry
Communications Coordinator, BoardSource
Part Four: A View from a Board Professional
The following questions were presented to board professional, and CEO of Business Volunteers Unlimited (BVU) Brian Broadbent.
What’s the biggest challenge in your role as it relates to the board?
The biggest challenge is maintaining quality board engagement. I participate in large boards and we need to find a niche for everyone so that they feel valued, and so that we maximize their available contribution to the organization. On two of my boards we recently merged so the board is large.
In what area do you see the most need for process improvement?
Process improvement is most needed in the area of HR/Leadership Development and personnel management. We surveyed Executive Directors at United Way agencies and learned this was their number one priority. At BVU many of our consults are focused in this direction.
How has technology evolved during the course of your board-related involvement?
Social media usage has grown steadily. At the City Mission we use it extensively. The same holds true for BVU. In addition, most of the nonprofits I deal with have made website upgrades and database upgrades. All are pretty tech savvy.
Looking ahead to the future, what board management issues would you like to see technology solve?
I think of technology primarily leveraging operations, and the board as being outside of operations. Technology can help facilitate the board’s need for knowledge and feedback, as well as enhance communication. The speed of communication is certainly improved.
About Brian Broadbent
Brian is the CEO of Business Volunteers Unlimited (BVU). He serves on several boards including in the capacity of President of The City Mission board and as Governance Chair for Youth Opportunities Unlimited.
Read the Other Interviews in the Series:
Part 1 - A View from a Board Chair
Part 2 - A View from a Board Liaison
Part 3 - A View from a Board Member
StreamLink Software and BoardSource are teaming up to present a multi-part blog series entitled a 360 Degree View from the Board.
Introduction
“Some aspects of board service are constant. Each player in the boardroom, whether it’s the board chair, board member, or chief executive, has a role to fulfill and a set of expectations to meet. Other aspects change with the times. Committee structures change, processes are refined, and strategic plans help both board and staff members refocus organizational direction and work toward greater impact. In recent years, the rise of smartphones and other technology have created a culture accustomed to having any and all data within reach at all times. Have these technological developments changed the way that nonprofit boards interact during and between meetings? Are boards doing all they can to use technological tools to maximize efficiency and focus on exceptional governance?”
Danielle M. Henry
Communications Coordinator, BoardSource
Part Three: A View from a Board Member
The following questions were presented to Sandra Holmes.
What role-specific activities do you have to do in order to prepare for a board meeting, and what is the level of time and effort required?
I sit on five different boards so my role varies, depending on the organization, but typically, I look at my notes within 24-48 hours post meeting (any longer than that and my memory is toast) and make certain that I add any projects/responsibilities to my “to do” list. I make note of progress prior to the next meeting, be it committee or board and review notes at least couple of days prior to meetings to make sure I take care of business. For example, on one board, I’m the chair of the governance committee which covers staff -board relations, all HR functions, compensation, benefits, board recruitment & training, board satisfaction and any HR policy issues that emerge. I work closely with the CEO and we conference on a weekly basis, usually by phone. I probably spend between 2-4 hours per week on this function.
What’s the biggest challenge in your role as it relates to the board?
My biggest challenge is making the time to do the job in a creative and compelling way that adds value to the organization. Striving to bring the best to the table always demands more time, and that is a scarce resource.
In what area do you see the most need for process improvement?
In virtually every organization in which I’m engaged, data and information is kept in an idiosyncratic way that doesn’t lend itself to good communication. I want the information I need at my fingertips and don’t want to have to create my own “filing system” in order to be able to conduct business.
How has technology changed the way you conduct board business?
Not enough! Of course, 90% of board members are now reachable via email and have “smart phones” but most non-profits (especially the smaller ones) have barely scratched the surface of how technology can improve communication, efficiency and productivity. Many organizations simply don’t have the fiscal resources or the in-house knowledge to add “technology wizard” to their staff while still delivering top-notch services to their clients.
About Sandra Holmes
Sandra Duncan Holmes is a community activist and volunteer who spent her working life in non-profit management. She currently loves the flexibility of retirement which allows time for travel (the more places the better) golf, gardening and most of all, enjoying her active life as the wife of a still hard-working, saintly husband, the mother of two wonderful women, mother-in-love to two great sons-in-law, and four amazing grandsons aged 2,4,6 & 8.
Read the Other Interviews in the Series:
Part 1 - A View from a Board Chair
Part 2 - A View from a Board Liaison
StreamLink Software and BoardSource are teaming up to present a multi-part blog series entitled a 360 Degree View from the Board.
Introduction
“Some aspects of board service are constant. Each player in the boardroom, whether it’s the board chair, board member, or chief executive, has a role to fulfill and a set of expectations to meet. Other aspects change with the times. Committee structures change, processes are refined, and strategic plans help both board and staff members refocus organizational direction and work toward greater impact. In recent years, the rise of smartphones and other technology have created a culture accustomed to having any and all data within reach at all times. Have these technological developments changed the way that nonprofit boards interact during and between meetings? Are boards doing all they can to use technological tools to maximize efficiency and focus on exceptional governance?”
Danielle M. Henry
Communications Coordinator, BoardSource
Part Two: A View from a Board Liaison
The following questions were presented to Katie Richlick, Development Coordinator at Cleveland Hearing & Speech Center.
What do you think board members expect from you?
I believe the board members expect me to be in the loop regarding the upcoming meeting. They like to know when it is, where it being held at, specific instructions for the meeting and the content of the agenda. They also expect me to provide training on any software we may use and to extract information from our database, when it is needed.
What do you expect from the board members?
Our board members are incredibly involved individuals and a great asset to our organization. All that I would really expect out of them is a clear instruction when they need something from me. I am always happy to help them as long as I know what they need from me.
What role-specific activities do you have to do in order to prepare for a board meeting, and what is the level of time and effort required?
My role as development coordinator involves several different activities in preparation for the board meeting. I prepare the agenda based on feedback from the directors, attach relevant documents and monitor attendance. There are also certain day of responsibilities including room set up, food/beverage preparation and note taking during the meeting. Most of the effort involved in this process involves working with a team to get the job accomplished. I spent approximately 2 hours preparing for each board meeting.
What’s the biggest challenge in your role as it relates to the board?
A lot of my work with the board is indirect in nature but some of the challenges I see presented are gaps of knowledge when it comes to utilizing technology. Some of the board fully embrace the technology products that we use. They understand how it can streamline the process, reduce expenses and allow it can allow for easier collaboration. Others are used to a more traditional method and would prefer materials be distributed/questions answered in different way.
How has technology changed the way you complete board-related tasks?
I have only been in this role for a short time but we are utilizing technology more and more for board-related tasks. It has made the process streamlined and information more readily available. It also allows for an environment of sharing. We are able to post materials that might be of interest to our board members and they can choose to access these or not. There are so many other ways we could utilize technology but we have only just begun to dig into the realm of possibility.
About Katie Richlick
Katie serves as Development Coordinator at Cleveland Hearing & Speech Center. Previously, she served as an Income Development Representative for the American Cancer Society focusing on Relay for Life and Coaches vs. Cancer. Ms. Richlick graduated in 2006 from Grand Valley State University and began her two consecutive years of AmeriCorps. During her time as an AmeriCorps member, she was working on completing her graduate degree in Non-profit Administration from North Park University which she received in 2008. Her volunteer experiences have included serving on Grand Valley State University’s Young Alumni Council and acting as state lead for AmeriCorps Alums. Katie has recently relocated to Northeast Ohio and has spent the last few months getting to know Cleveland.
StreamLink Software and BoardSource are teaming up to present a multi-part blog series entitled a 360 Degree View from the Board.
Introduction
“Some aspects of board service are constant. Each player in the boardroom, whether it’s the board chair, board member, or chief executive, has a role to fulfill and a set of expectations to meet. Other aspects change with the times. Committee structures change, processes are refined, and strategic plans help both board and staff members refocus organizational direction and work toward greater impact. In recent years, the rise of smartphones and other technology have created a culture accustomed to having any and all data within reach at all times. Have these technological developments changed the way that nonprofit boards interact during and between meetings? Are boards doing all they can to use technological tools to maximize efficiency and focus on exceptional governance?”
Danielle M. Henry
Communications Coordinator, BoardSource
Part One: A View from a Board Chair
The following questions were presented to Adam Roth, former board chair for Cleveland Reads, and the LeadDIVERSITY Alumni Association.
What role-specific activities do you have to do in order to prepare for a board meeting, and what is the level of time and effort required?
There are a number of key steps required in preparing for a board meeting. One is to review the agenda with staff leadership to make sure the meeting flow and timing is determined ahead of time.
Another is to make sure agenda topics link to strategic issues as opposed to diving into operational ones. This step will help keep the discussions focused.
Finally, the chair should spend time prior to the meeting identifying performance improvement goals for the board as a whole.
What’s the biggest challenge in your role as it relates to the board?
The biggest challenge is ensuring that the committee chairs and the board as a whole are aware of the strategic goals directly impacting their roles. If you come into a board chair role and there’s no strategic plan in place, it creates a critical barrier. Developing a thoughtful strategic plan becomes the first step.
Once the strategic plan is in place there needs to be an annual review process. The review should include an evaluation of the goals thus far and assignment of non-completed goals to the appropriate committee.
The committee reports to the board must link back to these strategic goals. This approach accomplishes two key things. First, it keeps the board out of operational issues and second it focuses the efforts of the board in a consistent approved direction. The Chair must own this process otherwise the board will produce less.
In what area do you see the most need for process improvement?
In addition to the strategic plan process mentioned above, the next major process element involves full board engagement. It is important to ensure the board and committee members are meeting the expectations set by the board and organization. Without an effective process in place, it becomes difficult and time consuming to track the goals and expectations. It is critical to evaluate and process board performance in order to move the organization forward.
How has technology changed the way you conduct board business?
Technology improvements and process improvements go hand in hand. For example, we now see automatic tracking, measuring and evaluating board performance in some board management software tools. Furthermore, technology has created processes that ensure board members have all the information they need at their fingertips including strategic goals for committees, meeting agendas and materials and benchmark monitoring. Technology has done a great deal to create a more engaged board and to build public trust.
About Adam Roth
Before serving as President of StreamLink Software, Adam was Chief Operating Officer for West Side Ecumenical Ministry (WSEM). Adam supervised all of WSEM’s programs and was responsible for system development and integration, quality control, resource development, new program initiatives and community collaborations.
Adam holds master’s degrees in social work and management from Case Western Reserve University’s Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences and the Weatherhead School of Management, and a bachelor’s degree in psychology from The College of Wooster.
If you’re reading this article, chances are you’re doing your homework and trying to decide if your organization really needs a board portal. As you may know, a board portal is software that allows board of directors to securely access board documents and collaborate with other board members electronically. But what you might not know is that a board portal is really supposed to work with and optimize the programs and processes already in place, not replace them. Here are just a few ways a board portal can help streamline document, information, meeting and member management.
Using a Board Portal for Document and Information Management
- All board-related documents from board books to bylaws are stored securely in a cloud-based central repository, not passed around back and forth or stored on one person’s laptop. As a result, key information will be safe and available even if there are disruptions caused by anything from floods to changes in staffing.
- Because of built-in securities, members can only access the documents they’re allowed to view
- Meeting agendas and packets are created and perfectly organized in minutes. Documents produced in different programs are uniformly converted so members don’t have to open and switch between multiple software programs to read their meeting materials.
Using a Board Portal for Meeting Management
- A central, organizational calendar helps make meeting planning easier, and built-in functionality automatically sends meeting reminders and helps keep track of member attendance.
- The board portal automates the process by which action items get assigned, tracked, and managed.
- Capture the motions presented and record the results which are viewable to applicable members.
- Quickly access logically-organized board books, meeting documents, minutes and more, no matter where the meeting participants are located.
- Creates an archive of past meetings for reference and compliance purposes.
Using a Board Portal for Member Management
- Access the most current roster of board and committee members and key member data such as contact information, biographical content, special skills, and more.
- Track and report time, expectations, and financial contributions members make to the organization.
- Create a “bullpen” of potential board members, complete with pertinent information about them so you can act quickly when a position opens on the board.
A board portal can save time and eliminate a lot of frustration by simply creating a logical system and place for everything you need to manage your boards and committees effectively. Yes, you can absolutely manage boards and committees without a board portal. But why not take advantage of easy-to-use, affordable tools rather than cobbling together workarounds.
If you have started to explore purchasing a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) application for your institution, you have probably come across several different definitions or interpretations. Software as a Service provides a lot of advantages, but for many institutions, web based software provides a different set of variables you should explore when selecting the right product. There is a tremendous amount of information written about SaaS and what to look for, but let’s focus on two items that don’t get as much attention:
- The second “S”
- Tradeoffs you should expect
Service with a Capital S
While the benefits of SaaS products or cloud computing for the nonprofit and public sector community have been well documented, to get the true value of the SaaS solution you have to focus on the second “S” – Service. By service, I’m not referring to the way in which the software is delivered, but customer service.
Because there is generally little internal IT support for SaaS solutions, it is very important to understand what you can expect from your vendor/partner.
When you make the decision to buy a SaaS product, you are essentially entrusting this service to a third party, so you will want to understand their customer service protocols. How responsive is the account team to your problems? Do they have a policy in place for how long it takes to get back to you? Is there a cost for better service? What are the ways you can contact them, live chat, email, phone or some combination? You need to be comfortable with how you can reach your provider and how responsive they are to your questions/problems. Keep in mind the key to a successful SaaS company is customer retention. Because the product generally comes at a lower cost initially, it is important for SaaS providers to provide good service to keep you as clients.
Reasonable Tradeoffs
What makes the SaaS model so attractive to many institutions also brings with it some built in constraints.
I really like this software, but it would really be great if it could just do x,y,z as well. Does this sound familiar? The reason SaaS providers can offer products at a relatively low cost is because they have created a product that appeals to a large target audience and can spread their initial costs over that audience. The minute a SaaS provider starts to offer multiple “one off” customized solutions, the cost/pricing structure falls apart. They can no longer effectively manage each one of those one off solutions because every time there is an upgrade they have to test it and implement it at each customized deployment driving up cost which will eventually be passed on to you.
This is not to say you are stuck with the initial set of features your purchased, but it may force you to ask a couple of different questions. How often does the SaaS provider release updates? One of the key benefits of a SaaS model is product upgrades are seamless and should be driven by the community of users. The SaaS vendor then can take suggestions from their customers, prioritize them and push them to their clients on a regular basis. Most of these updates are not new releases of the product, but tweaks or enhancements. Understand how frequently they release product enhancements and how you can interact with them to make suggestions. For smaller SaaS vendors these software iterations may happen every 4 – 8 weeks, in other larger organizations with more established products and a larger client base this may happen every 6 months.
Another issue which pops up when looking to migrate to a SaaS solution is “what do I own?” In almost every case you don’t own the software, you subscribe to it, but you should own your data. Find out if the vendor has the ability to export that data and in what format. Do they provide you with tools that you can export the data yourself and in what format? You may want to run your own custom reports or combine data from multiple systems or simply have the peace of mind.
There are obviously many things to consider in any software purchase, but understanding the basic framework of what you are signing up for is critical to your success. Software-as-a Service provides excellent opportunities for nonprofit and public sector institutions to utilize software to create capacity and reduce costs.
Posted by
Adam Roth on Thu, Mar 08, 2012 @ 08:05 AM
“Technology Assessment” -- What comes to mind when you hear this phrase? Confusion? Excitement? Fear of falling into a giant financial black hole? While these are all legitimate responses, there are two keys to getting the most out of any consulting relationship (especially one that covers something as broad and diverse in meaning as a technology assessment). The first key is to define a goal, and prepare some specific questions that need to get answered. Sometimes the very act of figuring out the questions to ask can lead to figuring out answers and solutions that dramatically shrink the scope of the assessment.
The other key is to make sure you are operating with the right assumptions about your own organization. This article will focus on identifying and refining 3 key assumptions that will help you uncover the right questions to ask of your technology assessment consultant.
Assumption 1 - We need a specific brand, product or system. This information is often based on what other organizations are using and stems from a fear of not having the right tools.
New Assumption: The reality is that you need to closely examine ALL your current assets, not just your technology resources. These assets can include the Board of Directors, grant funds, your donors, even your brand. Next, rank them in order of importance and complexity. Importance can be defined in terms of resources, services, credibility and security of brand. Complexity refers to the amount of information and processes required to maximize the asset. This analysis should lead to some rather specific revelations about where the greatest need lies for the tools that can maximize your assets.
Application: If a consultant takes you down the path of analyzing technology that does not maximize your resources, services, credibility or security of brand related to your priority list you need to recognize this oversight and stop the process immediately.
Assumption 2 – All of the software and hardware tools we use must integrate in order to provide the most efficient and therefore best way to manage our systems and processes.
New Assumption: Web based solutions have made it very easy for most any hardware or software to share information. Therefore, a full on integrated system from a single vendor should not be the top line assumption. In fact these solutions often increase complexity and users are often left not getting the best solution. Many users are forced into creating “workarounds” in order to create or improve efficiencies. Large scale system integrations can take significant IT resources and may even put security at risk if not implemented effectively. Web-based solutions don’t require such resources, can be accessed anywhere, and can be quickly updated when new product features and functions are available.
Application: Make sure your asset priority table is understood by the consultant, and identify the best solutions to manage the asset as opposed to a solution that integrates well, but manages the assets less effectively. Drive your consultant in this direction with good questions about asset management, and don’t demand integration as the primary requirement.
Assumption 3 – No matter what technology solution we determine to be right for our organization, the back-end costs of the implementation will be enormous.
New Assumption: Software as a Service (SaaS), cloud-based solutions, virtual servers and other managed solutions allow you to dramatically grow your infrastructure without adding significant upgrades to staff or hardware creating a more predictable, scalable and consistent technology environment.
Application: You should demand these virtual solutions as unrestricted dollars are more valuable and you do not run a tech company requiring long-term investment in major infrastructure. If your consultant starts with this as a baseline your long-term costs will be minimized.
In conclusion, remember that good assumptions will help you ask the right questions, and the right questions will lead to a more efficient and effective technology consulting engagement.
The Art of Managing Complexity
It’s likely the first time you get funding is the result of writing a killer grant. It’s also likely that subsequent rounds of funding are a result of a killer grant AND proof you successfully accomplished all you said you would in your proposal. Some grantors have deep pockets and lax reporting requirements, but most (especially federal agencies) require detailed accounts of how well you used the money before they’ll give more. More and more grantors are funding specific projects, not organizations, and they expect a return on their investment.
Think of all the inter-connected, grant-funded initiatives across the entire organization. Each one has to be monitored, analyzed, reported on and managed. Think of the people who have to do their part to make sure tasks get completed effectively and on time. Think of the all the disparate systems and processes in place across your organization. Now think what can happen if all these moving parts start to get out of sync.
As grant requirements become more complex, organizations need help managing the entire grant cycle, from discovering new funding sources to measuring the outcome of the programs, projects, departments and sub-recipients that received the money. Even reporting back to the grantor has become more complex. For example, recent changes in government grant allocation rules have had major implications, in some cases shifting the onus of the auditing process on the organization itself instead of on outside regulators. But not all barriers to success are external.
Organizations with fewer resources may have a small staff dedicated to grant management, which may limit their funding options if grantor requirements are daunting. Some organizations are large and segmented and unable to react nimbly to changes that could positively impact programs. It’s often the case that one team will utilize tools that are incompatible with those used by others. And it’s also common for individuals and teams to become very protective of everything from the processes they use to the data they collect.
These issues can render decision makers reluctant to adopt a technology solution, preferring instead that each team of stakeholders continue to act like an autonomous unit with their own separate systems, tools, processes and strategies. This approach invites disaster in the form of missed deadlines, ineffective communication, lack of a streamlined process, and the very real possibility of lost funding opportunities or money left on the table due to mismanagement.
How do you break that cycle and convince your organization that it’s a good idea to invest in grant management software? The solution lies in weighing pros and cons of switching to a new approach, and by alleviating the concerns that can come up when implementing software that’s designed to be used by multiple people with differing roles. The following talking points are designed to address some of these concerns.
Talking Points to Help Make Your Case
We already have internal systems and processes in place, why do we need a grant management software tool?
An internal system can mean anything from a series of spreadsheets and a reliance on email to proprietary software developed in-house. Even the most sophisticated internally-created systems will be deficient in some areas. And most organizations don’t have the time and resources to monitor and make incremental improvements to propriety systems. It’s easier to get work done using tools that were thoughtfully designed for a specific purpose. Anyone who has ever used a shoe to drive a nail can relate.
Good grant management software can streamline internal processes that impact every single stage of the grant cycle. Companies that stake their reputation on developing grant management software need their products to be effective or else no one will buy them. And to keep customers happy, they need to provide frequent updates based on the suggestions they receive.
We handle grant management as part our accounting system, so we don’t need a replacement
Grant management software shouldn’t be used to replace an accounting system, it should be designed to work with it. The software should allow you to import the accounting information that is directly related to grants, nothing else. This process creates a controlled level of visibility. That way the grant development office can access only the relevant data needed for reporting purposes without having to wait for someone else to pull information for them. Having the ability to quickly generate reports at any time gives the organization a real-time view of grant performance and allows them make adjustments if necessary. And don’t forget there’s much more to a grant than the financial pieces like budget creation fund allocation, and performance measurement tasks you’d expect the software to handle. Grant management software is also designed to track, measure and automate each step of the grant cycle. So it can be an invaluable tool when it comes to storing documents and information, assigning tasks, keeping track of upcoming deadlines, creating reports for internal purposes and grantors, submitting the grant and even researching new funding opportunities.
We need software that integrates with our other systems
This is no longer the case as more systems migrate over to a web-based Software as a Service (SaaS) model. SaaS tools can easily import and export standard data that’s commonly used by other software (like accounting software). And unlike giant enterprise systems that try to do a little bit of everything, SaaS products target specific needs and can do them very well.
We’re too small to justify a grant management tool
Small organizations are actually better poised to take advantage of some of the features available in grant management software. Starting small means it’s easier to input information and users. As the organization grows, it will be easier to get new team members up to speed since the resources they need will be right at their fingertips. And built-in research tools can help organizations discover new funding sources that can help organizations grow and expand their reach.
We can’t afford grant management software
The initial investment is a temporary burden. The fact is, software providers should take each organization’s unique situation into consideration when creating pricing quotes. Some create price structures based on the number of users actively using the system. A better way is to charge based on current grant revenue. That way, organizations can more easily adopt the software at an early stage, and pay a higher amount later when it earns its keep by earning the full potential of every grant and maximizing each funding opportunity.
We don’t have time to learn a new system
There will be a time investment involved at first as users get up to speed. But, grant management software will save organizations time and frustration in the long run. And the best software providers will offer training and support services. Some will even help with the initial population of the data in the system. Think of it as a time to create or crystallize a grant process that becomes the internal standard for the organization, saving time and effort going forward.
I don’t want to share sensitive information like budgets and salaries with everyone
The solution is role-based access control. Grant management software should help organizations create types of users, and then give them specific permissions. That way each user only accesses the information they’re meant to see. In addition, password protection and encryption technology ensures that data stays safe and secure.
There’s no good reason an organization should be hobbled because they don’t have the right tools to do the very best job possible. It could be that grant management software has been overlooked simply because people have had to make do without it for so long. But organizations that fail to streamline their processes and get a handle on increasingly complex grantor requirements are at risk of not maximizing their funding opportunities. A good grant management software product will pay for itself in a relatively short period time through improved ROI and improved efficiencies and help organizations stay in sync.