Grant research and funding applications

I'm Val. I do two things for organizations that need funding: I find the money, and I write the applications that go after it.

Finding it means a funding map — which programs a specific organization is actually eligible for, with the award range, the deadline, the conditions and the source behind every line. Writing it means the full application package: narrative, eligibility analysis, budget, federal forms and exhibits, assembled the way a funded application reads.

Below are three pieces of work. The first was done for a real organization and is confirmed by them in writing. The other two are complete samples, built to be read in full.

1 · Selected work

Demographics are real public U.S. Census data; the project, dollar amounts and letters are illustrative — shown to demonstrate how a real application reads, not to represent a client.

2 · How I build a funding map

Anyone can produce a list of funders. The work is in removing the ones that do not apply, and in being honest about the ones that are a long shot.

• Profile first. Legal status, state of registration, annual budget and reporting form, what the money is actually for. Half of all funders are ruled out by these four facts alone.
• Verify on the funder's own site. Aggregator databases go stale; program pages do not. Every entry carries the source it was checked against, with the date.
• Date every deadline. Not "annual" or "rolling" — the actual date, and whether this year's cycle has opened.
• Rate the confidence. Verified fit, competitive but plausible, or long shot. A map that calls everything a good match is useless for planning.
• Remove the dead entries. Closed cycles and impossible match requirements come out, and I say which ones I removed and why.
• Sequence it. What to send this month, what costs nothing to try, what to calendar for next year — and what the organization needs to build before the large applications are credible.

The same discipline runs the other way for towns: I maintain a scored database of eligible Minnesota communities, so a project's funding tier is established before a single page is written. Selecting the right project for the right town is arithmetic, not guesswork.

3 · How Community Facilities applications are scored

A CF application is not judged on prose — it is scored against the criteria in 7 CFR Part 3570. Knowing the formula is what separates a fundable application from a hopeful one. The grant percentage a town can receive is set by two numbers: population and median household income (MHI) against the state's non-metro median.

On top of the grant share, applications earn priority points for being small, low-income, and for projects that protect public health and safety — fire, ambulance, water, and health facilities score highest. I read every application backward from these points: I confirm a town's tier first, then write each section to claim the points it actually qualifies for. Nothing is left to chance or to flattering language.

4 · What a complete package contains

A CF application is a package of exhibits, not one document. Here is the honest division of labor — what I produce, and what comes from the town's own people.

5 · Who I work with

• Small towns and rural districts — USDA Community Facilities (fire stations, clinics, town halls, libraries, public-safety equipment), USDA Water & Waste Disposal, Rural Business Development Grants, FEMA AFG for fire departments, Minnesota DEED and the Small Cities Development Program.
• Small nonprofits — funding maps and prospect research: state humanities and arts councils, community and family foundations, local microgrants, and the federal museum, library and humanities programs once capacity is there.
• Engineering and architecture firms — the funding side of projects you are already designing, so the grant application does not become your problem. See how that works →