Academic Grant Pursuits Newsletter - October 2027

1
ACADEMIC GRANT PURSUITS
October 2027
Contemporaneous Notes
In this issue:
• Contemporaneous
Notes
• Controlling for
Negative
Externalities
• Execution: It’s in
the Thinking and the
Doing
• A Hard Earmark
• Full Project
Lifespan
• Art of the Budget
Spend Down
• Low-Hanging Fruit
in Terms of Research
• Tchotchkes
• Freeform (and
Unpaid) Work around
a Grant
• Starting with Own
Inspired Ideas or
with Grant Funder
NOFOs
• Why Define “Work
Goals” and “Work
Objectives” in a
Grant Application?
• Art of the Chase
• Grant Opportunities
for Partner
Organizations
• Longevity of
Relevance to Users
as a Value-Add
(cont. on the next page)
By Shalin Hai-Jew
Editor
Dr. Shalin Hai-Jew,
Grant Writer
haijes@gmail.com
One healthy habit in the grants space—both for the grant application and for the grant-funded
work—is to keep contemporaneous notes. Contemporaneous notes are those taken as events are
happening and very shortly thereafter…so the record is accurate to the moment.
The notes may be in various formats of digital: text, audio, video, screenshots, and other multime-
dia. (Various computational tools can easily transcode between these modalities.) They may be
captured in analog paper formats. (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Contemporaneous Notes of Various Modalities

2
(Contemporaneous Notes...cont.)
Keeping contemporaneous notes for
creative thinking
Contemporaneous notes may help the notetaker think
through what they are writing or drawing or saying or per-
forming. Putting an idea into fixed form makes it potentially
more real and relevant to the thinker.
instant recall
Keeping contemporaneous notes enable almost instant re-
call. The notes may be searchable. They may be technical-
ly documented and auto-dated.
Human memory is much less accurate if they have to recre-
ate what occurred during a particular meeting or brainstorm-
ing session…in the past.
protection
How were individual or team decisions arrived at? How
were innovations inspired? Who originated what work and
when?
Contemporaneous notes—if correctly captured and re-
tained—can be used to prove assertions sometime in the
future. Where human memory is fallible, contemporaneous
notes may serve as a more accurate and preserved record.
The record aspect is particularly important if there are differ-
ing senses of recall, contested senses of reality, and legal
challenges. A solid record may provide some security.
(Figure 2)
Figure 2. Security
Conclusion
The effort of contemporaneous notetaking is not that diffi-
cult, and its benefits are manifold.

3
Controlling for Negative Externalities
By Shalin Hai-Jew
The proposed work in grant applications have to consider not
only the possible salutary effects of the work but also poten-
tial negative externalities, unintended adverse outcomes that
may emerge.
This understanding is common for those who engage in re-
search since considerations of possible negative fallouts are
built into the research proposal and oversight process. This
thinking is less of a practice in the grant writing and work pro-
posal design, except in some hard science fields. (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Negative Externalities
Most grant applicants want to focus on the positive outputs
and resulting outcomes only. Many may think that consider-
ing negatives may harm their chances. On the contrary, the
consideration of a wide range of potential impacts can be a
boon based in part on the thinking and on the framing.
Learning from history
How can one identify potential negative externalities from
the proposed work? One place to learn is from the academ-
ic literature, in order to learn from history. Has similar work
been found to have potentially negative impacts? If so,
what? And how were these addressed and headed off
thereafter?
Learning from reasoning and logic and
educated imagination
Another place to learn is through reasoning through the po-
tential intended and unintended consequences. What are
some possible unforeseen harms? Are there ways that the
human participants in the research may experience negative
effects from the experimentation? Are there negative social
effects from the work? Negative self-concept?
Designing potential harms out of the
work project
It helps to work with oversight committees to anticipate some
risks and to mitigate these. It helps for grant PIs / PDs to
know that negative externalities are possible and to design
ways to assess whether these are occurring in the work. It
helps for them to be receptive to a range of realities…and to
know that not every eventuality is anticipate-able. It will be
important to course-correct as new insights become availa-
ble.
Conclusion
Being aware of the potential for negative side effects of work
is important to ensure a successful work proposal, especially
if the project is funded by grant funders. This sophistication
will benefit the work and mitigate risks of that work.

4
(cont. on p. 7)
Execution: It’s in the Thinking and the Doing
By Shalin Hai-Jew
A fundamental requirement in grant-funded work is to do
the funded work.
What this means is that those grant principal investigators
(PIs) that are big on thinking big and talking big but not de-
livering…will be problematic in the grants space. They may
not be able to break the gravitational grip of work in order to
achieve stratospheric aims. (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Escape Velocity
The grant application has to represent real capabilities, so
that the ideas expressed on the page can morph into real
work, real deliverables, real outputs, and real resulting out-
comes.
From the page to the world
The proposed work concepts do have to be appealing and
innovative. They do have to transparently represent the on-
ground reality of the grant applicant team and the host institu-
tion of higher education (IHE).
The work planning part of the grant application is the bridge
between the concept and the world. It spells out how the
work will be achieved in terms of tasks over time. It spells
out the staff who will do the work and the KSAs (knowledge,
skills, and abilities) that they will bring to the work. It spells
out how much money will be spent to do the work and what it
will be spent on (and in what sequence or order). It spells out
what evaluation measures (research, data collection, data
analysis) will be applied to the work project to assess its rela-
tive success or failure.
The work plan’s solidness, its logic, its feasibility…will speak
to the possible effect of the completed work in the world for
the respective stakeholders.
Poking holes in the work plan
Grant evaluators may assess the work plan to see how valid
it is. What will they be looking for per se?
• Is the work plan sufficiently ambitious to fit the min-max
range of the funding? Is the project scope sufficiently
audacious to justify the expenditure? Or is it boring and
pro forma? Is it supplanting instead of offering anything

5
A Hard Earmark
By Shalin Hai-Jew
academia). (Figure 2) Soft earmarks are dedicated funds
for certain endeavors but are more negotiable in terms of the
recipients and the particular projects, with discretion to the
funding agency.
Figure 2. Physical Building
For the target of the “hard earmark,” they have to be able to
deliver on the work and to be willing to accept the hard ear-
marked funds in exchange. (Figure 3)
At the university level, one colleague received a grant that
was a “hard earmark.” These are apparently not so common
at the community college level. After all, hard earmarks are
for federal funds designated for a particular purpose and
given to a specific recipient, who may be the only person or
team in the world to achieve particular research outcomes.
A hard earmark bypasses the competitive merit-based pro-
cess for discretionary grants…because the target individual
or team has already shown capability to achieve a particular
outcome…that no one else can deliver on per se. This is a
form of procurement that is in the purview of the U.S. legisla-
ture and also some federal agencies. (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Procure!
Apparently, hard earmarked funds may be used for various
endeavors, including putting up various physical buildings
(which are not typically in the purview of grant funding in

6
(Hard Earmark...cont.)
Figure 4. Action Plan
Flourishing work attracts grant funding. (Figure 5) Pro-
grams and institutions of higher education (IHE) that are on
the decline are not as often the target of external sponsor-
ships.
Figure 5. Flourishing
Figure 3. Before and After
Pursuit by the grant funder
The grantee or recipient of the hard earmark (or direct alloca-
tion) in the author’s single third-hand observation had long
had a positive relationship with the grant manager. She was
doing work that had not been done before or done elsewhere.
She held several patents for several biological inventions.
She was positioned effectively to be considered for such
funding even though she did not actively pursue the moneys.
She had an action plan to do her best and most thorough
work, which she executed on six and seven days a week.
(Figure 4) Hers is an earned glory.

7
(Execution...cont. from p. 4)
(cont. on p. 11)
Conclusion
The grants space is a varied and rich one, with various possi-
bilities for individuals in the world. Grant moneys are to ad-
vance research and development, innovations, and the bet-
terment of humanity, along various dimensions.
(Hard Earmark...cont.)
• Grant-ready organizations have to be learning ones…
constantly uptaking information and sampling the larger
environment. (Figure 3)
Figure 3. Learning Organization
Pilot testing, preliminary research and
data collection
In the same way that a 3d design may be tested with a
printout in a 3d printer, some conceptual work may be pilot
tested, with some preliminary research and data collection.
The digital plans have to be able to manifest in physical ap-
new?
• In terms of the team that will actualize the work, do they
have the necessary experience, skills, and knowledge to
actualize the work? [While all team members will be
learning while actualizing the grant-funded work, if they
are trying to learn foundational new skills simultaneously,
that is a large risk to the project. There is no guarantee
that they will learn in time or to the level of fluency need-
ed. Some can learn on-the-fly, but many cannot. Even
those that are quick-on-the-uptake will not have the level
of expertise of experts, which means that they will go
down blind alleys and make poor decisions, in some cas-
es.] (Figure 2)
• In terms of the dependencies to achieve the stated work,
have the necessary connections been created? The
prior groundwork set?
Figure 2. Paying Attention

8
Full Project Lifespan
By Shalin Hai-Jew
Those who would pursue external sponsorships for work at
their institution of higher education (IHE) may benefit from
conceptualizing the full project lifespan of their proposed
work.
This mental walk-through may help them know what to expect
and prepare for what is to come at each phase. (Figure 1)
This anticipation may help with planning but also for emotional
and mental adjustments.
Figure 1. Grant Thinking
Thinking it through
A full lifespan of a grant-funded project will clearly involve the
pre-award, award, and post-award phases, if the focus is on
the grant funding foremost.
The pre-award phase involves the following:
• Conceptualizing a work proposal
• Acquiring agreements from work partners and col-
leagues
• Finding potential grant funders based on their notices of
funding opportunities (NOFOs)
• Conducting a review of the literature related to the grant-
funded work
• Conducting preliminary research work as needed
• Drafting a grant application, with the basic five parts:
work proposal (with a value proposition), planned work
scheduled in alignment with the grant funding schedule,
staffing, budgeting, and project evaluation plans (with
research and data collection and data analysis
• Completing the application with all necessary attesta-
tions, letters of support, and other requisite documenta-
tion
• Acquiring the necessary administrative signoffs and ap-
provals
• Submitting the grant applications package
• Working with the grant funder’s grant manager

9
(Full Project Lifespan...cont.)
The awards phase involves the following:
• Receiving notice from the grant funder of award
• Negotiating a grants contract and ensuring the necessary
signatures from the appropriate signatories from both
sides
• Commencing work per the approved plan
• Submitting grant progress reports as required at regular
intervals
• Purchasing necessary equipment, services, and others
• Billing for various expenditures and work along the way
• Maintaining documentation, keeping records
• Communicating with the grant funder’s grant manager as
needed
• Wrapping up the project with a close-out report including
information about progress, research, and expenditures
The post-awards phase involves the following:
• Completing any late billing (with permission)
• Closing out the grant
• Completing final reports
• Distributing the findings through academic publications,
conference presentations, and others
• Working with local public relations office to share the
work to a broad public
The entire lifespan of a grant-funded project may last any-
where from under a year to multiple years.
The general phases may include variances depending on the
specifics of the project.
Conclusion
This short article provides an overview of a full project
lifespan of grant-funded work…because it helps potential
grant principal investigators (PIs) to know what to expect…
and to adapt to each phase. Deadlines may be hard ones
(non-negotiable) or soft ones (somewhat negotiable)…but
they do inform much of the work at every phase.

10
Art of the Budget Spend Down
By Shalin Hai-Jew
Experienced grant PIs are constantly keeping their eye on
the budget and their expenditures. They are helped by ac-
countants and members of the post-awards office (assuming
that exists).
Coming up on the close of a grant, if the moneys haven’t
been spent already, there is a ritual spend-down. That is, the
remaining funds are reviewed…to see what remains and with
what strings attached (what the moneys are earmarked for)…
and then the task is to spend the funds the rest of the way
down…to bolster the grant-funded work. (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Spend Down
The point is not to leave anything unspent since such moneys
are difficult to attain. Also, proper spending speaks to the
fiscal responsibility of the grant-funded PI and / or team.
Sources of potential confusion
It may be unclear what moneys are left to spend. Why would
that be?
In some cases, there are multiple principal investigators (PIs)
or administrators on one grant. They are each spending on
their parts of the budget and not always consulting with each
other. Prices are dynamic and changing. Surprise expendi-
tures may have arisen prior.
Accountants may require time to makes heads or tails of the
respective budgets. They will have set up each grant with its
own budget number and read through the grant to know how
the grant budget is set up. They adhere to their internal con-
trols to ensure that grant assets are used appropriately…and
that procurements follow federal guidelines.
Documentation about the expenditures may not be clear.
They may be giving PIs incorrect information. [In one case,
an administrator was told she had $30,000 left to spend…but
when she want to spend it, she was told rather that she’d
already overspent. That $30,000 did not exist. And she was
overdrawn.]
Verifying with the grant funder’s grant
manager
Certainly, if there are questions about how the remaining
funds may be spent, the grant funder’s grant manager may
be contacted for clarification. Misspent funds have to be
paid back. Or misspent funds may not be reimbursed.
Grantees need to be sure that they are following the letter
and the spirit of the approved budget.
Closeout procedures
Wrapping up a grant-funded project involves particular pro-
cedures that have to be completed after the end of the grant

11
(Budget Spend Down...cont.)
funding period. Financial records have to be reconciled. Un-
spent funds have to be returned, in cases where funds were
handed over to the college in part or in whole (and not just
reimbursed as expenditures were made). Financial records
need to be kept for a number of years, in case an audit is
needed.
Conclusion
How to spend down funds in ways that align with the contrac-
tual agreement and that also benefit the work on-ground is a
kind of administrative art. Making sure that this spend down
is done well may require inputs from colleagues at the college
and at the grant funder.
plications. They have to transcend their dimensionality of
2d to 3d. (Figure 4) Some early proof-of-concept may be
needed before grant funders are wiling to fund larger ver-
sions of the project.
Figure 4. 3D Printing
Conclusion
Closing the say-do gap is an important aspect of perfor-
mance in work life. An idea is just an idea. Those who
would pursue external sponsorships need to perfect their
ability to follow-through with the work, without falling short.
In game theory, cheap talk is contrasted with costly signal-
ing. Grant funders are all about the costly signaling.
(Execution...cont. from p. 7)

12
Low-Hanging Fruit in Terms of Research
By Shalin Hai-Jew
Some grant principal investigators (PIs) are interested in the
work but see the research as onerous. (Figure 1) They un-
derstand that grant funders cannot just take their word for it.
They know that they need something empirical to bolster their
claims of achievements and to share finer details of their
work.
Figure 1. Blue Sky Dreaming to Grant Funding
This short article addresses what “low-hanging fruit” may look
like in terms of research.
What is easiest to attain?
Low-hanging fruit for grant PIs may vary based on their
knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs), accessible technolo-
gies, prior experiences, and the nature of their grant-funded
work. The idea is to find research methods that are conven-
tional and accepted by grant funders…that are achievable
within reasonable time limits and manageable costs. It helps
to have the research methods that align with the existing
work. It also helps if the methods have a high probability of
yielding relevant results.
One way to start is to conduct an audit of what is available.
• Does a review of the literature result in useful insights?
Are there sufficient relevant publications to inform the
research?
• Is there data that is already being collected in terms of
project work? For example, if an LMS (learning man-
agement system) is being used, can the trace data be
isolated and extracted for analytical use? Or an online
survey? Intake forms? Student information? (with
proper releases)
• Are there existing datasets that may shed light on the
topic being studied? Any institutional data?
• Is there information that may be used from a pilot study?
• Are there documents that may be used for a content
analysis? Policy documents? Gray literature docu-
ments?
• Are there prior studies that may have available data that
may be re-analyzed in new light? Different dimensional-
ity?
Certainly, access to extant data will require sign-offs and
permissions. It will also require in-depth analysis to under-
stand how the data was collected and what may be asserted
about it.
Some simpler methods of research may be considered.
• Is action research a possibility in alignment with the pro-
ject work?
• Can prior research be replicated? Incremented for-
ward?
• Is it possible to assess the construct validity and reliabil-

13
(Low-Hanging...cont.)
• Are there professional partners who have specific exper-
tise who may be brought alongside to pursue research?
More complex setups may include a pre- and a post-test with
the designed intervention occurring in-between. This does
include experimentation. This will require Institutional Review
Board (IRB) permissions and oversight. The grant research-
ers will have to attest to their professionalism, beneficence,
care, and ethical practices. (Figure 3) They will have to en-
sure that all participants in the research have informed con-
sent.
Figure 3. Attestations
Conclusion
There are various types of research—mixed methods, multi-
methods, qualitative, quantitative—that are possible in a re-
search context…that can output relevant findings.
The ideas here may suggest that the work is “easy,” but that
may overstate the case. Research has its complexities and
liabilities.
This short article offers some simple ideas as a start.
ity of a new research instrument?
• Is it possible to conduct a descriptive study based on the
particular research work?
• Is it possible to conduct a correlational study between
variables based on existing data?
• Is it possible to create a case study from the existing re-
search work? Is it possible to extract relevant insights
that may showcase patterns?
• Is it possible to set up a small scale primary (firsthand)
data collection?
Grant PIs may have a range of options in pursuing certain
lines of inquiry. (Figure 2)
Figure 2. Question Mark
There may be partners who may come onboard to conduct
research in their areas of expertise.

14
Tchotchkes
By Shalin Hai-Jew
At a community and technical college, several of the faculty
approached to pursue external grant funding. One wanted
money for “highlighters” in addition to millions of dollars’ worth
of equipment for his program. Another wanted money for
calculators. Another wanted laptops and headsets. One
wanted moneys to buy food for a supposed food pantry on
campus. Another wanted a couple police radios. Another
wanted money to create publicity to drive traffic to a program
teaching a little-used technology (and for which there were
many free trainings offered by the software maker).
Why wouldn’t the college just pony up the funds locally for the
small stuff, the tchotchkes? Why wouldn’t the locals just hold
a fundraiser? Or why wouldn’t they pursue local grants? Why
wouldn’t they shake out a little extra from the various extant
grants already awarded? (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Tchotchkes
A conversation about grants
The various asks opened conversations of what grants are
and the idea that grant funders are not in the business of
supplanting local budgets…but of providing funds for new
endeavors, new contributions by the college, perhaps some-
thing visionary and compelling.
After doing some searches, I had to let each know that most
grant funders do not fund the small things but expect some-
thing more ambitious. Many grant funders want proposed
programs, not bills for office supplies. Their min-max ranges
usually had floors of at least $50,000 for example.
Conclusion
That message reiterated over multiple articles in a grants
newsletter and face-to-face trainings and short courses…did
not quite sink in. One of the last requests was for the police
radios.
What was even more concerning was that the college had
turned away a $50,000 awarded cash grant (with some
$10,000 or so more for travel and conferences for multiple
members of the college team) because they could not man-
age simple data analysis.

15
Freeform (and Unpaid) Work around a Grant
By Shalin Hai-Jew
An organization positions itself to be grant-ready in basic
ways: hiring professional people, having savvy leadership
about grant-funding, encouraging innovative and ethical
work, and so on. It helps if they have a depth of experience
in the grants space, so that they can compete for funding.
(Figure 1)
Figure 1. Grant Seeking around Money
How individuals may position to be
competitive in the grants space
How an individual positions to be a successful grant appli-
cant requires the professionalism and innovativeness, too,
but there’s more. An individual can benefit their positionality
in applying for a grant by engaging in various types of free-
form work. (Figure 2)
Figure 2. Freeform Work
“Freeform work” refers to not only what is done during the
regular work day but additional other additive efforts that
expand their thinking, their knowledge, their skills, and their
abilities.

16
(Freeform Work...cont.) Figure 3. Ways of the World
How freeform work benefits the grant
application package
How does freeform work bolster the grant application?
Those varied experiences may inform the creativity of the
grant proposal. Experiences outside a discipline expands
the mind and may result in higher levels of innovation. Ex-
periential breadth may heighten the efficacy of the problem-
solution in the work proposal.
The details of such work may benefit the grant principal
investigator’s (PI’s) biosketch and bio statement. These
freeform work (and hobbyist) activities may communicate
dimensionality in the grant PI. It may speak to their invest-
ment in the larger community. It may humanize and per-
sonalize them to the grant evaluators.
Conclusion
Grant PIs, in many cases, are multi-dimensional people
and engaged in various endeavors. Thinking beyond their
professional discipline may benefit by bringing in their
freeform work and hobbies to inform grant proposals.
These may include the following:
• Technological skills, new technologies
• Specialized trainings
• Presentations as professional conferences
• Reading (in academia but other fields outside academ-
ia)
• Research
• Data collection
• Data analysis
• Academic publishing
• Hobbies
Freeform work shows extra-work (extra-curricular) inter-
ests. It shows a healthy curiosity. It shows social engage-
ment to benefit others.
Unfunded endeavors
In most cases, the employer does not fund such freeform
work. Or if they do, it is only partially funded or incidentally
funded as part of fulltime work. (Figure 3)

17
Starting with Own Inspired Ideas or with Grant Funder
NOFOs
By Shalin Hai-Jew
Should a grant applicant (1) start with their own inspired ide-
as of local projects that they want to put up for possible grant
funding, or should they (2) begin with grant funder NOFOs
(notices of funding opportunities) and brainstorm from there?
What is the best way to optimize a grant approach? (Figure
1)
Figure 1. Funding Formula
How may a grant applicant conceptualize their proposed
work? (Figure 2)
Figure 2. Undefined Project
Either? Both? Neither?
If grant applicants prefer to choose either #1 or #2, either
could work. It depends on how they work best.
That said, for improved chances to acquire grant funding, #2
is generally preferable. An identified announcement by a
grant funder, even if the funding is only “forecasted” and not
fully funded, means that there is at least the grant funder
interest and the potential money out there. A tailored ap-
proach by the grant applicant to the interests of the grant
funder means that the two positions are not that far apart.
The grant applicant does not have to make the case for the
value of their proposed work that is too distant from what the
grant funder is already invested in in terms of ideas. There
does not have to be a foundational argument about the merit
of funding the particular discipline or topic.
The goal is to identify the overlap in the Venn diagram be-
tween the grant funder and the grant applicant. Without
shared interests, nothing gets funded.
Grant funders do not expect to have to stretch to find those
competing for funds. They expect grant applicants in most
cases to do the adapting. In a grants marketplace, the grant
funders (the buyers) dictate prices, not the grant applicants
(the sellers).
Self-drive
Many of those who ultimately change the world tend to be
self-driven. They think differently. They see opportunities
where others do not.
For more regular folk, though, dreaming their own dreams
may read as more self-indulgent, more egoistic, and impracti-
cal. The ideas may be just unmoored from reality instead of

18
(Own Inspired...cont.) Figure 5. Full Steam Ahead
genius. It is not enough to hope for funds to just exist.
For the visionary, they may be able to shape their ideas to fit
an existing grant funders’ point-of-view. However, the world
does not typically come around to the particular interests of
the grant applicant.
Conclusion
Meanwhile, the future arrives quickly enough. (Figure 3) If
work is not funded, it generally will not come into reality. It
dissipates into the ether.
Figure 3. Future Bound
Grant applicants decide some of their future realities.
(Figure 4)
Figure 4. Murky Future
With sufficient bandwidth and focus, grant applicants need
to go full steam ahead and take every opportunity available.
(Figure 5)

19
Why Define “Work Goals” and “Work Objectives” in a
Grant Application?
By Shalin Hai-Jew
A core rationale for a grant application is the idea that the
proposed work will meet an important need, solve an im-
portant problem, research an important hypothesis (and re-
lated research questions), and in so doing, provide value.
The work should be novel or original perhaps in terms of the
techniques and technologies being applied.
A grant proposal is not there to propose something frivolous.
It is not there to supplant an existing budget at the institution
of higher education (IHE).
Criticality of a work plan
If a grant application can be said to have a fulcrum, a pivot
point for a lever, a central or critical part, that hinge would be
the work plan. The work plan describes what the grant appli-
cants will provide to the grant funder in exchange for the
funding. The work plan contains the core value proposition
of the grant application.
Core questions about the project team will come from the
work plan: Essentially, can the fielded team do the defined
work to quality standards? Within the designated time peri-
od? Within budget?
Critical parts of a work plan: Work
goals and work objectives
Then, a critical part in the work plan would be the “work
goals”. (Figure 1) Every part of the work plan would fit some-
where under the broad “work goals”.
Figure 1. Work Goals
“Work objectives” are specific and observably measurable
(quantifiable) targets that need to be achieved to complete
the broader goals. (Figure 2)
Figure 2. Work Objectives
What are “work goals”? What are
“work objectives”?
“Work goals” outline and summarize what the work project
will accomplish. These are aspirational but also practically
achievable.
There are different ways to write work goals. These may be
written out as full sentences. They may be written as verb
phrases.
These tend to be sequence sensitive. These are also written
in descending order (with the most important goals first and
the lesser ones at the end.).
“Work objectives” are much more specific. These bolster the
work goals by showing how they will practically enable the
goals. Work objectives are quantifiably measurable.
Together, work goals and work objectives may be written out
as an outline:
Work Goal #1
Work Objectives

20
(Work Goals / Work Objectives...cont.)
Work Objective
Work Goal #2
Work Objectives
Work Objectives
The outline may help with making a task list…of what will
have to be done to achieve the respective objectives.
These elements should be read of a piece, with an internal
consistency.
A fictional example
The problem in this example is that an adult education pro-
gram is not reaching its full potential in the community.
There are many learners who are not accessing its services.
The retention rate of the existing learners is not sufficiently
high.
Work Goal #1: The adult education program needs to at-
tract more learners from the community.
• The program director will reach out to potential learners
from the local high schools.
• The program director will reach out to potential learners
from the churches in the community.
• The program director will reach out to various indus-
tries.
• The staff of the adult education program will work with
the public relations office to create a media campaign
to attract learners.
• The adult education program will participate in local
educational and job fairs to attract potential learners.
• The program will shore up its website. It will conduct as
social media campaign in multiple languages to reach
out to potential learners.
• The program will create a logo and branding campaign
to publicize the offerings of the adult education pro-
gram.
• The program will participate in various cultural events in
town to reach out to learners.
Work Goal #2: The adult education program needs to en-
sure the successful retention of all learners until they gradu-
ate by successfully taking the standardized GED exam or the
standardized EFL exam.
• The adult education program will overhaul its curriculum
to be more supportive of learners from a diversity of
learning styles.
• The adult education program will provide more learning
resources to bolster learner success.
• The adult education program will employ faculty from
various cultural, lingual, and ethnic backgrounds.
• The adult education program will institute an emergency
intervention for learners who may be thinking of drop-
ping out.
• The adult education program will set aside some mon-
eys to support learners in crisis to try to encourage their
retention.
• The adult education program will connect with communi-
ty resources to help learners who may benefit from their
services.
• The adult education program will bring in volunteers to
provide tutoring and English speaking practice sessions
for learners.
In the objectives above, there could be specific events listed.
There may be goals for raising the numbers of learners.
There may be a baseline set for the retention and what the
programmatic expectations are for improvement.
Conclusion
It may be beneficial to think through the issue or problem
being addressed. Then, it helps to define the main goals…
and how those work goals are supported by the related work
objectives.

21
Art of the Chase
By Shalin Hai-Jew
(cont. on p. 24)
Grant writing work involves the “art of the chase,” in the con-
text of the pursuit of external funding for endeavors in higher
education. (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Art of the Chase
This is not something that people enjoy per se. The work is
tough and precise. Deadlines are often hard ones. Those
who would pursue grant funding may just want the money
and not the work, and not the details (which makes grant
pursuit impossible…since grant funding is given in exchange
for them doing work that solves problems).
What are ways to chase well?
To chase grant funding well, it helps to do the following:
• Stay informed about the grants space. Understand
which grant funders are active, and truly understand
what their goals and objectives are.
• Develop a strategy for what grant funding to chase.
There are costs to putting grant applications together.
Local capabilities do not align with all grant NOFOs.
• Be clear about the changing nature of the local organiza-
tion or institution of higher education (IHE): its leader-
ship, its capabilities, its movers and shakers, and its
needs. All the prior factors play a role in who steps for-
ward to pursue grant funding and what is possible in the
world.
• Share information accurately with all participants. Ensure
that the grant pursuit process is an understandable and
transparent one.
• Support the design of work that is doable or feasible.
Work to avoid mission creep and project scope creep.
• Support the design of budgets that are real-world and set
up the project for success. Avoid padding. Use budget
contingencies where needed.
• Use high standards for research and data collection and
data analysis.
• Keep accurate notes. Document, document, document.
Contemporaneously.
• Stay in good practice. Focus on the various component
parts of a grant application, and ensure each is as strong
as possible. There is no substituting for operational ex-
perience.
• Learn constantly. Adjust. Self-correct as needed.
• Pre-prepare with some of the more static information
about the college and various programs and staffing.
Acquire the proper attestations to back up grant applica-
tions as well.
• Scope out the competition. Ensure that the local organi-
zation is putting its best work out into the world. Make
sure that the local organization can compete.
• Make sure that the local team puts out something of val-
ue to apply for the grant funding. Help the team be truly
competitive, not ill-informed and self-deserving and pas-
sive. Strengthen local capabilities in the real.
• Uphold the professional ethics of the field. Avoid corner-
cutting. Avoid fraud. Avoid having thumbs on the scale.
Avoid nepotism. Avoid any form of corruption, wherever
it comes from. The fallouts are too costly. And the
frauds really do not make anything better (even if some
administrators seem to think so).
• Learn to read the shifting politics and vagaries of admin-
istrators. They can cause all sorts of challenges for per-
fectly reasonable grant applications. Their misunder-
standings can magnify into the work space and cause all
sorts of challenges, too.

22
Grant Opportunities for Partner Organizations
By Shalin Hai-Jew
For a college, there are many potential partners: other col-
leges, other institutions of higher education, nonprofit organi-
zations, businesses, entities within the organization, and so
on.
Every so often, grants arise that may be of interest to a col-
league or partner. If there is no direct conflict or competition
between the organizations, it makes sense to share that
notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) with them. Whoever
takes on the grant application does the heavy lifting. There
is almost no cost to share information with another.
A mutual support approach
Setting up a dynamic of collegiality and mutual benefit can
be positive in the long run. If people are all on the lookout
for grant opportunities, possibilities will arise that one may
miss. Also, one may look at a grant NOFO and not see an
opportunity there, but from another perspective, that may
open up potential and insight.
It may be many years later when a project arises where a
collaboration is possible (if ever)…but that is not the point
per se. A healthy professional relationship between organi-
zations can be highly beneficial.
But not if partners are not truly en-
gaged
The above is all fine and good, but some colleagues are not
really interested in grant-seeking. They may just want the
political cover of having a partner at the college. They may
want someone to blame if they fail to submit information cor-
rectly (when they do their work wholly on their own).
Others want to delegate the work back if they “take” one’s
advice. A grant writer does not have standing to set up an
account to apply on others’ behalf. The idea is not to create
liabilities for the local institution of higher education.
There are community partners that may need grant help, too,
but their organizations may be seen as being politically moti-
vated, which is frowned upon by IHEs (which are supposed
to be neutral). A public college is also not in the business of
giving away resources. Grant work can be a serious time
sink.
The importance of social ties
It helps to be familiar with the particular target organization
and their principals (leadership, main staffers). It is im-
portant to know others’ interests and capabilities. It helps to
know their standards and quality of work. If one is able to
recommend them based on firsthand knowledge and experi-
ences, that would be optimal. (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Social Network
In some cases, the others may take a leading role. There
may still be a role for the college, even if it is a junior one.
Conclusion
The idea is that too much territoriality (or turfiness) can be
negative. (Figure 2) Expanding one’s professional social
network and treating others with generosity and support can
be a net positive.
Figure 2. Turfiness

23
Longevity of Relevance to Users as a Value-Add
By Shalin Hai-Jew
In many cases, grant funding is only for a short period of
time. In that action period, whether for a year or two, all the
foundational work needs to be completed.
Then there is the question of whether the grant-funded work
has (positive) impact in the world…and for how long. How
long does the work stay relevant into the future? The length
of time that a work is relevant can be part of the value-add in
a grant proposal.
This work explores the question of the longevity of a grant-
funded work’s relevance based on various factors. (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Future Vision
Longevity into the future…based on en-
vironmental factors
Various environmental factors affect the potential longevity of
the work in the grant-funded project. (Figure 2) How dy-
namic is the space? How contested is it? A roiling space
may mean that a work is contested and lessened in value.
Hot topics attract attention.
Figure 2. Longevity
How well funded is the space? The topic? The discipline?
The more well-funded work can be, the more others will enter
the space and perhaps contest what was created prior. [It is
not so common for similar projects to be funded by grant-
funders unless they were funded simultaneously, with com-
peting teams of researchers. Some corporations will seed
competing teams to see how solutions evolve differently and
which solution performs most competitively. In higher educa-
tion, such funding of multiple similar projects is less com-
mon.]
Ways to design longevity into a grant-
funded project
Some characteristics of the grant-funded work will also affect
potential longevity.
A work that solves a known problem through programming
and empirical research may have widespread implications for
many. The resulting solution, especially if it is backed up in
reality, can be accepted broadly by many. It is important to
formulate a work proposal in a grant application in a way that
it may be relevant to many. In other words, it is good to pose
hard questions and then answer those questions in methodo-
logically solid ways. There is nothing like solving a hard
problem to stave off the effects of time on a work.
The quality of work may benefit its longevity. Work that is
hard-to-achieve, ambitious, audacious, and relevant…can be
used for longer time spans. If the talent of the staff that actu-
alized the work is hard to replicate, that may make the work
have a longer shelf life.
Work that is publicized more broadly enable others to en-
gage the work…and for other researchers to perhaps build
on that work. It also helps if the work is citable, which is an
academic sort of word-of-mouth (WOM). Academic publish-
ing conveys a gravitas to the work that may expand its up-
take.
The original grant funders may pay to encourage others to
adopt and adapt the original work’s program, model, instru-
ment, or other output. There may be funds for staff from
elsewhere to be trained. Other grant funders may onboard to
provide “bridge funding” or “step-down funding” to transition
from a large grant to a braided funding model (with moneys
from multiple sources).

24
(Art of the Chase...cont. from p. 21) (Longevity of Relevance...cont.)
Fast uptake has been linked to broader dissemination and
broader adoption across professional social networks. Bridg-
es between various disciplines also enable a work to spread
farther and wider. Positive general WOM also raises adoption
and usage.
The technologies used also affect whether contents are acces-
sible into the future (per “future-proofing”). If a file cannot be
opened in a human-readable (and machine-readable) way,
then it becomes inaccessible in future time. (Figure 3)
Figure 3. Futuristic Landscape
Having multiple versions of a work may also extend its use.
For example, a grant-funded project may include a working
program, a user manual, a research instrument, a slideshow,
and some videos. Each of those elements may attract users
and result in a life of their own.
There can be sustainability plans, too, to ensure that a work is
“supportable” and “renewable” through the host organization’s
funding and administrative support.
Conclusion
A future is not more of the present per se. Changes over time
do not occur linearly but in more curvilinear and complex and
unpredictable ways. Whether a work is relevant, and how,
may be in question.
So much of human endeavors are lost to human memory and
human practice. Protecting and preserving grant-funded work
into the future can be critical for its survival.
• Work well with grant managers at every phase of the
grants process. Understand their professional needs in
an empathic and professional way.
The thrill of the chase
What makes grant writing thrilling?
• Hunting for grant funding opportunities can be thrilling.
There is something joyful about finding a possible match
between a grant funder and a local IHE applicant or ap-
plicant team.
• There is something about the demanding craft of grant
writing that thrills. The problem-solving can be difficult
but also an opportunity for learning. The creativity of
putting a grants package together that is compelling and
coherent and honest is exciting. It feels like solving a
puzzle. This thrill is inherent in the work.
• The fact that the funding is hard to attain but can be won
and be consequential to the local organization or IHE is
thrilling. There is something on the line, something to be
gained, something to be lost.
• Working with colleagues and others is also thrilling. Peo-
ple have their own perspectives and points of view. Un-
derstanding their ambitions and supporting their pursuit
of external funding can be highly rewarding.
• The yay or nay or maybe decision at the end of the grant
application process is also thrilling.
• There is excitement in seeing work unfold.
Conclusion
The work itself can be high pressure. It is absolutely highly
competitive. There are no sure things. The work is not risk-
free, but it is also not reward-free. There are wins to be had
now and again.

Academic Grant Pursuits Newsletter - October 2027

More Related Content

Similar to Academic Grant Pursuits Newsletter - October 2027 (20)

More from Shalin Hai-Jew (14)

Recently uploaded (20)

Academic Grant Pursuits Newsletter - October 2027