Relationships

Every grant writer and staff from a nonprofit should take time to meet each other in person. This may sound like ancient advice since social media lets people keep their distance. But, people build a better relationship not by throwing electrons at each other across cyberspace.

A personal visit does two things:

  • Gives the grant writer an opportunity to tour the facility and meet the people working and supporting the organization. The grant writer can also get to know the community being served.
  • The nonprofit has a chance to understand what the grant writer can provide and if there could be a relationship. In the end, it is the grant writer who can go away and the nonprofit is left with the results.

Just like everywhere, there are good and bad people. The internet has shown that bad people can find good people and vice versa. Meeting in person can help both sides figure out who is who.

If a grant writer and nonprofit staff cannot meet, at least do video conferencing. And, do it once a week because a monitor is not quite the same as face-to-face (again ancient concept that worked well in the past).

I think that the most important thing about grant writing are the relationships. These should include not only grant writers and nonprofits, but the people providing the funding or other resource.

Many foundations want a conversation. They want a relationship with the nonprofit staff and a grant writer should help bring the two together. A foundation should not be seen as a source of money, but people who want to invest in the nonprofit’s mission.

Really, all of this grant writing is not about the papers and processes, but about people talking to each other. I’ve been working on getting people money for years and it all comes down to relationships and shared views.

Communicate, write, and submit. But, talk about it with all the people involved.

That old argument: Self Publishing vs Traditional Publishing

 

I had another blog planned. However, I’ve been listening to self-publishing podcasts and traditional publishing came up as it usually does.

I think there is merit in both and some people agree since there are hybrid publishing systems combining the two. However, the biggest advantage to self-publishing is that a well written book has a venue toward being read. There is less chance in traditional publishing.

The merger of the publication industry narrowed the book selection process with fewer people doing the selecting and fewer venues for authors to sell in. Also, publishers took less risk by using just a few plot lines. Readers’ choices declined while publishers compensated by using marketing ploys like best seller lists that did not really list best sellers. I’ve heard many readers who selected a best seller and wondered why, after reading it, that it was ever published.

Agents are not at fault because they need to select books editors want. Editors must select what is quickly profitable or get fired. Corporate management will not adjust leaving the decision for change up to the reader.

My goal has always been to look elsewhere than best seller lists and the big five publishing companies for something to read. Going to the other end with self-publishing is usually not good, either. There are too many self-published books of poor quality. At least books traditionally published are readable.

I seek out small, independent presses. This is where I have found books rich in diversity and vivid story telling that could become classics. While hybrid publishing helps improve self-published authors, these presses are where a well written book has a chance to being read for a long time.

Given all of this, I’m likely to self-publish my books. I’d rather not, but it’s fruitless to pursue an agent because my books do not fit the standard plot line. I’d like to find an independent publisher, but they are hard to find in my genre (hint: become more recognized). Instead, I will professionally edit my books and put them out there. Maybe one day, someone on a podcast will talk about my book. I hope it’s a podcast I listen to.

What does a Nonprofit Need?

Before looking for grants, I find out exactly what a nonprofit will need to meet their mission goals.

Almost everyone thinks this means money. But, many times a nonprofit will need something else like volunteers. Or, they might need an in-kind donation like equipment or a used vehicle. Maybe, the people at a nonprofit just need someone to talk to.

I try to always be available and listen to staff members talk about future goals for the organization or how they deal with problems. I try not to tell them what they should do but help them figure it out as best as I could. As a volunteer, it doesn’t cost them anything and I don’t mind.

It’s good that there are other people better than me who can find in-kind resources. It helps when the nonprofit staff have a relationship with local businesses and vendors. Nonprofits should work on these relationships in case they need something one day that they don’t have the money to buy.

My ability to find volunteers is not that good, either. Unless I volunteer my wife. Nonprofit staff should develop a relationship with their local community. Get on neighborhood email lists, speak before church groups, or simply go outside and yell for help.

Successful nonprofits communicate regularly with local communities, churches, businesses, social clubs, other nonprofits, and individuals. They build partnerships and share resources as much as possible. They look for other means to solve problems and promote the mission.

Nonprofits and grant writers should not always look for money. There are other ways to get help and usually people are there to help.

Quote: Hope dies last (Studs Terkel)

Outlining for Fiction

I’ve been writing short stories for many years. Now, I’m writing novels, hopefully to publish one soon. Whether writing short or long fiction, I learned not to write an outline.

When I’m ready to write, I had already been thinking about the story for so long that I don’t need to write an outline. I think not writing an outline is what most fiction writers do.

Some writers just start writing something and some say they start with an idea only. But, I think most are like me and have thought about the story enough that they have the story outlined in their thoughts. Except, soon after I start on a story, about when I discover the main character and plot, I write the ending.

This becomes my outline. A start and a finish with only the middle to be written. Fairly simple process, like coming to a fork in the road and knowing which one to take. Yet, by the time I’ve completed the middle, a lot of times my ending and beginning have changed and taken the other fork in the road. Sometimes, even my ending is better as the beginning and vice versa.

My characters are at fault. While they have not entirely changed things, they tweaked enough to make the story start and end as they wanted it. I let them since it is their story, anyway.

I’ve tried writing a story without first writing the ending and I’ve ended up with a story without an ending. Maybe an outline would solve this issue. The problem is I wouldn’t follow an outline if I wrote it.

At some early point in writing the outline, I would be writing the story.

Outlines can be good for a lot of things, such as writing business plans or a technical manual. Even some fiction writers do well with an outline. Writers should not get lost in outlines. Do the minimum and go write.

What really matters is the story.

Quote:  A fork in the road. Classic cliché. Most people write about how they don’t want to go left (or right). It is better to write how it is good to go in the other direction. Granted, the choice may lead the traveler off a cliff, but it was good up to that point.