2.1 Introduction

“There are no secrets to success. It is the result of preparation, hard work and learning from failure.” ~ Colin Powell

 

Funding entities issue requests for proposals (RFPs) to obtain submissions that align with their strategic goals while ensuring quality, cost efficiency, and risk mitigation. RFPs are used for specific projects and provide a structured framework to help applicants provide the parameters of the services that are needed. Because grants are competitive, evaluation methods become an important part of the process. Chapter 2 provides insight regarding the purpose of RFPs, criteria for evaluation, and tips for deciphering requirements.

2.2 Understanding RFPs

The primary purpose of an RFP is to outline the project’s requirements, goals, and evaluation criteria. This process enables potential applicants to submit detailed proposals that address the funder’s needs. This process fosters competition, allowing the funding organization to compare various solutions and select the most suitable one based on factors such as quality, cost, and applicant’s expertise. Below is a list of items that should be demonstrated by the grant writer in response to the request.

Identify the Best Solution

Grantors or funders are looking to find the most effective and efficient solution to meet an identified need or gap in service, whether it is for a product, service, or project. Responding to a proposal without understanding the problem at hand will result in coming up short.

Cost Effectiveness

Funders or grantors seek proposals that offer value for money to maximize return on investment. Writing a proposal that pays attention to cost-effectiveness will help it stand out. However, it is important to balance quality and price to ensure a good return on investment.

Risk mitigation: Funders want to minimize risk, so they will select an applicant who has proven experience, reliability, and the capacity to deliver on time and within budget.

Innovation: Funders may be seeking fresh ideas or innovative approaches to solve challenges, especially in competitive or rapidly changing industries. Finding ways to demonstrate creativity in a clear example helps funders follow the idea at hand.

Compliance and standards: Demonstrating how the applicant can meet the regulatory requirements, internal standards, or other criteria will ensure that the solution aligns with legal or organizational expectations. Familiarity with the funder’s requirements and organization will help to create cohesion between compliance and innovation, making the proposal more attractive.

Partnerships and long-term relationships: In some cases, funders are looking to build ongoing relationships with applicants, especially for large-scale or multi-phase projects. To connect with funders on a long-term level, it is important to understand the backbone of the granting entity. Taking time to study their values and goals will make it easier to align the applicant’s proposal to the requirements of the funder.

2.3 Criteria for Evaluating RFPs

When writing a successful proposal, it is helpful to think about how it will be evaluated by the funder and its grant-review panel. There are many different aspects that are taken into consideration. A checklist, along with questions to guide the development of the proposal, are included below.

Requirements and solution: Did the applicant sufficiently address the information requested in each section? Is the language in the proposal speaking to the solution? Does the proposal use examples that show past success and a clear understanding of the problem?

Sustainability: How will the organization carry the project forward after the grant period has ended, if applicable? Will it reach beyond the community that is being served, and can it be reproduced? Will people learn a skill that will last for years or a skill that can be passed down to others?

Qualifications and experience: Does the plan highlight the qualifications of the current staff or new staff that might be needed to fulfill portions of the work? Does it show special certifications that the organization has that are required to complete the deliverables? Are similar experiences and successes demonstrated in the proposal?

Financial structure and budget: Is the cost breakdown transparent? Is the financial structure competitive and does it clearly lay out how all funding will be spent?

Measurable deliverables and evaluation: Are the deliverables measurable? Will both quantitative and qualitative data be collected and communicated as part of the evaluation process? How will the grant be evaluated? Will the evaluators be hired, eliminating possible bias? Do you have a team in mind to evaluate the grant process and outcomes?

2.4 Tips for Deciphering RFP Requirements

So often, proposals are turned down due to oversight or a small error. Assuming that funders will understand what is meant can have devastating results. Much work goes into preparing to write a response to an RFP. Stakeholders are called in to gain favor for the project, research committees spend months gathering information and data, and hours are spent in committees dreaming of innovative solutions. Few mention the blood, sweat, and tears that go into the preparation that is completed prior to even submitting a proposal for consideration.

The competition is fierce, and the applicants are passionate about why they should win the bid. It is a shame, but the fact is that many grants are lost due to common errors like format and failure to pay attention to directions. Action to avoid dismissal should be taken in the earliest stages. Prior to writing the proposal, it is important to read the RFP multiple times and identify the scope, noting key parts that will need attention. The scope of work (SOW) outlines the objectives and associated activities, time frame, responsible parties, and deliverables of the project. When looking at the RFP, look closely at the mandatory requirements that, if missing, will disqualify the proposal, along with the optional or preferred items.

After the first draft is written, use the following checklist as a tool prior to your final revision. Items to include will be in alignment to the evaluation criteria, deadlines, industry standards, legal and technical requirements, format, and study of the organization issuing the RFP.

2.5 Examples of Successful RFP Responses

Actual examples of proposals are difficult to find due to confidentiality, yet there are resources that provide samples and insight into winning RFPs. Reaching out to grantees who have a currently funded project to ask if they would be willing to share their experience is a great idea. Further, examining these case studies will give readers an idea of the importance of structure, clarity, and innovation.

1. DemandStar’s sample of a winning RFP:^[2] Offers a sample of a winning government proposal and useful for understanding structure and content. The site can be found at: https://network.demandstar.com/supplier-support/sample-of-winning-rfp/
2. Responsive’s curated RFP examples:^[3] Provides 33 RFP examples across various industries, highlighting unique and effective practices.
3. OpenAsset’s analysis of winning RFP responses:^[4] Discusses real-life examples of successful RFP responses, detailing what made them effective.
4. Bidsketch’s proposal templates and samples:^[5] Offers templates and insights into what makes a winning proposal based on research from over 25,000 proposals.
5. Storydoc’s winning RFP examples:^[6] Features RFP examples across different industries, analyzing what makes each effective and techniques to apply these principles.

2.6 Conclusion

Understanding how grant reviewers evaluate RFPs takes away some of the mystery. This allows applicants the opportunity to focus on the specific needs of their organization, finding areas where the services they have to offer align. Awardees of RFPs pay attention to the details and are able to paint a picture that is innovative and captivating. Concise writing and word choice will ensure the crafted proposal will be read, and adherence to the format and specifications keep the candidates in the pool of consideration.

2.7 Learning Activities