Grant Writing: Own the Night
By Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD (ret.), MPA
We own the night[i]
has become such an U.S. Military truism that it has its own acronym OTN.
Until recently, the history of warfare was that operations where usually avoided
at night. Technology has changed nighttime operations from using artificial
illumination (like flares) to using devices that take advantage of the low-light
environment. Moreover, technology is being employed to solve another age-old
military problem communications. As Kerner noted in Joint Technical
Architecture: Impact on Department of Defense Programs, In today's increasingly
dynamic battle space, systems that were never intended to work together are
often involved in aspects of the same mission, sometimes even deployed in the
same tent. In this environment, interoperability (i.e., the ability of systems
to exchange information and use common information) is at a premium, but it
rarely happens by accident.[ii]
Both the problems
of working at night and communicating with different units (or agencies) are
common problems for law enforcement organizations. Indeed, FBI data for law
enforcement officers killed in the line-of-duty reveals that between 1995 and
2004 over 65% of the deaths occurred between 2000 and 0800 hours. Moreover,
according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, more than 2/3 of sexual assaults
occur between 1800 and 0600 hours. Clearly, there is significant crime at night
and law enforcement officials need to look at technologies that improve their OTN.
In addition to
sharing the need to work at night, law enforcement and military personnel share
the problem of interoperability. Emergency situations often involve multiple
jurisdictions with different communication equipment and jargon. The National
Institute of Justice has produced several reports detailing both problems and
potential technological solutions.
Military Applications Law Enforcement Solutions
Whereas
technological solutions for nighttime operations and communications have been
developed for the U.S. Military, there has been significantly less technology
development directed solely at domestic law enforcement. A simply explanation
is that the military has a much larger budget than any single law enforcement
agency and therefore, money attracts and drives development of technology. It
follows that if the needs of local law enforcement could be combined, there
would be greater private sector motivation to produce technology aimed at
solving local law enforcement problems.
The purpose of
the Technology Transfer Programs (TTP) is to determine and combine the needs of
the more than 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies into a larger
purchasing pool therefore increasing the development of technology for law
enforcement; and, additionally, engendering uniformity across the nation. As an
example, between 1998 and 2002, the Counterdrug TTP delivered over 4800 pieces
of equipment to domestic law enforcement agencies. Simply, the larger
purchasing pool has, in part, created vendor motivation to produce technology
solutions for law enforcement.
Another economic
force behind some of the TTP success was the peace dividend from the Cold
War. Around the end of the cold war, the Office of National Drug Control Policy
(ONDCP) sought inter-agency agreements with research and development centers
that had heretofore been dedicated to the development of military technology.
Now, places like the U.S. Army Electronic Proving Ground and, U.S. Navy Space
and Naval Warfare Systems Center are involved in the search for law enforcement
technology solutions.
The National (or
federal) policy on determining needs is that those need are best determined by
the people closest to the problem. Indeed, the character and nature of American
law enforcement is that solutions forced down (from federal or state
authorities) are much less like to be accepted than solutions reached by means
of participation. Recognizing this, TTP determines the direction of
technological development based on input from regional experts.
Once the regional
experts agree on what types of technology would help solve local problems the
technologies are offered to the local agencies through a competitive grant
process.
The Last Bastion of Local
Application
Most grants from
the federal government are in some way funneled through the state. Moreover,
many grant applications are simply too complex and costly to administer for the
small municipal agency. Often, it would cost the agency more to apply and
administer the grant than the money received from the grant. Technology
transfer grants, in both the areas of counterdrug and homeland security, are set
up so that the local agency applies directly for the funding. Again, this is
because it is presumed that you know best what technological solutions would
work in your community.
Perhaps the first
and foremost clue in successfully applying is understanding how the technology
will solve your local problem. The funding agency is asking you to demonstrate
that the technology will improve your agencies operational capabilities; you
have the capability to integrate the technology into your current
infrastructure; and, the technology is not too complex for your organization to
support. So, you the applicant, must understand the technology and the local
problem and then draw a connection between the technology and your problem in
the grant application.
Technology
transfers grants are a competitive process. In some manner, the grant
applications are scored, and then the equipment is provided to the highest
scoring agencies. While this is somewhat a function of prioritizing the
allocation of limited resources (theres only so much to go around), it is also
a function of ensuring local needs are met. In other words, if your grant
application demonstrates you need the technology you are likely to be awarded.
Demonstrating need
Completing a
grant application as a means of demonstrating need is a much different mindset.
It places you, the writer, in the position of having to understand the
technology, your community, the national priorities and the nexus between the
three. Because the types of technology offered by this process changes, your
first step is to review the technologies offered. It is critical to understand
the capabilities and limitations of the equipment. At a minimum, look carefully
at the vendors specifications. What do they say the equipment should be used
for? A very successful applicant would likely pick up the telephone, call the
vendor and ask for the telephone number of a similar agency that is using the
equipment. How are they using it? What does it do? What cant it do?
Once you
understand the capabilities and limitations of the technology, you have a
greater understanding of the problems the technology can solve. Now,
specifically, what are your communitys problems? How will the technology solve
your, specific, local problem? Or, how will it enhance your operations? If you
can answer these questions you have fulfilled the first two parts of the grant
triad improving your operational capabilities and integrating the technology
into your operations.
National Priorities
Grants like the
TTP are a dual-edged sword. Yes, the focus is finding technological solutions
based on local needs, but the process is also used to further national
priorities. As an example, you can not apply for TTP in the arena of homeland
security if your community has not adopted the National Incident Management
System (NIMS). The furtherance of national priorities is not hidden in the
grant process. It is plainly among the questions on the application.
When you see
questions that dont seem to have a direct connection to the technology or are
clearly connected to a national priority, step-back and make sure you understand
the national priority. As an example, dont ignore or attempt a generic answer
to questions about your community and the National Response Plan; or your
community and the National Priorities. Many times the grant application will
have supplemental information that can help you understand the terms and
phrases, and thus the questions. Often, a greater understanding of the question
will lead to an easy answer you are probably in compliance or could be if you
clearly understood what was being asked.
It is a competitive process
Nearly all grant
applications are in some way a competitive process. As for the TTP, your
application is likely scored by a panel of subject matter experts. Points are
assigned by the expert based on your answer. The higher your overall score the
more likely you will be awarded the grant. There are five simple things you can
do to improve your application and thus your score:
- Write clearly:
With the advent of online grant applications, many applicants type their
answers directly into the application. Instead of typing directly into the
application, use word processing software to create a first draft. At a
minimum, you can now use the spell check feature. More importantly, you can
seek professional input about your application.
- Seek Feedback:
Once you have completed your draft answer you should seek feedback. At a
minimum, have a colleague read your responses. Your readers should be looking
at both your exposition and content. Yes, spelling counts. Reviewers are
human beings, obvious misspelling, missing words or extra words detract from
your presentation. A smart grant writer will seek professional advice. As an
example, ITT Industries has Margaret Stark, a Law Enforcement Grant
Consultant. She is willing and able to assist you without charge. You can
contact her at 704.540.0981.
- Answer the Question:
If you dont understand a word, term or question you should seek clarification
from the grantor. You can pick up the telephone and call them. Often, there
is supplemental material and/or a reference location you can consult.
Moreover, concentrate on answer the question at hand. As an example, there is
a difference in how technology might be used during a disaster as opposed to
how it might be incorporated into your routine operations. Sometimes, because
an agencys routine operations are emergency responses they tend to view the
two questions as the same. They are not. And, you must answer both while
drawing the connection between the technology, your local problems and
national priorities.
- Explore the Question:
The National Priorities is a reference to a specific document containing
specific recommendations. On the other hand, it can also mean a broad set of
national goals. You need to understand what is meant. Or, a needs
assessment is a specific activity. During your initial review of the grant
you may think you agency has never conducted a needs assessment. Yet, upon
further exploration you are likely to find that some larger (county, regional
or state) agency included your jurisdiction in an assessment. Dont answer a
question until you fully understand it.
- Be specific: If
a grant application asks you to answer a yes or no question and then to
provides you space to describe your answer, dont leave the explanation
blank. Your grant is going to be competitively scored against other grants.
A one word response is the minimum and will receive the minimum. As an
example, if you were asked, Does your jurisdiction contain any critical
infrastructure? Some would answer yes and then say we have numerous
bridges, highways and a single electrical generating plant. Other, more
savvy writers, would say, Highway 76 runs east/west through our jurisdiction
and is a primary hurricane evacuation route. There are four bridges (two over
highways, one over a rail line and one over a river). The Cheap Power Company
plant is located in the northeast area of our jurisdiction and provides power
to the 34K residence of our jurisdiction as well as substantial power to
surround jurisdictions. The second answer provides the grant reviewer with a
basis from which to assign a competitive score. While there are no
guarantees, you be the judge of which answer you would score higher.
As a final
thought, the grant writing process is not simply an administrative function. It
should be a core component of your agencys journey toward owning the night.
It would be a shame if someones safety was jeopardized because a few hours
werent spent on being a competitive writer.
About the Author:
Lieutenant Raymond E. Foster, LAPD
(ret.), MPA, is a regular contributor to PoliceOne.com. After his 24 years of
service, he retired to become a well-respected author and educator. His is the
author of books like Police Technology and Leadership: Texas Hold em
Style. Raymond can be contacted through the police writers website at
www.police-writers.com.
[i]
Bowman, T. (2001) Heat and light are silent allies for U.S. forces.
Baltimore Sun.
[ii]
Kerner, J. (2001) Joint Technical Architecture: Impact on Department of
Defense Programs. CrossTalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering,
October Issue
|