HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_SPCS_11.11.2015Notice of Meeting for the
Strategic Partnerships for Community Services Advisory Board
of the City of Georgetown
November 11, 2015 at 5:00 PM
at City Hall, Main Floor Conference Room, 113 E. 8th Street, Georgetown, Texas 78626
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you
require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable
assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City at least four
(4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for
additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Legislative Regular Agenda
A Call to Order--C.O. Smith, SPCS Advisory Board Chair
B Roll Call --C.O. Smith, SPCS Advisory Board Chair
C Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes from the September 9, 2015 SPCS Advisory
Board Meeting—Séverine Cushing, SPCS Advisory Board Secretary
D Report from Suzy Pukys regarding the results of the Survey that was provided to all of the agencies that
applied for funding with the Common Grant Application either through the City of Georgetown, the
Georgetown Healthcare Foundation, United Way of Williamson County, or Seeds of Strength to assess
the use of the Common Grant Application and Program Abstracts—Suzy Pukys, SPCS Vice-Chair
E Report from Suzy Pukys regarding proposed changes to the Common Grant Application utilized by the
City of Georgetown, the Georgetown Healthcare Foundation, United Way of Williamson County, or
Seeds of Strength as an outcome of results and comments received from the Survey outlined in Item D—
Suzy Pukys, SPCS Vice-Chair
F Discussion and possible action regarding possible revisions and/or updates to the Common Grant
Application, Program Abstract, and Evaluation Rubric for the City of Georgetown for use during the FY
2016-17 Grant Application Cycle. --C.O. Smith, Board Chair
G Discussion and possible action regarding proposed revisions to Bylaws related to meeting schedule—C.O.
Smith, Board Chair
H Discussion and possible action on future meetings and topics—C.O. Smith, SPCS Advisory Board Chair
I Adjourn
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, Shelley Nowling, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times,
on the ______ day of __________________, 2015, at __________, and remained so posted for at least 72
continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
____________________________________
Shelley Nowling, City Secretary
Page 1 of 54
City of Georgetown, Texas
Strategic Partnerships for Community Services
November 11, 2015
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes from the September 9, 2015 SPCS
Advisory Board Meeting—Séverine Cushing, SPCS Advisory Board Secretary
ITEM SUMMARY:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Minutes for the September 9, 2015 SPCS Advisory Board Meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
SUBMITTED BY:
Shirley J. Rinn for Severine Cushing, SPCS Advisory Board Secretary
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
DRAFT Minutes Backup Material
Page 2 of 54
SPCS Advisory Board Minutes
September 9, 2015
Page 1 of 3
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Strategic Partnerships for Community Services Advisory Board
City of Georgetown, Texas
September 9, 2015
The Strategic Partnerships for Community Services Advisory Board of the City of
Georgetown, Texas, met on Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 6:30 p.m.
Members Present: C.O. Smith, Suzy Pukys, Severine Cushing, and Barbara Rauch
Members Absent: Larry Gambone
Staff Present: Shirley J. Rinn, Executive Assistant to the City Manager
MINUTES
Legislative Regular Agenda
A Call to Order--C.O. Smith, SPCS Advisory Board Chair
The Meeting was called to Order at 6:32 p.m.
B Roll Call --C.O. Smith, SPCS Advisory Board Chair
A Quorum of the Board was present for the meeting, including: C.O. Smith, Suzy
Pukys, Severine Cushing, and Barbara Rauch
C Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes from the July 8, 2015 and
July 29, 2015 SPCS Advisory Board Meetings—Séverine Cushing, SPCS Advisory Board
Secretary
Motion by Pukys, second by Cushing to approve the Minutes from the July 8, 2015
and July 29, 2015 SPCS Advisory Board Meetings . Approved 4-0 (Gambone Absent)
D. Report from Suzy Pukys regarding the Survey that is being provided to all of the
agencies that applied for funding with the Common Grant Application either through
the City of Georgetown, the Georgetown Healthcare Foundation, United Way of
Williamson County, or Seeds of Strength to assess the use of the Common Grant
Application and Program Abstracts—Suzy Pukys, SPCS Vice-Chair
Page 3 of 54
SPCS Advisory Board Minutes
September 9, 2015
Page 2 of 3
Pukys provided a report to let the Advisory Board that the Regional Funder’s Group
is doing a Survey to all of the applicants for Feedback regarding the Grant
Application and process. Once the survey results are compiled, Suzy will provide an
update to the Advisory Board.
E. Discussion and possible action regarding the reporting/auditing requirements to be
included in the Funding Agreements for the agencies who will be receiving Strategic
Partnership Grant Funding for FY 2015-16--C.O. Smith, Board Chair
The Advisory Board discussed revising the reporting/auditing requirements that
should be included in the Funding Agreements.
Motion by Rauch, second by Cushing to make revisions to Section 3C. of the Funding
Agreements as outlined below:
3. As consideration for the funds to be paid by the City, LSCC agrees to provide the
following as a condition of this Agreement:
C. provide a progress report to the City on or before March 15, 2015, which include
progress meeting service objectives, the total number of persons and agencies
directly served, and the number of Georgetown citizens served; and
C. provide a final report to the City on or before October 31, 20__ that specifically
identifies and includes:
1. how the City’s funds were used;
2. an analysis of the goal set forth in the evaluation section of the grant application,
including outputs and outcomes;
3. the total numbers served and the total number Georgetown citizens served; and
Approved 4-0 (Gambone Absent)
Motion by Cushing, second by Pukys to have the agencies provide a final report
on October 31st of each year instead of a progress report on March 15th of each
year. Approved 4-0 (Gambone Absent)
F. Discussion and possible action on future meetings and topics—C.O. Smith, SPCS
Advisory Board Chair
The Advisory Board discussed having a meeting in late October after Survey related
to the Common Grant Application is completed.
Page 4 of 54
SPCS Advisory Board Minutes
September 9, 2015
Page 3 of 3
D. Adjourn
Motion by Pukys, second by Rauch to Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m.
Attest:
Severine Cushing, Board Secretary C.O. Smith, Board Chair
Page 5 of 54
City of Georgetown, Texas
Strategic Partnerships for Community Services
November 11, 2015
SUBJECT:
Report from Suzy Pukys regarding the results of the Survey that was provided to all of the
agencies that applied for funding with the Common Grant Application either through the City of
Georgetown, the Georgetown Healthcare Foundation, United Way of Williamson County, or
Seeds of Strength to assess the use of the Common Grant Application and Program Abstracts—
Suzy Pukys, SPCS Vice-Chair
ITEM SUMMARY:
Suzy Pukys will provide a report to the Board regarding the results of the Survey that was
provided to all of the agencies that applied for funding with the Common Grant Application either
through the City of Georgetown, the Georgetown Healthcare Foundation, United Way of
Williamson County, or Seeds of Strength to assess the use of the Common Grant Application and
Program Abstracts.
ATTACHMENT:
1. Survey Results
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Shirley J. Rinn on behalf of Suzy Pukys, SPCS Vice-Chair
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Survey Results Backup Material
Page 6 of 54
61.90%26
38.10%16
80.95%34
19.05%8
Q1 Did you use the Common Application
for two or more grant applications?
Answered: 42 Skipped: 0
Total 42
Q2 Did you receive funding from any of the
organizations using the application?
Answered: 42 Skipped: 0
Total 42
Q3 The Common Application reduced my
yes
no
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
yes
no
yes
no
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
yes
no
1 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 7 of 54
2.44%1
36.59%15
36.59%15
14.63%6
9.76%4
grant writing workload.
Answered: 41 Skipped: 1
Total 41
#Comments Date
1 Having consistent language in all applications is very beneficial, especially for those Executive Directors who do not
have the resources to hire specific RD Staff whose skillsets lend themselves easily to this. For those of us who wear
many "hats" keeping this as simple as possible is nice!
9/18/2015 8:48 AM
2 The application seemed repetitive in some areas. It was difficult to tell the story, and it did not ask the questions in
clear manner. The committee punished applicants for information that was not asked for on the application. The
committees need to either assist with the application questions or only rate organizations on the information asked for
in the application. The application was a one size fits all when all organizations do not fit. It is difficult to compare a
non-profit that has been around for 20+ years and has dozens of employees to an organization that has only been
around a couple of years and is volunteer run or has only a couple of employees. I feel as though a common
application could be beneficial if used correctly. Only filling out one application for multiple grants is a definite time
saver, but not at the detriment of the funding to organizations because of question clarity and thoroughness.
9/17/2015 8:34 AM
3 This was my first submission, so I have no basis of comparison.9/17/2015 5:08 AM
4 Maybe it's a first year problem, but each agency seemed to focus on the supplementary applications pretty heavily.
Could there be a way to include the agency specific information within the format of the Common Application?
9/16/2015 10:55 AM
5 The Common Application made the process of writing the proposal fairly stress free. It is a good, concise layout.9/15/2015 6:07 PM
6 Too much repetition. Could be streamlined.9/15/2015 11:45 AM
7 My experience with the grant came at a time when I needed to step in with grant writing when it had not been a part
of my job for a few years. So, it added to my workload, but was much easier than many grants I had written in the past.
9/15/2015 10:18 AM
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neither Agree
nor Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neither Agree nor Disagree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
2 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 8 of 54
2.63%1
31.58%12
36.84%14
8 It was helpful to input the organizational information only once and in the same format.9/15/2015 9:58 AM
9 I didn't perceive any significant difference...grantors still had their own desired information so there wasn't really much
if any of a time savings
9/15/2015 9:57 AM
10 Although the application did not reduce my grant writing workload, the organizational overview questions were a good
exercise in looking at our organization's strategy and coordination to evaluate strengths and weaknesses.
9/11/2015 9:28 AM
11 The Common Application was a lot of work to complete. I do feel that it was a good process to go through, and it
helped us to present our thoughts in a cohesive, persuasive manner.
9/10/2015 4:06 PM
12 I did notice slight differences in the Common Application between the funding organizations and sometimes our
request for funding was slightly different, but overall it made the grant writing season much less time consuming.
9/10/2015 3:23 PM
13 Didn't use it but would find it helpful.9/10/2015 12:09 PM
14 Have no idea what you are talking about. Made one application. Application form was restrictive.9/10/2015 10:22 AM
15 This was the most extensive grant application I have ever encountered.9/10/2015 10:10 AM
16 Yes, to the extent that I was able to cut and paste from one application into the other. The information required was
slightly different from other grant applications, so the original Common Application required data collection and a
written narrative that had not been done previously.
9/10/2015 9:43 AM
17 It would reduce the load if I was requesting for the same thing; however, I used it for two applications that were
different in scope.
9/10/2015 9:27 AM
Q4 How would you rate the Organization
Background and Program Request
Information sections with regard to their
level of difficulty?
Answered: 38 Skipped: 4
Extremely
simple
Somewhat simple
Neither simple
nor difficult
Somewhat
difficult
Extremely
difficult
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
Extremely simple
Somewhat simple
Neither simple nor difficult
3 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 9 of 54
21.05%8
7.89%3
Total 38
#Comments Date
1 This is probably this most difficult, but most valuable, part of the application. It takes a significant amount of time and
thought, but once it's done it is useful across many applications, not just the common application.
10/5/2015 1:18 PM
2 It was a new application/grant and therefore I was not familiar with the format and some of the language.9/17/2015 3:13 PM
3 This was too one size fits all. A large organization will have much more data and facts than a smaller organization.9/17/2015 8:42 AM
4 Very straight forward.9/17/2015 5:14 AM
5 I thought it was lengthy, in some degree. Asking for the same information in different format more than one time in the
application.
9/16/2015 11:43 AM
6 The additional description or clarification of the questions was useful.9/15/2015 3:42 PM
7 It's difficult to stay within the word count 9/15/2015 3:38 PM
8 The difficulty arises form the character limitation not the logistics ...lots of editing at times to state what needs to be
stated within the character constraints
9/15/2015 10:03 AM
9 The Organization Background section is quite intensive, so I wouldn't rate it as simple. However, once it is complete it
is highly useful across many applications, and not just the common applications.
9/14/2015 3:12 PM
10 I think it depends on how clear the organization's organizational vision is and how clear their program vision is.
Program was extremely simple because our program is so rounded out. We are in a period of growth, so
organizational background was more difficult to express.
9/11/2015 9:32 AM
11 The Wilco Common Application asks similar questions in the organization background section to those in the St.
David's Foundation application. As a grantee of the St. David's Foundation, we are accustome to these types of
questions.
9/10/2015 6:03 PM
12 How about sending the form so I can answer 9/10/2015 10:26 AM
13 It would be helpful under "organizational information" if there were word or character counts 1st page of common app).9/10/2015 10:17 AM
14 Straight forward request for information that was generally available in the annual report for the organization.9/10/2015 10:09 AM
15 Because the requests we were making were substantial, the detail level was appropriate. The level of detail would
seem like a bit much for a small request.
9/10/2015 9:32 AM
Q5 How would you rate the Organization
Background and Program Request
Information sections with regard to their
clarity of questions and instructions?
Answered: 38 Skipped: 4
Somewhat difficult
Extremely difficult
4 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 10 of 54
50.00%19
36.84%14
2.63%1
7.89%3
2.63%1
Total 38
#Comments Date
1 To be honest, this (and other questions on this page) are relative to the individual. Some ED's (including myself) are
more program orientated but have to take on grant writing responsibilities. I feel the questions are clear, but can see
why some organizations, without the staffing resources, might struggle with this whole process (just my 2 cents)
9/18/2015 9:47 AM
2 It was a new application/grant and therefore I was not familiar with the format and some of the language.9/17/2015 3:13 PM
3 The questions were not clear. They could have been interpreted too many ways. The questions need to be concise
and to the point.
9/17/2015 8:42 AM
4 As mentioned above, I was grateful for the elaboration on the questions provided.9/15/2015 3:42 PM
5 I wasn't crazy about the how do you cooperate, collaborate, etc. question. It was hard to make a distinction between
each despite the definitions that were provided, so I tried to provide examples of different relationships we have in the
community to demonstrate our partnerships.
9/11/2015 9:32 AM
6 How about sending the form so I can answer 9/10/2015 10:26 AM
7 Question #3: What are your organization's capabilities for doing this? The explanation asks for information that we
understand and discuss all the time within our organization (sometimes in the form of a SWOT analysis during
strategic planning.) That said, we wanted to be very cautious about a public revelation of these discussions that might
be interpreted out of context. This is a very introspective discussion question. Seems like the question is redundant if
you look at other questions in the Program Request Information.
9/10/2015 10:09 AM
8 Most was very clear. The question related to program/unit cost is difficult to answer with the way our organization is
set up and how we measure things. It's not as cut and dried as the question implies. Having an example to follow on
the Logic Model section would be helpful.
9/10/2015 9:32 AM
Q6 How would you rate the Organization
Clear
Somewhat clear
Neither clear
nor unclear
Somewhat
unclear
Unclear
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
Clear
Somewhat clear
Neither clear nor unclear
Somewhat unclear
Unclear
5 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 11 of 54
76.32%29
15.79%6
2.63%1
2.63%1
2.63%1
Background and Program Request
Information sections with regard to their
relevance?
Answered: 38 Skipped: 4
Total 38
#Comments Date
1 The questions were not specific enough to be either relevant or irrelevant. It was a matter of interpretation.9/17/2015 8:42 AM
2 I thought that since, many non profit organizations do not hire professional grant writers or some have not had
experience with grants, that it was lengthy and time consuming to write. The person keeping the books for the
organization, our only part time paid staff member, had to give us time to assist with the financial page. I did like that
the new application allowed for administrative cost in the grant.
9/16/2015 11:43 AM
3 I appreciated the ability to give a big picture idea of where our organization is and then be able to focus in on how our
request for funding of the specific program or project fit into that picture.
9/15/2015 3:42 PM
4 Duplication 9/11/2015 11:09 AM
5 If I remember - not very good 9/10/2015 10:26 AM
6 Every non-profit is at its own stage of introspection and re-engineering. Sometimes, the information requested by
grantors seems to imply a regimented process for board development and strategic planning that doesn't align with the
organization's unique processes and strategic planning objectives.
9/10/2015 10:09 AM
Q7 How would you rate the Organization
Relevant
Somewhat
relevant
Neither
relevant nor...
Somewhat
irrelevant
Irrelevant
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
Relevant
Somewhat relevant
Neither relevant nor irrelevant
Somewhat irrelevant
Irrelevant
6 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 12 of 54
27.03%10
40.54%15
29.73%11
2.70%1
Background and Program Request
Information sections with regard to their
redundancy?
Answered: 37 Skipped: 5
Total 37
#Comments Date
1 It seemed the same question was asked with different wording multiple times.9/17/2015 8:42 AM
2 It really depends on the structure of the organization and how many different programs an organization runs.9/15/2015 3:42 PM
3 Two apps asking repeating questions 9/11/2015 11:09 AM
4 This application seems somewhat complex for smaller grant requests. Once a grantor is familiar with our program, I
doubt that the Organization Background will receive any attention.
9/10/2015 4:21 PM
5 How about sending the form so I can answer 9/10/2015 10:26 AM
Q8 How would you rate the Organization
Background and Program Request
Information sections with regard to their
character limits?
Answered: 36 Skipped: 6
Not redundant
Neutral
Somewhat
redundant
Extremely
redundant
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
Not redundant
Neutral
Somewhat redundant
Extremely redundant
7 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 13 of 54
0.00%0
2.78%1
72.22%26
13.89%5
11.11%4
Total 36
#Comments Date
1 The character limits have helped us be more thought-filled in our responses. This has helped us get to the heart of
what we do and our request.
9/18/2015 11:35 AM
2 If you want to hear the story of a non-profit then the character limits need to be higher. So much information has to be
left out otherwise.
9/17/2015 8:42 AM
3 The limits were helpful in keeping the information brief and to the point.9/17/2015 5:14 AM
4 Because the program does not give ongoing character counts, each section must be separately saved in Word and
pasted in. I don't think you can print the whole application, so if you make last minute changes you may not have an
accurate record.
9/16/2015 10:59 AM
5 There were a couple of answer where I would have liked more characters, but it did not change the meaning of the
answers. It just required a bit of "word-smithing" to meet the limit.
9/15/2015 3:42 PM
6 But not by much 9/15/2015 3:38 PM
7 This relates to some sections not all 9/15/2015 10:03 AM
8 I found the structure of the evaluation section extremely limiting. The program for which I was applying had more than
one goal, yet the application only allowed one goal to be entered. The funding organization suggested that I create
additional pages with the same questions as needed, but after I submitted the application with additional pages, the
additional pages seemed to have gotten lost. It would be most helpful if additional pages/goals/objectives were
included, even if not required.
9/10/2015 6:03 PM
9 This was actually pretty helpful to help us present our information in a clear and concise manner.9/10/2015 4:21 PM
10 I remember that!!9/10/2015 10:26 AM
Far too many
characters
Too many
characters
About right
Too few
characters
Far too few
characters
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
Far too many characters
Too many characters
About right
Too few characters
Far too few characters
8 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 14 of 54
18.42%7
78.95%30
2.63%1
11 Some of the character limits under Organizational Background &Program Request Information were a little short and
we felt that we were unable to fully answer the question.
9/10/2015 10:17 AM
Q9 Were the number of questions in the
Organization Background section regarding
the organization and strategy...
Answered: 38 Skipped: 4
Total 38
#Comments Date
1 The same amount of information could have been obtained with half the questions.9/17/2015 8:42 AM
2 Perhaps one general statement about the organization would suffice.9/16/2015 11:43 AM
3 Too constrained if I remember correctly 9/10/2015 10:26 AM
Q10 Were the number of questions
pertaining to the specific project in the
Program Request Information section...
Answered: 38 Skipped: 4
Too many
About right
Too few
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
Too many
About right
Too few
9 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 15 of 54
7.89%3
86.84%33
5.26%2
Total 38
Q11 What recommendations do you have to
improve the Evaluation section?
Answered: 26 Skipped: 16
#Responses Date
1 I have completed several Evaluation sections such as this before, but I think for folks who are not familar with how this
format works perhaps providing an example would be useful.
10/5/2015 1:20 PM
2 none 9/18/2015 11:37 AM
3 Maybe some annual/hands on training provided to help staff understand and picture what outcomes, outputs, and
activities look like? For some individuals, these can be difficult to conceptualize.
9/18/2015 9:52 AM
4 none 9/17/2015 3:15 PM
5 This section was good 9/17/2015 8:45 AM
6 None 9/17/2015 5:16 AM
7 not so long 9/16/2015 11:45 AM
8 Logic model can be lengthy and perhaps overly detailed for some goals.9/16/2015 11:01 AM
9 I don't have any.9/15/2015 3:47 PM
10 N/A 9/15/2015 12:46 PM
11 none 9/15/2015 12:32 PM
12 Seems redundant. Most of the evaluation had already been discussed in previous sections.9/15/2015 11:54 AM
13 Questions are approrpiate and concise as is 9/15/2015 10:09 AM
14 None, I feel it was pretty effective.9/15/2015 9:28 AM
15 none, very clear 9/14/2015 3:49 PM
Too many
About right
Too few
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices Responses
Too many
About right
Too few
10 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 16 of 54
16 Have a limited comment section where footnotes/clarifications can be entered 9/11/2015 11:52 AM
17 none 9/11/2015 9:32 AM
18 As stated previously, it would be helpful if additional pages where added so that we could easily include multiple goals.9/10/2015 6:05 PM
19 I thought the Evaluation section was clear and information requested was pertinent.9/10/2015 5:29 PM
20 None 9/10/2015 12:36 PM
21 How about sending the form so I can answer 9/10/2015 10:27 AM
22 If an organization has multiple goals, they are unable to cut and paste to add new goals because the document was
locked. If possible, it would be helpful to have a drop down menu or something to that effect to be able to add more
than 1 goal.
9/10/2015 10:20 AM
23 Specify that you are looking for short-term program outcomes.9/10/2015 10:13 AM
24 There were a couple of questions that seemed to ask the same thing in this section.9/10/2015 9:50 AM
25 Higher character limit 9/10/2015 9:40 AM
26 It's not really clear if you want us to list more than one goal, with related activities, outputs, etc., or just one goal that
covers everything you're trying to accomplish.
9/10/2015 9:35 AM
Q12 What recommendations do you have to
improve the Budget/Budget Narrative
section?
Answered: 29 Skipped: 13
#Responses Date
1 N/A 10/5/2015 1:20 PM
2 none 9/18/2015 11:37 AM
3 None 9/18/2015 9:52 AM
4 none 9/17/2015 3:15 PM
5 None 9/17/2015 8:45 AM
6 None 9/17/2015 5:16 AM
7 It was redundant, asking for budget in two different parts.9/16/2015 11:45 AM
8 N/A 9/16/2015 11:01 AM
9 This was the only section I wish you would revise. It is a bit confusing.9/15/2015 6:09 PM
10 I would like more clarity in the Budget Template and Narrative section on whether the entire program/project budget is
being sought or if it should be the budget of proposed funding request usage.
9/15/2015 3:47 PM
11 N/A 9/15/2015 12:46 PM
12 none 9/15/2015 12:32 PM
13 na 9/15/2015 11:54 AM
14 It seems workable as is 9/15/2015 10:09 AM
15 Some of this is in the combined application. Delete duplications.9/15/2015 10:04 AM
16 None.9/15/2015 9:28 AM
17 none, very user friendly 9/14/2015 3:49 PM
18 Sometimes it can be time consuming to match our budget line items with the items in this section.9/14/2015 3:29 PM
19 add additional "other" line 9/11/2015 11:52 AM
20 none 9/11/2015 9:32 AM
11 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 17 of 54
21 None 9/10/2015 6:05 PM
22 I thought this section was appropriate.9/10/2015 5:29 PM
23 None 9/10/2015 12:36 PM
24 How about send the form so I can answer 9/10/2015 10:27 AM
25 n/a 9/10/2015 10:20 AM
26 Rather than asking a question about cash reserves, could there be a question about the organization's Balance Sheet
for the last month of its most recent fiscal year?
9/10/2015 10:13 AM
27 fine 9/10/2015 9:50 AM
28 Higher character limit 9/10/2015 9:40 AM
29 It's a little too open to interpretation. Are you asking for the names of sources, or types of sources, etc.9/10/2015 9:35 AM
Q13 Was answering these application
questions of any ancillary benefit to you or
your organization, e.g., helpful in planning,
capacity-building, reviewing your strategic
plan, etc.?
Answered: 33 Skipped: 9
#Responses Date
1 Yes, especially the Organization Background section.10/5/2015 1:20 PM
2 No 9/28/2015 12:41 PM
3 The questions helped train a new staff member in understanding some of our processes.9/18/2015 11:37 AM
4 Not particularly but maybe I need to think about doing that in the future!9/18/2015 9:52 AM
5 yes 9/17/2015 3:15 PM
6 No, it actually made it more complicated.9/17/2015 8:45 AM
7 Yes, it brought focus and clarity to the request.9/17/2015 5:16 AM
8 somewhat 9/16/2015 11:45 AM
9 Yes.9/16/2015 11:01 AM
10 Yes. With a specific, well-thought out strategic plan the application questions were much less complicated to answer.9/15/2015 3:47 PM
11 Yes, this process helped us to better articulate our future strategic goals.9/15/2015 12:46 PM
12 no 9/15/2015 12:32 PM
13 No 9/15/2015 11:54 AM
14 Yes, helped focus our strategic planning initiatives 9/15/2015 10:50 AM
15 Yes.9/15/2015 10:12 AM
16 Not really as thise issues are addressedwell in advance of applying for grants 9/15/2015 10:09 AM
17 No 9/15/2015 10:04 AM
18 Not this time, but I can see how we might use the questions to help shape discussions in the future.9/15/2015 9:28 AM
19 yes 9/14/2015 3:49 PM
20 No.9/14/2015 3:29 PM
21 yes 9/11/2015 11:52 AM
22 no 9/11/2015 11:09 AM
12 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 18 of 54
23 Yes, exactly-- sparked conversations with me that helped me further understand our vision and streategic plan 9/11/2015 9:32 AM
24 No 9/10/2015 6:05 PM
25 Yes, these questions prompted many discussions regarding our strategy and short-term goals.9/10/2015 5:29 PM
26 Yes 9/10/2015 12:36 PM
27 NO 9/10/2015 10:27 AM
28 It was helpful to have some of this information collected to use for other potential applications or plans.9/10/2015 10:20 AM
29 Yes, the questions helped to identify gaps in our planning process.9/10/2015 10:13 AM
30 It was a useful exercise to review our strategic plan 9/10/2015 10:13 AM
31 Yes, the initial 5 questions are thought provoking 9/10/2015 9:50 AM
32 Yes 9/10/2015 9:40 AM
33 Yes, because it allowed me as a grant writer the opportunity to stress how important it is that we tighten up our metrics
in order to respond appropriate to funders.
9/10/2015 9:35 AM
Q14 How would you rate the supplemental
information required by each funder
(Addendum, Program Abstract) with regard
to the following areas:
Answered: 32 Skipped: 10
13 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 19 of 54
Difficulty
Not difficult Somewhat difficult Difficult
Seeds of
Strength
United Way of
Williamson...
Georgetown
Health...
City of
Georgetown
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
14 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 20 of 54
Clarity of Questions and Instructions
Clear Somewhat clear Not clear
Seeds of
Strength
United Way of
Williamson...
Georgetown
Health...
City of
Georgetown
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
15 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 21 of 54
Relevance
Relevant Somewhat relevant Not relevant
Seeds of
Strength
United Way of
Williamson...
Georgetown
Health...
City of
Georgetown
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
16 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 22 of 54
Redundancy
Not redundant Somewhat redundant Redundant
Seeds of
Strength
United Way of
Williamson...
Georgetown
Health...
City of
Georgetown
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
17 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 23 of 54
Character Limit
More than I needed About right Not enough
Seeds of
Strength
United Way of
Williamson...
Georgetown
Health...
City of
Georgetown
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
18 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 24 of 54
# of Questions
Too many Just right Too few
Seeds of
Strength
United Way of
Williamson...
Georgetown
Health...
City of
Georgetown
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
19 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 25 of 54
Difficulty
72.22%
13
27.78%
5
0.00%
0
18
29.41%
5
64.71%
11
5.88%
1
17
81.82%
18
13.64%
3
4.55%
1
22
85.00%
17
10.00%
2
5.00%
1
20
Clarity of Questions and Instructions
83.33%
15
16.67%
3
0.00%
0
18
52.94%
9
47.06%
8
0.00%
0
17
86.36%
19
9.09%
2
4.55%
1
22
80.00%
16
20.00%
4
0.00%
0
20
Relevance
72.22%
13
27.78%
5
0.00%
0
18
58.82%
10
35.29%
6
5.88%
1
17
80.95%
17
14.29%
3
4.76%
1
21
85.00%
17
15.00%
3
0.00%
0
20
Redundancy
38.89%
7
44.44%
8
16.67%
3
18
35.29%
6
52.94%
9
11.76%
2
17
63.64%
14
31.82%
7
4.55%
1
22
55.00%
11
40.00%
8
5.00%
1
20
Character Limit
17.65%
3
82.35%
14
0.00%
0
17
12.50%
2
81.25%
13
6.25%
1
16
5.00%
1
75.00%
15
20.00%
4
20
Not difficult Somewhat difficult Difficult Total
Seeds of Strength
United Way of Williamson County
Georgetown Health Foundation
City of Georgetown
Clear Somewhat clear Not clear Total
Seeds of Strength
United Way of Williamson County
Georgetown Health Foundation
City of Georgetown
Relevant Somewhat relevant Not relevant Total
Seeds of Strength
United Way of Williamson County
Georgetown Health Foundation
City of Georgetown
Not redundant Somewhat redundant Redundant Total
Seeds of Strength
United Way of Williamson County
Georgetown Health Foundation
City of Georgetown
More than I needed About right Not enough Total
Seeds of Strength
United Way of Williamson County
Georgetown Health Foundation
20 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 26 of 54
5.26%
1
89.47%
17
5.26%
1
19
# of Questions
0.00%
0
100.00%
2
0.00%
0
2
33.33%
1
66.67%
2
0.00%
0
3
25.00%
1
75.00%
3
0.00%
0
4
16.67%
1
83.33%
5
0.00%
0
6
#Comments Date
1 I applaud all of these entities for making the commitment to work with the service providers/grantees. The work you all
are doing helps tremendously in Williamson County communities.
9/18/2015 11:40 AM
2 I am sure that once I become more familiar with the application process changes, I will be fine. Thank you.9/17/2015 3:21 PM
3 If the person writing these grants for non profits is a volunteer only, it was time consuming and lengthy. Perhaps that is
necessary but difficult to find a person willing to put so much time in writing these grants. It was helpful that
administrative costs were included so that a grant writer, staff member, could be paid. That was not provided for in
some grants. .We understand that one needs information to guarantee that the grant will be used as stated and for the
non profits guidelines with an evaluation process.
9/16/2015 11:54 AM
4 The Seeds of Strength and Georgetown Health Foundation addenda were very similar to each other. The City of
Georgetown program abstract had a couple of questions that I felt were answered in the common application.
9/15/2015 3:53 PM
5 I would appreciate a word limit. My computer program does not calculate total characters.9/15/2015 10:22 AM
6 We did not request City of Georgetown Funding during this cycle since they raised the "floor" for grants and we could
not effectively take on any additional projects of that scope with our existing workload at that time.
9/15/2015 10:21 AM
7 Overall, it was helpful to be able to use the same language across applications. I just remember that the United Way
application, while simpler than in years past, was still a bit more difficult than the others and required more work.
9/15/2015 9:31 AM
8 It would be helpful if both the application and supplemental information were part of the same document.9/10/2015 6:08 PM
9 Can not remember 9/10/2015 10:27 AM
10 The use of this rather extensive application precludes participation by smaller organizations which do have full time
development staff. My organization is just getting big enough to tackle an application of this nature. When I inquired
about some of the components, the response from the funding agency was rude. If you would like to attract a variety
of requests, you should consider either using a simpler version for smaller organizations or cheerfully providing some
support during the application process.
9/10/2015 10:24 AM
11 We have not yet applied with some of these other funders, but appreciate this opportunity to provide feedback. Thank
you.
9/10/2015 10:21 AM
12 We found that the GHF was very project focused and difficult to discuss operational side of the organization. The
questions did not illicit the higher level, thought provoking answers that the board later stated that they wanted.
9/10/2015 9:52 AM
City of Georgetown
Too many Just right Too few Total
Seeds of Strength
United Way of Williamson County
Georgetown Health Foundation
City of Georgetown
21 / 21
Applicant Perception Survey: Williamson County Common Application SurveyMonkey
Page 27 of 54
City of Georgetown, Texas
Strategic Partnerships for Community Services
November 11, 2015
SUBJECT:
Report from Suzy Pukys regarding proposed changes to the Common Grant Application utilized
by the City of Georgetown, the Georgetown Healthcare Foundation, United Way of Williamson
County, or Seeds of Strength as an outcome of results and comments received from the Survey
outlined in Item D—Suzy Pukys, SPCS Vice-Chair
ITEM SUMMARY:
Suzy Pukys will provide a report to the Board regarding proposed changes to the Common Grant
Application utilized by the City of Georgetown, the Georgetown Healthcare Foundation, United
Way of Williamson County, or Seeds of Strength as an outcome of results and comments received
from the Survey outlined in Item D.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Revised Common Grant Application
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Shirley J. Rinn on behalf of Suzy Pukys, SPCS Vice-Chair
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Revised Common Grant Application Backup Material
Page 28 of 54
COMMON PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION
Williamson County Funders
Instructions: Complete and submit this application along with attachments listed on the last page of
this application. Refer to individual funder’s grants processes to determine the deadline to submit this
complete application.
Organization Information
Organization Name
Legal Name (if different)
Year Founded
Mailing Address
Phone
Website
Federal Tax ID #
CEO or Executive Director (include title
if other than “CEO” or “ED”)
Phone Number & Email Address
Organization Mission
Organization Vision
Total Request Amount
Current Population Served by
Organization (unduplicated individuals and
geographic area(s) – cities, counties, etc.)
Proposed Population Served through
this Program Request (unduplicated
individuals and geographic area(s) – cities,
counties, etc.)
Program Name
Brief Description of the Request (500
character max.)
Contact Information
Name, Title
Email, Phone
Page 29 of 54
Organization Background
The first five questions in this section were adopted from Charting Impact, developed by the Better
Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance, GuideStar USA, and Independent Sector. We chose to use these
five questions because they have been thoroughly tested and encourage strategic thinking.
Remember to answer all questions in this section at the organization level, NOT the project/program
level. Be sure to cite all statistics and research in a separate attachment.
Note: Character maximums include spaces. 2,000 characters with spaces is approximately equivalent to 325 words.
1. What is your organization striving to accomplish?
Clearly and concisely state your organization's ultimate goal for intended impact. Identify the groups or
communities you aim to assist, the needs your work is addressing, an d your expected outcomes. Examine how
your goals for the next three to five years (or an alternate timeframe specified in your answer) fit within your
overall plan to contribute to lasting, meaningful change. When finished ask yourself, "If someone unfamil iar with
our work were to read this, would they have a clear definition of what long -term success means for my
organization?" (2,000 character max.)
2. What are your strategies for making this happen?
Describe your organization's strategies for accomplishing the long-term goals you cited in your previous answer.
Specify the broad approaches you employ and why your organization believes these methods will benefit your
target population or advance your issue. State near-term activities that serve as important building blocks for
future success, explaining how these elements strengthen your orga nization's strategic approach. (2,000 character
max.)
3. What are your organization's capabilities for doing this?
Detail the resources, capacities, and connections that support your progress toward long -term goals. While
describing your organization's core assets, identify both internal resources (including, but not limited to, staff,
budget, and expertise) and external strengths (including partnerships, collaborations, networks, and influence)
that have contributed to, or will contribute in the future to, the accomplishment of these goals. (2,000 character
max.)
4. How will your organization know if you are making progress?
Explain how your organization assesses progress toward your intended impact. Identify milestones that signal
progress and success. Describe your assessment and improvement process: the methods you use as you monitor
key indicators and how your organization uses that information to refine your efforts. (2,000 character max.)
5. What have and haven't you accomplished so far?
Demonstrate recent progress toward your long-term goals by describing how your near-term objectives are
propelling your organization toward your ultimate intended impact. Go beyond the outputs of your work to make
Page 30 of 54
clear how these outcomes are contributing to fulfilling long-term goals. In describing both outcomes achieved and
those not yet realized, include what your organization has learned about what does and doesn't work, what risks
and obstacles exist, and what adjustments to goals, strategies, or objectives have been made along the way.
(2,000 character max.)
Page 31 of 54
Program Request Information
Note: If you have already provided appropriate responses to any of the questions below in
the previous Organization Background section, simply type, “Answered in #___ of the
Organization Background section.”
This section focuses on the program(s) for which you are requesting funding.
1. Describe the program for which you are requesting funding, and the cause/issue it seeks to
address. Detail the strategies, resources, capacities, and connections that support your progress toward
long-term goals. Provide evidence to support the strategies you employ within the program, and whether
such strategies have been proven effective by research. (2,000 character max.)
2. Present data that substantiates the need for the services you wish to provide. Describe the need for
services and the tools you use to identify need. If you have wait lists for your services, describe the reasons or
conditions that necessitate the wait lists, and how you prioritize them. (2,000 character max.)
3. Provide program service costs in the table below. If you quantify your service in units, please define
what is meant by “unit.”
Program Service Costs
Individuals/Units of Service Total Program Costs Individual/Unit Costs
4. If the program is new to the community and your target population, how do you plan to promote
it? How will you make the program visible to those who would benefit from it? If this question
does not apply to your request, insert “N/A.” (1,000 character max.)
5. How do you coordinate, cooperate, or collaborate with other agencies to achieve your program
goals? Specifically highlight those organizations with which you have formalized agreements,
such as Letters of Commitment or Memoranda of Understanding. (2,000 character max.)
Coordination. Harmonious functioning of parts for effective results. Helping each other but not changing the basic way of
doing business.
Cooperation. Common effort and association for the purpose of common benefit. Helping each other in specific ways.
Collaboration. To work jointly with others on a common goal that is beyond what any one group can accomplish alone.
(adapted from: Forest, C. Empowerment skills for family workers: A worker handbook. Cornell University, 2003.)
6. Briefly describe what sets you apart from other nonprofits in the area and why your organization is
best situated to provide this service. (2,000 character max.)
Page 32 of 54
Page 33 of 54
Evaluation
Define the primary goal or goals (up to 3) you hope to achieve through this funding for your program.
The goal identified below should be attainable within a 12-month period, and must relate to
goals/outcomes articulated in the Program Request section of this proposal.
GOAL: What will this funding help you accomplish? Example: Increase financial literacy for 200 low-
income adults in Williamson County.
Activities: What activities will support or accomplish your goals? Example: Deliver financial literacy
classes.
Outputs: What do you expect these activities to produce? Outputs are often quantitative measures
such as # of participants, # of sessions held, # of encounters, so be sure to include anticipated
benchmarks that will gauge your progress. Example: Present 24 financial literacy classes (2 per month)
serving 200 adults. Regular attendance and number of participants (at least 20 per session) serve as key
benchmarks in determining the success of the program.
Outcomes: What benefits, impact, or changes in behavior, knowledge, skills, and/or attitudes for
participants do you anticipate will result from completion of the activities? Example: 85% of the 200
participants in the financial literacy program will exhibit increased financial literacy knowledge and skills
as determined by pre- and post-testing.
Performance Measures: How will you know when you have accomplished your goal? How will you
measure and quantify results? Example: % of participants’ improvement from pre-test to post-test,
regular attendance, and number of attendees.
GOAL:
Activities
Outputs (include
quantitative projections,
such as anticipated numbers
served)
Outcomes
Performance Measures
GOAL:
Activities
Outputs (include
quantitative projections,
such as anticipated numbers
served)
Outcomes
Performance Measures
Page 34 of 54
GOAL:
Activities
Outputs (include
quantitative projections,
such as anticipated numbers
served)
Outcomes
Performance Measures
What are your plans to ensure that the work described above is continued and supported beyond this
grant cycle? (1,000 character max.)
Page 35 of 54
Organizational Support
SOURCES OF ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT (Previous Fiscal Year)
The purpose of this section is to provide a top line overview of your funding.
Sources Name(s) of Funder(s) Amount
Foundation Grants
Individual
Contributions
N/A – no need to disclose the names of individual
donors.
Corporate
Foundations
Government Grants
Fundraising Efforts
Program Service
Revenue
Investment Income
Membership Income
Other (specify)
TOTAL REVENUE
CURRENT FISCAL YEAR DATES:
In your current fiscal year, what are your top 5 external sources of organizational support? Please list
specific funding entities and award amounts, indicating whether the funds are pending or in-hand. If
a top source is an individual donor, state “individual donor” with award amount.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Page 36 of 54
What are your cash reserves? How many months could you operate at your continued budget level?
Page 37 of 54
Checklist of Attachments
Budget Information. Include:
Program/Project Budget (Excel template provided);
Actual Program/Project Budget for last fiscal year (if applicable);
Proposed Organizational Budget for current fiscal year;
Actual organization budget for last fiscal year.
Key Staff list. Include titles, short bio, and length of time employed. Please speak specifically
to the staff member(s) who will be directing the program and explain why her/his oversight
positions the program for success.
Board list. Specify the percentage of Board members that make a financial contribution to
your organization. Under each individual Board member’s name, include:
o place of business;
o home address;
o years with the organization.
Citations and additional information (if applicable). This attachment may be used to cite
any statistics/research, and may include critical detail about your organization or program(s) not
already in the grant.
If this proposal will fund collaborative work with Georgetown Independent School
District staff and/or students, attach the District’s Letter of Approval of the PIE
Partnership Proposal.
501(c)(3) IRS determination letter.
Previous fiscal year financials in PDF format. Include:
balance sheet;
income statement;
year-to-date financials (balance sheet and income statement);
Audited financials and Form 990. Refer to specific funder’s requirements.
Page 38 of 54
City of Georgetown, Texas
Strategic Partnerships for Community Services
November 11, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion and possible action regarding possible revisions and/or updates to the Common Grant
Application, Program Abstract, and Evaluation Rubric for the City of Georgetown for use during
the FY 2016-17 Grant Application Cycle. --C.O. Smith, Board Chair
ITEM SUMMARY:
The Board will review and consider revisions to the Common Grant Application as outlined in
Item E, as well as review the Program Abstract and Scoring Rubric for the City of Georgetown for
possible revisions for the FY 2016-17 Grant Application Cycle.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. City of Georgetown Program Abstract
2. City of Georgetown Evaluation Rubric
3. Revised Common Grant Application
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Shirley Rinn for C. O. Smith, Board Chair
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Revised Common Grant Application Backup Material
Program Abstract Backup Material
Scoring Rubric Backup Material
Page 39 of 54
COMMON PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION
Williamson County Funders
Instructions: Complete and submit this application along with attachments listed on the last page of
this application. Refer to individual funder’s grants processes to determine the deadline to submit this
complete application.
Organization Information
Organization Name
Legal Name (if different)
Year Founded
Mailing Address
Phone
Website
Federal Tax ID #
CEO or Executive Director (include title
if other than “CEO” or “ED”)
Phone Number & Email Address
Organization Mission
Organization Vision
Total Request Amount
Current Population Served by
Organization (unduplicated individuals and
geographic area(s) – cities, counties, etc.)
Proposed Population Served through
this Program Request (unduplicated
individuals and geographic area(s) – cities,
counties, etc.)
Program Name
Brief Description of the Request (500
character max.)
Contact Information
Name, Title
Email, Phone
Page 40 of 54
Organization Background
The first five questions in this section were adopted from Charting Impact, developed by the Better
Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance, GuideStar USA, and Independent Sector. We chose to use these
five questions because they have been thoroughly tested and encourage strategic thinking.
Remember to answer all questions in this section at the organization level, NOT the project/program
level. Be sure to cite all statistics and research in a separate attachment.
Note: Character maximums include spaces. 2,000 characters with spaces is approximately equivalent to 325 words.
1. What is your organization striving to accomplish?
Clearly and concisely state your organization's ultimate goal for intended impact. Identify the groups or
communities you aim to assist, the needs your work is addressing, an d your expected outcomes. Examine how
your goals for the next three to five years (or an alternate timeframe specified in your answer) fit within your
overall plan to contribute to lasting, meaningful change. When finished ask yourself, "If someone unfamil iar with
our work were to read this, would they have a clear definition of what long -term success means for my
organization?" (2,000 character max.)
2. What are your strategies for making this happen?
Describe your organization's strategies for accomplishing the long-term goals you cited in your previous answer.
Specify the broad approaches you employ and why your organization believes these methods will benefit your
target population or advance your issue. State near-term activities that serve as important building blocks for
future success, explaining how these elements strengthen your orga nization's strategic approach. (2,000 character
max.)
3. What are your organization's capabilities for doing this?
Detail the resources, capacities, and connections that support your progress toward long -term goals. While
describing your organization's core assets, identify both internal resources (including, but not limited to, staff,
budget, and expertise) and external strengths (including partnerships, collaborations, networks, and influence)
that have contributed to, or will contribute in the future to, the accomplishment of these goals. (2,000 character
max.)
4. How will your organization know if you are making progress?
Explain how your organization assesses progress toward your intended impact. Identify milestones that signal
progress and success. Describe your assessment and improvement process: the methods you use as you monitor
key indicators and how your organization uses that information to refine your efforts. (2,000 character max.)
5. What have and haven't you accomplished so far?
Demonstrate recent progress toward your long-term goals by describing how your near-term objectives are
propelling your organization toward your ultimate intended impact. Go beyond the outputs of your work to make
Page 41 of 54
clear how these outcomes are contributing to fulfilling long-term goals. In describing both outcomes achieved and
those not yet realized, include what your organization has learned about what does and doesn't work, what risks
and obstacles exist, and what adjustments to goals, strategies, or objectives have been made along the way.
(2,000 character max.)
Page 42 of 54
Program Request Information
Note: If you have already provided appropriate responses to any of the questions below in
the previous Organization Background section, simply type, “Answered in #___ of the
Organization Background section.”
This section focuses on the program(s) for which you are requesting funding.
1. Describe the program for which you are requesting funding, and the cause/issue it seeks to
address. Detail the strategies, resources, capacities, and connections that support your progress toward
long-term goals. Provide evidence to support the strategies you employ within the program, and whether
such strategies have been proven effective by research. (2,000 character max.)
2. Present data that substantiates the need for the services you wish to provide. Describe the need for
services and the tools you use to identify need. If you have wait lists for your services, describe the reasons or
conditions that necessitate the wait lists, and how you prioritize them. (2,000 character max.)
3. Provide program service costs in the table below. If you quantify your service in units, please define
what is meant by “unit.”
Program Service Costs
Individuals/Units of Service Total Program Costs Individual/Unit Costs
4. If the program is new to the community and your target population, how do you plan to promote
it? How will you make the program visible to those who would benefit from it? If this question
does not apply to your request, insert “N/A.” (1,000 character max.)
5. How do you coordinate, cooperate, or collaborate with other agencies to achieve your program
goals? Specifically highlight those organizations with which you have formalized agreements,
such as Letters of Commitment or Memoranda of Understanding. (2,000 character max.)
Coordination. Harmonious functioning of parts for effective results. Helping each other but not changing the basic way of
doing business.
Cooperation. Common effort and association for the purpose of common benefit. Helping each other in specific ways.
Collaboration. To work jointly with others on a common goal that is beyond what any one group can accomplish alone.
(adapted from: Forest, C. Empowerment skills for family workers: A worker handbook. Cornell University, 2003.)
6. Briefly describe what sets you apart from other nonprofits in the area and why your organization is
best situated to provide this service. (2,000 character max.)
Page 43 of 54
Page 44 of 54
Evaluation
Define the primary goal or goals (up to 3) you hope to achieve through this funding for your program.
The goal identified below should be attainable within a 12-month period, and must relate to
goals/outcomes articulated in the Program Request section of this proposal.
GOAL: What will this funding help you accomplish? Example: Increase financial literacy for 200 low-
income adults in Williamson County.
Activities: What activities will support or accomplish your goals? Example: Deliver financial literacy
classes.
Outputs: What do you expect these activities to produce? Outputs are often quantitative measures
such as # of participants, # of sessions held, # of encounters, so be sure to include anticipated
benchmarks that will gauge your progress. Example: Present 24 financial literacy classes (2 per month)
serving 200 adults. Regular attendance and number of participants (at least 20 per session) serve as key
benchmarks in determining the success of the program.
Outcomes: What benefits, impact, or changes in behavior, knowledge, skills, and/or attitudes for
participants do you anticipate will result from completion of the activities? Example: 85% of the 200
participants in the financial literacy program will exhibit increased financial literacy knowledge and skills
as determined by pre- and post-testing.
Performance Measures: How will you know when you have accomplished your goal? How will you
measure and quantify results? Example: % of participants’ improvement from pre-test to post-test,
regular attendance, and number of attendees.
GOAL:
Activities
Outputs (include
quantitative projections,
such as anticipated numbers
served)
Outcomes
Performance Measures
GOAL:
Activities
Outputs (include
quantitative projections,
such as anticipated numbers
served)
Outcomes
Performance Measures
Page 45 of 54
GOAL:
Activities
Outputs (include
quantitative projections,
such as anticipated numbers
served)
Outcomes
Performance Measures
What are your plans to ensure that the work described above is continued and supported beyond this
grant cycle? (1,000 character max.)
Page 46 of 54
Organizational Support
SOURCES OF ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT (Previous Fiscal Year)
The purpose of this section is to provide a top line overview of your funding.
Sources Name(s) of Funder(s) Amount
Foundation Grants
Individual
Contributions
N/A – no need to disclose the names of individual
donors.
Corporate
Foundations
Government Grants
Fundraising Efforts
Program Service
Revenue
Investment Income
Membership Income
Other (specify)
TOTAL REVENUE
CURRENT FISCAL YEAR DATES:
In your current fiscal year, what are your top 5 external sources of organizational support? Please list
specific funding entities and award amounts, indicating whether the funds are pending or in-hand. If
a top source is an individual donor, state “individual donor” with award amount.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Page 47 of 54
What are your cash reserves? How many months could you operate at your continued budget level?
Page 48 of 54
Checklist of Attachments
Budget Information. Include:
Program/Project Budget (Excel template provided);
Actual Program/Project Budget for last fiscal year (if applicable);
Proposed Organizational Budget for current fiscal year;
Actual organization budget for last fiscal year.
Key Staff list. Include titles, short bio, and length of time employed. Please speak specifically
to the staff member(s) who will be directing the program and explain why her/his oversight
positions the program for success.
Board list. Specify the percentage of Board members that make a financial contribution to
your organization. Under each individual Board member’s name, include:
o place of business;
o home address;
o years with the organization.
Citations and additional information (if applicable). This attachment may be used to cite
any statistics/research, and may include critical detail about your organization or program(s) not
already in the grant.
If this proposal will fund collaborative work with Georgetown Independent School
District staff and/or students, attach the District’s Letter of Approval of the PIE
Partnership Proposal.
501(c)(3) IRS determination letter.
Previous fiscal year financials in PDF format. Include:
balance sheet;
income statement;
year-to-date financials (balance sheet and income statement);
Audited financials and Form 990. Refer to specific funder’s requirements.
Page 49 of 54
City of Georgetown
STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS FOR COMMUNITY SERVICES
Program Abstract
Responses to the prompts below will be reviewed to make an initial determination regarding an
organization’s eligibility for City of Georgetown funding.
Name of Organization:
Amount Requested ($10,000-$50,000):
Proposed Program Abstract
1. Describe the program for which you are requesting funding, the cause/issue it seeks to address, the
need for services in your target area, and the target population. 1,000 character max.
2. Describe how the proposed program aligns with one or more of the City’s priority areas (Public
Safety, Transportation, Housing, Veteran’s Services, Parks & Recreation, Safety Net). 500 character max.
3. To what extent do you educate and empower your target population toward self-sufficiency? If this
question does not apply to your request, insert “N/A.” 500 character max.
4. What are your plans to ensure that the program is continued and supported beyond this grant cycle?
500 character max.
5. Does this program provide opportunities for matching or incentive funds within your organization or
from other grantees? 500 character max.
Page 50 of 54
1
2015 Williamson County Common Application Evaluation Rubric Agency Name:
City of Georgetown
Evaluation Form Sections & Scoring
Instructions
This evaluation form is designed to assess the Common Application as a comprehensive document, as well as its distinct sections. Please offer comment to justify your score
throughout each section. Provide the total score of all sections combined, as well as your recommendation for funding.
Maximum Score
Organization Background 20
Program Request 20
Evaluation 15
Budget 10
Risk of Investment Analysis & Program Abstract 35
TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE 100
Final Comments:
Total Score for Proposal: out of 100
PROPOSAL DECISION
Fully Funded $
Partially Funded $
Proposal Not Funded. Summary of Rationale:
Page 51 of 54
2
Organization Background (20 points max.)
• Are the needs the Organization is addressing and ultimate goal for impact clear?
• Are methods of assessment sound? Do they demonstrate progress?
• Can the Organization articulate near- and long-term goals?
Comments:
Total Score:
Rationale:
Request Information (20 points max.)
• Does the Proposal provide clear rationale for its strategies in addressing the need/problem, as well as evidence to support the choice of strategy?
• Does the Organization have the resources and capacities needed to carry out the Program(s)?
• Does the Organization demonstrate that it cultivates and maintains working relationships with other organizations in order to achieve program goals?
Comments:
Total Score:
Rationale:
Evaluation (15 points max)
• The evaluation plan is solid, i.e., activities, outputs, and outcomes logically build upon one another. Expected results are clear.
Comments:
Total Score:
Rationale:
Budget (10 points max.)
Page 52 of 54
3
• Does the organization have diverse resources?
• Are proposed expenses appropriate and indirect/admin costs reasonable?
Comments:
Total Score:
Rationale:
Risk of Investment Analysis and Program Abstract (35 points max.)
• What do the attachments reveal about the health of the organization? Review makeup of Board leadership, staff qualifications, and financial
information. How sustainable is this organization?
• How well does the organization/program(s) align with the City of Georgetown’s priorities?
• Do this organization and its programs seem promising for success? Do they demonstrate a clear value to their target population and are important to
this community?
• Do this organization and its programs work collaboratively with other agencies to provide a maximum benefit to the community members it serves?
Do they demonstrate innovation?
Comments:
Total Score:
Rationale:
Page 53 of 54
City of Georgetown, Texas
Strategic Partnerships for Community Services
November 11, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion and possible action regarding proposed revisions to Bylaws related to meeting
schedule—C.O. Smith, Board Chair
ITEM SUMMARY:
The Chair would like to discuss possible revisions to the Bylaws related to the the meeting
schedule for the Strategic Partnerships for Community Services Advisory Board.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Shirley Rinn for C. O. Smith, Board Chair
Page 54 of 54