In a previous article, we explained how a regranting blueprint lays out the configuration for the entire regranting process and helps grant makers to refine their understanding of each component of their workflow. It ensures that grant makers remain on track to meet key milestones while also maximizing efficiency. We also reviewed the first step in the process: Stakeholder analysis. In this article, we look at the final two steps: process management followed by structure and alignment.
Next, map out the processes and dependencies that will bring the project to life. The goal here is to understand how decisions will be made, who will be responsible for decision making, and how those decisions will tie back to the original requirements of the funder. As a key component of the entire process, grant monitoring also falls under process management. Because this aspect of the work is so crucial, it is vital to examine the potential for the unexpected before you begin putting the project into action.
Having a game plan for the unintended will ensure that even if something doesn’t go as planned, you are able to stay on track to meet your goals. For example, what happens if a metric or KPI is not being met? By determining ahead of time how the different stakeholders will be informed, what review steps will need to be taken, and what actions will allow you to course correct, you will be better prepared to handle the unexpected so that milestones are met regardless of unforeseen variables.
The final segment of the blueprint is to examine the overarching structure in order to determine how to align your goals, the goals of the original funder, and the data points necessary to support these goals. Crucial to this phase is an audit of the specific types of data you will need to collect at various points throughout the project. This extends from subrecipient application to grant monitoring, invoicing, and close out. When it comes to choosing subrecipients, you will need to determine the funding requirements. Do you need to utilize an RFP or an RFA to determine the best applicants for the pass-through grant? Do you need to use a scoring rubric or a voting mechanism? It’s essential to know what criteria must be followed in order to remain compliant with the requirements of the original funder as you are awarding funds and managing subrecipients. This is also where you reaffirm your timeline for periodic check-ins with federal and state agencies (or whoever is providing funding at each level of the grant and subgrant), determine how to gather reporting, and map out how to manage the post-award.
Utilizing a blueprint to build out a grant management or grant making system ensures that you are maximizing the efficiencies of your resources—namely time, funding, and talent—in order to best meet the mission and goals of all agencies involved. But you don't have to figure this out on your own. Working with a consultative and dedicated collaborator can streamline the process, saving you crucial time and preventing you from making costly detours along the way to reaching your goals—as well as the goals of the original funder.
As a player in the regranting space, you already know that the process of administering pass-through grants is inherently collaborative. Bringing in an outside vendor to assist with the blueprinting process can add even more value to the work you’re doing. With the right consultative partner you benefit from their extensive experience and their distance from the project that makes them an objective contributor. A partner such as WizeHive will add value to your processes by providing insights you may not have considered. We've seen first hand that the experience gained from creating blueprints for other clients running similar regranting programs better equips us to assist you in creating a systematic, dynamic workflow. Before engaging a technology partner, be sure to learn if they've gone through this process with other clients.
