Abstract
Grant writing can be a useful tool for music educators and researchers who seek added funding for resources to facilitate their projects and programs. Since few grant-writing courses are tailored to the needs of music educators, this article provides information on how to identify funding mechanisms, understand grant-writing terminology, draft application components, and develop an idea into a letter of inquiry or an elevator speech to approach potential funders. Creative approaches to grant writing and careful attention to program requirements can contribute to successfully funded proposals that provide additional resources and support for music programs and professional development.
Photo of Jennifer A. Bugos courtesy of the author
These grant-writing guidelines may help you get additional monies, equipment, and support for your music program.
NAfME is glad to offer one hour of professional development recognition to you for reading this article.
Please follow the link below and complete a short quiz to receive your certificate of completion.
Every music educator wants to bring the benefits of music to their students. Even a small amount of additional financial support in the music classroom can provide new opportunities for music learning and self-discovery. 1 Therefore, it is no surprise that music educators commonly request information about grant writing as part of their professional development. In a group of 456 experienced music educators, 38 percent of educators specified grant writing as a topic of need for professional development. 2 However, many school districts, colleges, and universities do not tailor grant-writing courses to meet the needs of music educators. For instance, existing grant-writing courses typically focus on federal applications and commonly overlook foundations that may support arts education. In addition, electronic resources and consultant presentations use terminology laden with jargon, causing unnecessary confusion. This article discusses basic technical terms and creative approaches to identifying funding resources, presenting a concept, and developing a concept into elevator speech (i.e., a clear concise summary of the project, suitable to explain during a brief ride on an elevator), all of which may assist music educators in acquiring additional resources and support for their classrooms.
Why Apply for Funding?
Grants represent sources of funding that can support research projects, acquisition of supplies, equipment, travel, special performances, and professional development for music educators. Many music educators rely upon independent sources, school districts, private donations, and program stakeholders, such as parents and the surrounding community, for classroom resources and professional development. Since the arts are a core subject, funding for daily needs may be generally provided by the district in public schools or through funds set aside for arts programs in private schools. 3 However, many music educators would like to obtain additional instruments, technology, and other programs to enhance the classroom learning environment. After attending state- or national-level music education association conferences, educators often comment, “If only our budget had enough resources to acquire new equipment, technology, or instruments . . .” Grant writing may be a solution to supplement or alleviate some budgetary shortfalls for classroom resources.
There are additional benefits stemming from the submission of grant applications. Those who obtain funding show that a project has merit as evidenced through a review process. Funded proposals demonstrate evidence of impact, innovation, or significance as indicated by the goals of the funder. The ideas presented in a proposal must be valued highly for an organization to provide financial support. Since a proposal may be reviewed by a large number of individuals, typically including experts in music and outside music education, this is an opportunity to advocate for music education programs. Sharing grant proposals with the school administration, research constituency at the district level, and outside experts demonstrates dedication and the ability to effectively advocate for the value of music education programs. In addition, educators who submit grant applications are viewed by administrators as problem solvers who display concern for increasing opportunities for their students. Grant writing shows the ability to overcome fiscal roadblocks and enhances professional skills. 4
Grant opportunities can often lead to collaborations with groups of arts educators or inspire collaborative research to facilitate common goals. Proposals that include an interdisciplinary team of educators, such as the arts, music, and physical education, can facilitate projects that allow students to gain a better understanding of the impact of these disciplines through arts integration. Some grant opportunities, such as the Arts Integration Grants sponsored by Crayola, 5 are tailored specifically for arts integration projects. For instance, one school received a small grant to initiate a unit titled “The Opera of Health.” Children experienced separate and collaborative units about operatic singing and composers, healthful eating habits, and artistic painting techniques in each music, visual arts, and physical education class. The project culminated with a unique musical performed by the children. The interrelatedness of content areas strengthened the curricular content and fostered teamwork across disciplines.
When seeking grant funding, the most important step is to begin writing and submitting proposals. One common element that prevents some educators from pursuing grants is the time and effort required to undergo the application process. 6 Like other fundraising initiatives, grant writing requires time and organization, but it is a skill that can be easily developed. It is beneficial to receive a grant, even if it is a very small award. First, it satisfies an immediate need. Perhaps even more important, those awarded a grant have an established track record of successful proposals and project management, which is very desirable when submitting future applications. When preparing an application, one should plan ahead to write and rewrite to facilitate the strongest possible application. Although the achievement of previous funding is no guarantee that a new request will be funded, there is strong likelihood that an application will be more competitive with grant-writing experience, especially if the application is targeted toward a specific funding opportunity.
Identifying Opportunities
Funding sources include the following categories: independent foundations, the federal government, private industry, and professional organizations (see Table 1). Since a grant proposal is developed based on a specified need, educators should be sure that the proposal concisely indicates how fulfilling this need will serve the mission of the funder and affect potential stakeholders when considering potential funding mechanisms. One way to confirm this is to conduct a database search based on the project or proposed need so that local and national grant opportunities can be identified. Funding databases, such as those of the Foundation Center, Community of Science, Grants4teachers, or GetEdFunding, 7 offer advanced searching options that can be beneficial. 8 Advanced searches may include specific cities or regions of the country or may allow one to focus on a proposed population (e.g., at-risk young people). Databases such as the Community of Science are not just for scientists. This social network allows individuals to make connections about projects and other people conducting projects. Community of Science includes features that allow the applicant to post a profile and view a list of colleagues with similar project or research interests. This may be a useful tool to help identify potential collaborators for projects. In addition, check local arts organizations and school districts for community-based grant resources for arts educators. Many of these grant opportunities will be cross-referenced in national databases.
National and International Music Education Funding Sources
National databases, such as the Community of Science, enable educators to search by independent project need (e.g., musical instruments, professional development), geographic location, sponsor type (e.g., private foundations, federal grants), constituent (e.g., at-risk students), and type of activity (e.g., performance, scholarship, curriculum development). When searching, it can be helpful to include related terms. Beyond music education–related search terms, consider searching for arts education or education in general. Many grants are open to educators regardless of subject area. For example, the McCarthey Dressman Education Foundation offers teacher development grants that may be a resource for professional development opportunities. 9 If the project is interdisciplinary or includes a special population, one can search additional terms that include the population that would be affected by the project, such as early childhood or adolescents with autism. Focusing more broadly can uncover search results that may not appear under music education search terms.
Demystifying Applications
Terminology in grant applications can be overwhelming and is cited as one of the most prominent reasons why many music educators refrain from submitting grant applications (see Table 2). 10 Program announcements (PAs) for grant applications are as varied as classes of students. However, all program announcements have specific guidelines that, if not fully satisfied, will result in an unsuccessful application. After identifying a specific funding opportunity, one should be sure to carefully read the entire request for applications (RFA) or request for proposals (RFP). It is the applicant’s responsibility to determine whether the funding opportunity is a good match for the project as well as to adjust the project so that it is attractive to the funding organization. In many cases, it is possible to contact the funding organization and schedule an individual consultation with the program officer or a member of the foundation. When discussing a project with a program officer, be sure to have completed a short (no more than two-minute) elevator speech to concisely outline the project.
Grant Acronyms and Definitions
Create an Elevator Speech
An elevator speech is an executive summary of the grant proposal. It is so brief and focused that one could use it to explain the project to a person who knows nothing about the project on a brief elevator ride. To formulate an elevator speech, consider implementing this four-step approach: (1) name it—identify the problem, (2) aim it—choose a specific strategy to focus your efforts, (3) claim it—understand and take personal ownership of the problem, and (4) tame it—implement your strategy. 11 The most prominent pieces of a grant application include these sections: problem/significance (name it), specific aims/project goals (aim it), background knowledge (claim it), and methodology (procedure, timeline, budget, and evaluation; tame it). For samples of each section from a funded proposal, please see the sidebar, “Sample Sections from a Funded Proposal.”
Step 1: Name It!
The problem statement provides the first impression for reviewers and describes or names the primary issue(s) addressed in the application. It also summarizes the actions proposed to address the problem. Some questions that educators may wish to consider include the following: “What are some prominent student needs in the music classroom? What is necessary for professional growth as an educator or researcher?” The significance section connects with the audience and introduces the significance or impact of the proposal.
The significance section provides evidence to support the need and number of individuals who will benefit from the project. Music educators often reach a large number of stakeholders: students, parents, teachers, administrators, and community members. Since music educators are responsible for instructing most of the students in an individual school or in multiple institutions, educators should specify in the grant proposal how the grant resources will benefit all stakeholders and how many individuals the project will benefit. The significance section in a professional development grant provides details of the training, certificate, or degree programs and explains how these opportunities will empower one to elevate teaching, impact curricular development, foster student musical achievement, and more fully engage students with an enhanced music-learning environment. Consider both the short-term and long-term goals and aims of the project. Music educators can identify and include measurable, immediate benefits to the music classroom in the next year as well as long-term benefits that will be sustained over the next several years. Perhaps the intent of the project is to develop a curriculum based on this training that will include new course offerings or after-school ensembles for secondary students or new strategies for curricular engagement.
If the goal of a grant is to facilitate the acquisition of equipment or supplies, a specific explanation of how such resources will enhance the curriculum will be necessary. Asking questions such as “Who will benefit from using the equipment or supplies?” can help the grant writer provide considerable detail about the setting and student population. A possible detailed response to this question might look like the following: Southwest High has a population of 750 students with only 9 percent enrolled in instrumental ensembles and an increasing high school dropout rate. The purpose of this project is to extend our music offerings to include a Contemporary Guitar program with a class set of 25 guitars. The Contemporary Guitar program is projected to increase music program enrollment, motivation for music offerings, and reduce the likelihood of high school dropout.
When indicating significance, it is appropriate to specify the exact number of students involved as well as ramifications of funded programs or how the new instruments/equipment will be used. The significance statement should include a description of how the equipment will help alleviate the problem. In the Contemporary Guitar program example, low enrollment in a high school music program and elevated high school dropout rates are considered part of the larger problem. Justification of how the program could impact music enrollment and student retention would need be clarified later in the proposal.
The significance section often includes references to the mission statement of the funder. Proposals that reach the target population or match the mission of the foundation or organization tend to be viewed as more compelling by funders.
12
If the mission includes providing educational opportunities presenting art forms, promoting artists and arts groups, and guiding advancement of the arts, a significance statement might include the following: This project will provide educational opportunities to 200 families at the Sunny Day Elementary School through the implementation of a Suzuki violin program for at-risk children. Funding is requested to purchase violins for this program that will advance performance skills and knowledge of the performing arts.
Programmatic grants and research grants may have different foci for significance sections. For grant opportunities that support research, the significance statement must match the goals of the mission statement in a more specific context. For instance, a problem statement that includes significance from a previously funded proposal by the GRAMMY Foundation, whose mission includes concern for music’s role on the human condition, is as follows: This project will evaluate the impact of piano training on cognitive, motor, and psychosocial outcomes in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Parkinson’s disease, a neurodegenerative disorder affecting 5 million Americans over age 65, is often accompanied by executive dysfunction in addition to motor symptoms, such as bradykinesia, tremors, rigidity, and gait and postural difficulties. While research supports the effectiveness of music listening interventions (e.g., rhythmic auditory stimulation) on mobility, balance, and gait, the impact of musical performance on executive dysfunction is not yet known.
The opening sentence helps the reader understand the purpose of the project, followed by the problem and significance of the project, extending the benefits of musical performance to patients with Parkinson’s disease. The significance section helps the reader focus on the scope of the problem.
Sample Sections from a Funded Proposal
Older adults represent a large target group for increased participation in music education programs. Yet, few programs address the needs of adults. Adults are interested in developing musical skills with opportunities for aesthetic experiences, group socialization, and cognitive maintenance. Music can increase cognitive abilities as demonstrated by our pilot data. Can music-making in Orff instruction offer cognitive benefits? Can Orff instruction foster creativity in aging adults? What is the effect of such a program on self-efficacy?
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the effects of Orff instruction on musical creativity and cognitive abilities in older adults (65–85 years).
What is the effect of music participation in an Orff instruction program compared to a control task, structured autobiographical writing, on creativity?
What is the effect of music participation in an Orff instruction program compared to a control task on processing speed?
What is the effect of music participation compared to a control task on general and musical self-efficacy?
Music instruction benefits executive, spatial, temporal, and verbal memory functions in many populations, indicating transfer capabilities. Musical training is correlated with higher verbal memory performance among college students and young children (Chan, Ho, & Cheung, 1998; Ho, Cheung, & Chan, 2003). Four-year-old children receiving 10 minutes of piano instruction up to twice a week performed better on spatial-temporal task performance assessments than children receiving computer training (Rauscher et al., 1997). After eight months of piano instruction, kindergartners displayed greater improvements in spatial abilities than the control group (Rauscher & Zupan, 2000). Six-year-olds scored significantly higher on the Short-Term Memory subtest of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Battery after receiving 30 weeks of music instruction (Bilharz, Bruhn, & Olson, 2000). Preliminary research has shown that a multimodal intervention, individualized piano instruction, has the ability to significantly enhance some working memory and executive processes, such as attention and concentration, working memory, and planning and strategy learning, in older adults (Bugos et al., 2007). Results of a follow-up study comparing the effects of piano instruction, percussion instruction, and music-listening instruction in older adults reveal significantly enhanced working memory stemming from group percussion instruction (Bugos, 2011). The purpose of this research is to examine the effects of active music making in an Orff instruction program on self-efficacy and memory performance in healthy older adults.
Self-efficacy and social engagement can impact cognitive abilities in aging. One common barrier to successful aging is decreased performance in cognitive abilities due to age-related cognitive decline (Salthouse, 1994; Wecker et al., 2005). Specifically, aging has been associated with decreased processing speed and performance on verbal memory and verbal fluency measures. Decreases in processing speed have been attributed to cognitive slowing (Salthouse, 1996). It is important to identify cognitive interventions that may potentially mitigate age-related cognitive decline. Current cognitive interventions demonstrate only short-term success with little potential for transfer or fail to be replicated outside a laboratory setting (Lustig et al., 2009).
Educational opportunities may serve as effective and enjoyable interventions. Research suggests that educational opportunities have the potential to protect against cognitive decline (Ghisletta, Bickel, & Lovden, 2006). A key challenge is to discover enjoyable cognitive interventions that transfer beyond the domain of training to everyday situations. This research will evaluate Orff instruction as a cognitive intervention and the role of such training on creativity and cognition in an aging population.
Twenty-six older adults with less than three years of formal music training will be matched by age, gender, and intelligence to an eight-week training program that will meet for two hours weekly (16 hours total): mallet instruction and structured autobiographical recall (SAR) class. Criteria for participation are being between 65 and 85 years, being native English speakers, not currently taking any medications that could adversely affect memory performance, having no preexisting cognitive impairments, having no difficulty with the movement of their hands, having less than three years of prior musical training, and not currently being engaged in musical performance. Participants will be matched for age, gender, education, and intelligence to two training groups (by the flip of a coin): Orff instruction (experimental group) and SAR (control group) programs. SAR serves as a control task as it provides an attentional component without any music listening or musical performance. Informed written consent will be obtained by participants in accordance with the university institutional review board. Participants will be required to practice 30 minutes daily and log all practice sessions.
Participants will complete measures of self-efficacy (General Self-Efficacy Scale; Sherer et al., 1982), musical self-efficacy (Music Performance Self-Efficacy Scale; Zelanak, 2010), and memory performance (Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task; Gronwall, 1977), and creativity (Modified Version of Musical Measure of Creative Thinking; Webster, 1994) pre- and posttraining.
The Orff Instruction Program is a progressively difficult percussion program that promotes active music-making with opportunities for the development of aural skills, gross motor coordination, and improvisation and creative exploration on Orff instruments.
The SAR Program facilitates autobiographical recall through journaling, storytelling activities, and group discussions.
Step 2: Aim It!
Each grant application contains a section to spell out the overall objectives and specific aims, or steps that will be taken to achieve these objectives. If the aims are not feasible, are not written clearly, do not match the objectives, or do not purport to resolve the problem, the proposal may not be reviewed favorably. One way to help focus the aims of a project is to consider how to measure and document a project’s success. Assessment of outcomes is integral to the grant-writing process, just as program assessment is critical to retention and promotion of music programs. Choosing outcomes that will demonstrate a project’s success enables the grant writer to clearly state the project aims. Assessment of outcomes is the difference between perceiving the program was effective and providing evidence to support program effectiveness.
Aims for research projects will also include hypotheses. For instance, if the aim of the project is to evaluate the effects of a novel choral singing program on music reading and visual attention in sixth-grade students, a specific hypothesis might be “Children randomly assigned to the choral singing program will demonstrate enhanced music reading and visual attention compared to other students engaged in nonmusical activity.” Programmatic grants will clearly link program activities to achieving these aims in a systematic way. For example, if the objective is to establish an intergenerational ukulele program, short-term aims could include recruitment and establishing a program for ukulele music instruction for those with little formal music experience, defining the benefits of the program and evaluating the benefits to middle school students and community members, and the evaluation of qualities that attracted current members to enroll. If the main objective of the proposal is to acquire classroom equipment, one should carefully consider how obtaining this equipment will directly contribute to curricular aims for the students. Grants require justification of purchases made based on project usage to complete specific aims and objectives.
If a goal of the project is to acquire new technology for composition, explain how the curricular content will be enhanced with this technology and how specific needs will be addressed through technology acquisition. An objective of this application might be to incorporate new technology (e.g., mixers, software) into a composition program. Specific aims could include examining the ability of high school students to compose a contemporary theme and variations with specific software technology, perhaps culminating in a concert or community event. Additional aims might include measuring user comfort with new technology, the process of integrating technology with existing curriculum to achieve higher musical standards, and self-efficacy for technology integration in a creative musical context. Formulation of specific aims are like objectives in a lesson plan. Music educators focus on specific, demonstrable activities to evaluate curricular objectives. When formulating specific aims, consider how the aims will be evaluated and the value of the information collected to the goals of the funding organization.
Step 3: Claim It!
Content knowledge about a topic as well as what others are saying about the topic—or claiming knowledge of the topic and making connections to one’s music program—is important to secure funding. Every competitive proposal includes background information referencing what others have done or previous research surrounding a topic. Music educators should become familiar with the conversation surrounding the topic and explain how the project extends what is currently known about a topic or extends the reach of effective teaching strategies in professional development. Connect what is known about the topic back to the project needs.
Many grants are reviewed by teams of expert reviewers who are respected for their knowledge on a topic, and depending upon the mechanism, reviewers on the panel may not be familiar with musical concepts or specific pedagogy in music education (e.g., Suzuki, Orff, Kodály, Dalcroze, etc.). When discussing related literature, one should be sure to limit the use of acronyms and jargon and to define terms that may be unfamiliar to those outside of the music discipline. Music educators are familiar with the most commonly used band or orchestra methods; however, reviewers may not have the background to understand why music educators want to acquire a new set of methods to incorporate creativity in the curriculum. Explicit explanations will underscore how instruments or technology will extend the school’s curricular offerings and long-term curricular goals and increase opportunities for a larger number of students in the ensemble or general music classroom. Therefore, providing explicit project details that connect the topic to previous research in music education will enable better readability and clarify details for reviewers unfamiliar with music education.
Step 4: Tame It!
Just as every lesson plan contains a recipe that includes procedures for meeting the objectives, every grant proposal includes a series of methods to facilitate the project. Educators have a wealth of expertise in lesson plan preparation that can be directed toward grant application preparation. Detailed instructions as to how the project will be facilitated and evaluated can be found in the methodology, with procedure, timeline, budget, and evaluation sections. One should use each section to provide details about the project. In the beginning, drafting each section will be helpful when discussing the project with a program officer. The methods include the materials for the project and information about the prospective population, program details, and measures for evaluation. As one continues to write the proposal, it is important to avoid some common pitfalls.
First, do not underestimate the time to complete the project or the funding necessary to facilitate the project. 13 Most grant writers have a strong tendency to underestimate what will be required to successfully complete a project. Research supports strategies to counteract this bias by establishing estimates for individual pieces of the project rather than for the project as a whole. 14 For example, one should create a detailed timeline that includes permissions (e.g., parent or administrator permissions, institutional human subjects ethics regulations), recruitment, assessment administration, scoring, data entry, and dissemination, which includes progress reports to the funding organization. Allow enough time to account for potential unanticipated issues that may be beyond one’s control (e.g., delays in approval by the school board). Grant writers should consider potential pitfalls and limitations of a project. For example, what happens if enrollment does not increase by adding a new program in a school? What is the contingency plan in case the new program or new curriculum does not work as intended?
Plan the budget accordingly to carry out the project. One should not overinflate the budget, but be realistic. 15 Reviewers are looking for potential reasons to deny funding, and inflating the budget is a common mistake. Most budgets separately detail supplies (<$500.00) and equipment (>$500.00). One should be sure that the costs that are necessary to complete the project are allowed by the organization. Some organizations will fund instrument repair but may not provide funding for new instruments. In addition, some organizations do not allow for overhead or indirect costs or may allow for only a percentage of indirect costs.
Elevator Speech
An elevator speech should include a description of the problem, significance, and specific aims. Scheduling an appointment to review a practiced elevator speech with a program officer or grants officer is necessary for many foundation grants and federal grants. Program officers are eager to listen to your ideas and can provide key feedback to enable your application to be more competitive. In some cases, the program officer may recommend a different funding mechanism for the project. Whatever feedback or suggestions are offered, one should take notes and express appreciation for their guidance in this process.
The development of a successful application is based on the criteria involved in the review process. Consider the goals of the funding mechanism or foundation and research successful grant applications when evaluating funding resources. Music educators’ goals directly impact their constituents. Grant writing is no different than any other form of professional development in that the value of these experiences lies in the impact felt by the students. 16 Yet, among thousands of music educators surveyed in 2009, 47 percent of the population reported not submitting grants due to a lack of experience. 17
Writing a grant does not have to be overwhelming. It shares many similarities with designing a lesson plan. Once a grant writer clarifies a project’s goals, he or she is well on the way to explaining them to a funding agency. There are many possibilities for achieving success in grant writing. The benefits of obtaining grant support have the capacity to reach students, support the classroom, and impact the community and are all within a music educator’s reach.
Footnotes
Notes
Jennifer A. Bugos is an associate professor of music education at the University of South Florida and a member of the Center for Music Education Research in Tampa. Her research has been funded by the National Endowment for the Arts, National Institutes of Health, the GRAMMY Foundation, Retirement Research Foundation, McKnight Brain Research Foundation, and the American Orff Schulwerk Association. She can be contacted at