Once we had established our mission and vision the next step that needed to be done was writing the Request for Proposal (RFP). Team 2 worked on creating the Request for Proposal, and once they created the draft they shared it with the rest of the class. As a class, we went over what we liked and what we wanted to change. Even though the team that worked on the Request for Proposals did such an amazing first draft, there were still many edits that the class went over to make sure that everyone felt comfortable with what was included. We all had the understanding that many organizations are already extremely busy with other things, so we did not want to add a more to their plates by asking for too much in the RFP. In the end, we decided that we wanted to include our mission along with the kinds of programs that we would like to fund and the ones that we would not. After that our RFP includes a list of things that organizations need to include in their application.
Our class decided at the beginning that we wanted to fund organizations that provided educational and professional opportunities to the low, income immigrant community. Off the top of our heads, we had a list of organizations we knew in the DMV area that worked with this community and we knew we could reach out to them to ask if they were interested in applying to our foundation. The RFP that we currently have includes the list of programs that could help the low-income immigrant community. This allows organizations to know what type of programs we are interested in funding and which ones would not count. The RFP includes the list of things that we ask for in the application. This includes a cover letter, an executive summary, a narrative and a budget narrative, information about the organization’s history, mission, vision, goals, and key staff, 990-form, and a plan to measure the project results. We are requiring that all organizations that are planning on applying provide us with all of these documents.
Human Services and Social Justice did a great job of teaching us about RFPs; however, I never thought about what actually goes into creating one. This process showed me how difficult it can be to write an RFP because it has to be general enough to allow different organizations to fill out the application but also specific enough that there is not an overwhelming amount of applications. At one point, we were struggling to decide what we wanted to include in the application, specifically if we wanted organizations to include their 990s. For a brief period of time I was thinking why it mattered if we included it or not; however, I remembered this is not just a class project, organizations are actually going to be applying to our foundation and including different things just to include it could take up a lot of their staff members’ times. I realized that RFPs need to include what we would want to see to understand the organization but also taking into consideration the time that these organizations will take to fill out the application.
While I personally am not a fan of group projects, I think we did a good job as a class to edit the RFP. I have never liked group projects because there are so many different personalities that can be working together and I can easily feel overpowered by others. I have a tendency to not speak up when working in groups but I think my classmates did a great job of being open to hearing from everyone. Professor Kelso also made sure that we all said our opinions throughout the editing process, which I appreciated otherwise I probably would not have spoken up. I am happy with the RFP that we created and I am excited to see how many organizations we get to apply.
--Jocelyn
Responses from our class
Thank you so much for your thoughtful post. The RFP writing process was a struggle and a learning experience. As someone on the RFP writing team, I found that like you, I was very surprised by how much still needed to change and be edited. We probably spent 1-2 hours on review in class. I think making sure everyone was comfortable with the language was an important reason to edit together and to not jump ahead to approving it before it was ready. I also felt like we took a community-centered approach and tried to make our requirements less time-consuming for nonprofits who decide to apply for the grant. I love this!! As a nonprofit executive director myself- with a very small and hardworking team - I would feel frustrated by the amount of requirements asked for if the funding amount was low or on the lower side. I also think that our transparency in telling organizations what we would and would not fund was awesome! These little details make a world of difference to nonprofit grantwriters. They want to maximize their time and opportunity. Overall, I think the final version of the RFP does this. I am very proud of the class and its collaboration to create the RFP we have now.
--Kyrah
During the Request For Proposals editing process, I found myself thinking about whether or not we would be encouraging mission creep from the organizations who will apply for our grant. We needed to remain on target with what projects and programs we seek to fund based in Students For Students' mission and vision without possibly excluding a potential partner! Earlier this semester, we read about how foundations can be a driver, partner, or catalyst for social change. Of those three, I believe Students For Students is seeking to fill a "partner" role, which is why it was so important that we wrote this RFP with an idea of what local nonprofits were actually offering. Though being a driver or catalyst doesn't mean throwing caution to the wind, focusing on a partnership role demands greater care. As a class, we can recognize that our grant isn't enough for any one nonprofit to kick-start a massive new program, however, we recognize the kind of mileage it can give to an organization already building towards our shared vision.
As Kyrah said before, we spent nearly an entire class meeting on editing--even down to the word! I think taking the time for this precision was key to effectively writing a RFP that was both specific and inclusive. It had to be both aware of current work and making space for new projects that may emerge. Otherwise, we wouldn't be effectively prioritizing our role as a partner to local nonprofits.
--Helen
I agree that the process of creating the RFP was very informative and I learned a lot through our class debates. I was particularly struck by how easily we found ourself straying ever so slightly away from the established Students for Students mission. In our debates our class often found ourselves specifically focusing on one word or phrase. We would debate and discuss, and ultimately find ourselves with a bit of tunnel vision. Usually, the debate ended when someone suggested an entirely different sentence. They would find success with keeping the meaning of the original sentence but wording it entirely differently, rather than trying to tweak or change the existing sentence. The new sentence would more accurately describe our mission and more succinctly convey the meaning. This tunnel vision effect made it very clear how easily an organization can experience mission creep. Words get twisted and focused on so specifically that they distort the meaning and connotations that were originally intended. Before this experience, I had turned my nose up to organizations that experience mission creep. I naively felt that mission creep was a sign that the organization didn't truly care about their mission. I stand fully corrected in this thought, because Students for Students experienced the beginnings of mission creep in just creating our RFP. I now completely understand how over many years and many leadership changes, an organization can find themselves operating under a mission statement that is different from what they originally intended.
--Haley