Post 350–400-word reply to each Discussion
Discussion #1
When grant managers knowingly make mistakes or stumble upon, it is extremely important that they contact the funder to admit to fault and follow-up with necessary actions taken. Mayhem can happen to any grant project but not doubt when a project’s performance is deemed unsatisfactory, most awarding agencies will require grant managers to submit an audit. Flood et al1 suggests having regular audits done as a sound business practice which can allow grant managers to examine project documentation and compliance of items such as income, expenditures, and financial statements associated with the grant. He also highly recommends that grant managers audit regularly which can be a great way to identify problems in the grant. Problems for example such as noncompliance with grant terms and conditions, failure to conduct required assessments, illegal purchases made, and even not meeting a match funds commitment.1 I can understand how hard it can be to ensure that match funds are met especially when many are included in grant proposals. When I was working on the homework assignments my foundation from Chesapeake Regional submitted a grant only requesting help for a health educator while a great majority of the funds were being relied upon by grant matching. It takes the right group and time to project how much can be covered so that when a grant is delivered, though it may include all the funding asked for, many organizations have to be ready for smaller grant amounts and how they plan to cover the rest of the costs. Both Ward and Flood recommend that any discrepancies with grant management should be reported immediately to the established audit agency and the funder. Action will most likely result in some sort of follow-up as well as a resolution process.1 Ward even mentions that failure to follow-up up with resolutions can seriously harm an organization as well as a grant manager from receiving future grant funds.2 In essence, it is the grant manager’s duty to ensure that the funds are properly being managed, used, and documented. Grant managers are not perfect and mistakes are bound to happen and it is critical to own up to those mistakes when discovered. Even if a nonprofit doesn’t spend more than $300,000 of government grant monies a good grant manager should always be prepared for an audit. Whitehurst3 mentions that grant funders will appreciate open admitting of fault which shows trust and rationale behind why the mistake was made in the first place and the knowing that the process of fixing it is in place and that the mistake shouldn’t happen again. He also adds that the tools available to rebuilding credibility and authority to lead as a grant manager are being accessible, answering questions, admitting mistakes, and providing action. If a grant manager keeps in touch with funders and speaks up before being caught, I can imagine they would understand wanting to feel embarrassed than lose future funding not only for their organization but for themselves on whatever project they touch.
References
1. Flood H. Essentials of Grants Management: A Guide for the Perplexed. Available at http://archives.gadoe.org/DMGetDocument.aspx/EssentialsofGrantsManagement.pdf?p=6CC6799F8C1371F66CEF72E8CD67388DDE32B5705066C91D2CAA546454A0CF7A. Accessed October 11, 2017.
2. Ward D. Effective Grants Management. 2010. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
3. Whitehursts J. Be a Leader Who Can Admit Mistakes. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2015/06/be-a-leader-who-can-admit-mistakes. Accessed October 11, 2017.
Discussion #2
Grants management “is a combination of a definition of a time frame and the activities that take place during that time frame.”1 So, when an individual is identified or appointed as the grants manager, he/she is responsible for the financial reporting, the evaluation of objectives, and tasking and monitoring personnel among other detailed duties. When milestones of the grant are reached, or projected targets are achieved, the grant manager receives the recognition; moreover, the one who receives the glory must also bear the burden when circumstances are not favorable. If an embarrassing error occurs, a grants manager should expeditiously and efficiently rectify the mistake. How aggressive a grants manager should clean up an embarrassing error depends on the error. As prior stated, it should be done expeditiously but also efficiently. He/she would not want to make a hasty decision without complete accurate information. Doing so could exacerbate the situation. Although it is the grants manager responsibility to oversee the full particulars of the grant, his/her actions reflect the organization that is receiving the funds. So, the grant manager’s diligent response or lack of could be the determining factor whether the grantor awards the respective organization monies again or if the grantor rescinds the original offer and not continue payments. Audits are conducted to monitor and analyze the performance of grant recipients, and internal audits are sometimes implemented to maintain checks and balances within grantee organizations.2 Internal audits assists the grants manager in accomplishing objectives and improve the effectiveness of risk management. This would prove beneficial to the grants manager in preventing an error or discovering it before it becomes catastrophic. Nevertheless, there is a difference between an error and intentional malfeasance. Case in point, the School District of Lancaster in 2003 was found guilty of unethical practices in receipt of a federal grant that included, nepotism, wasteful spending and poor tax administrative oversight. This resulted in resignations of positions, as well as an incarceration.1 I am certain that this caused embarrassment on the school district and the community. Without knowing if the grants manager was knowledgeable of these misdeeds, this is an example of a complex error that must be aggressively approached but efficiently. In this case, mismanagement and lack of supervision was the error of the grants manager who could have potentially prevented many of the unethical actions.
Any error discovered should be immediately rectified. As a grants manager, it is a moot point who or what was the cause of the blunder. Ultimately, it is the duty of the grants manager to oversee the direct or indirect administration of the grant, and just as he/she will receive the accolades of a successful ran grant, unfortunately, any misfortunes are also part of the job.
References
1. Ward D. Effective grants management. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 2010.
2. Grants 101. Grants.gov. https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/learn-grants/grants-101/post-award-phase.html. Accessed October 9, 2017.