Grant Competition: AARP Foundation Seeks Evidence-Based Solutions for Vulnerable Older Adults Applicant Webinar Presented by Matt D Amico, Grant Program Officer October 11, 2016
Webinar Agenda AARP Foundation Overview Evidence-Based Grant Competition Overview Overview of Application Process Question & Answer
AARP FOUNDATION Vision: A country free of poverty where no older person feels vulnerable. Mission: We serve the vulnerable 50+ by creating and advancing effective solutions to help them secure the essentials. AARP Foundation focuses its work around four impact areas, to ensure that low-income vulnerable older adults have nutritious food, safe, secure and affordable housing, a steady income, and strong and sustaining social bonds.
AARP Foundation Desired Outcomes Income Security Ultimate outcome: More working-age older adults employed and able to protect their financial assets. Food Security Ultimate outcome: A food-secure nation where all older adults have access to healthy, safe and affordable foods. Housing Security Ultimate outcome: More olders adults able to keep and maintain the place called home. Social Connectedness Ultimate outcome: Older adults are fully connected to community and healthier for it.
Background on Grant Competition Grant competition seeks evidence-based solutions that advance our mission to serve the vulnerable 50+. Grantees will be guided by a deep level of engagement with AARP Foundation and that can be nurtured, evaluated and brought to scale. We expect a percentage of grantees will move along evidence continuum in preparation to be scaled nationally under the AARP Foundation umbrella.
Eligibility Eligible organizations include those with 501(c)(3) designation. Public agencies are eligible. Must not currently be a program of AARP Foundation. AARP Foundation does not make grants to individuals.
Goals for Grant Competition Through this grant competition AARP Foundation seeks to advance multiple goals: Develop a landscape of evidence-based interventions; Create portfolio of grant-funded programs with different levels of evidence with the goal of scaling, to serve more low-income older adults; and Identify solutions that seek a double bottom line (sustainable programs that achieve a positive financial and social return).
Focus on Evidence Our Goal: assist grantee in moving through evidence continuum. Determine your current level of evidence: Theory of Change/Pre-Evidence: Program model supported by theoretical framework (e.g., theory of change) and/or previous research. Self-reported Evidence: Systematically collected data tracks who is served, and the outputs and outcomes that are achieved. Independent Evaluation: Evaluations that support causal conclusions but cannot be generalized beyond the study group; or evaluations that support causal conclusions with a large range of participants or multiple evaluations supporting the same conclusion. Minimum Requirement: Strong theory of change supported by previous research findings.
AARP Foundation Engagement AARP Foundation focuses our grantmaking to identify and invest in new programs that we can implement directly or through close collaboration with other organizations. Through this deep level of engagement, we seek to: Define your outcomes and methodology to measure the outcome. Understand and refine your business and program model. Determine your readiness for the appropriate evaluation. Provide technical assistance as needed. Explore potential to expand the program under the AARP Foundation umbrella. Expansion under the AARP Foundation umbrella could range simply from leveraging AARP Foundation s trusted brand to increase awareness and participation to integrating the program within AARP Foundation s organizational structure.
Grant Award The total amount and length of the grant award will coincide with the level of evidence and maturity of the program. The cost to move from one milestone to the next is often higher particularly as more people are being served and the necessary evaluation becomes more complicated. The following should be considered guidelines, but not strict funding bands: Theory of Change/ Pre-Evidence: $50,000-$75,000; 9-18 months Self-reported Evidence: $100,000-$200,000/year; 18-24 months Independent Evaluation: $200,000-$300,000/year; 24-36 months
Tips for a Strong Submission Be Concise and Specific(note character limits). Help Us Understand Your Program Life Cycle Focus on Evidence, Data, Results Logic model/theory of change attachment is helpful (guidance available in appendix of this presentation). Calculate social return, if possible Compelling Financial Model (Double Bottom Line social and financial return) Focus on how we could leverage your expertise. Explain how scaling could work (by your organization or another).
Goals for Pre-Application Receive a basic understanding of the level of evidence and/or afflicted research of your program. ~20-30 minutes to complete. Logic Model or Theory of Change very helpful but not required. Budget or request amount not required for this stage (will be required in full application stage, if invited).
For More Information and to Apply Please visit our website for more details, to download the full Request for Applications (RFA), and to find the link to the required online pre-application. Link to submit full application will be e-mailed to invited applicants. http://www.aarp.org/aarp-foundation/grants/info-2016/identifying- Evidence-Based-Solutions.html
Timeline/Key Dates October 18: Mandatory Pre-application deadline by 11:59 p.m. ET October 24: Notification to all applicants regarding invited status November 10: Invited full application deadline by 11:59 p.m. ET November 21 - December 9: Clarification period (as needed) December 16: Organization informed about funding January 1: Program start date (flexible)
Questions? Please press *6 to unmute your line if you have a question; Press #6 to re-mute your line after you ve spoken. For questions after this webinar, please e-mail me at evidence@aarp.org with any follow-up questions. Thank you!
Appendix: Guidance on Logic Models What is a Logic Model? A picture/graphical depiction of a program: What you are putting into it, what you are doing, and what you hope to achieve. Program roadmap
Why Create a Logic Model? Builds a common understanding across stakeholders especially about the relationship between actions and results Takes common focus on outputs and moves it to outcomes Starting point for program planning and evaluation
AARP Foundation Logic Model Template Inputs Resources Activities Outputs Participation Outcomes Short Medium Long Assumptions - Contextual Factors -
Logic Model Components: Assumptions Assumptions are the beliefs we have about the program, the participants, and how the program will work. If not discussed from the outset of a program key stakeholders can have different ideas about: the problem or existing situation; program operations; expected outcomes and benefits; the participants and how they learn, behave, their motivations; resources and how they will be allocated; staff and their roles; the external environment and how it will influence the project; and/or the knowledge base and what is known and unknown.
Logic Model Components: Contextual Factors Contextual Factors: the environment in which the program exists and which can interact with and influence the program. Economic (e.g. a recession, an economic boom) Political/Civic (e.g. a new president, new leader) Social (e.g. gender roles, discrimination) Organizational (e.g. a reorganization, downsizing, merger) Environmental (e.g. a natural disaster, global warming, an oil spill)
Logic Model Components: Inputs/Resources Inputs are the resources dedicated to or consumed by the program. Common Inputs: funding staff volunteers training curriculum technology
Logic Model Components: Outputs Outputs are the direct results of program activities Program activities are the actions taken by programs to achieve the desired outcomes Example Activities: Tutoring sessions Grocery store tours Training Job counseling Participation is the number and type of participants in activities
Logic Model Components: Outcomes Outcomes are the changes we expect to occur as a result of our work. They are benefits to people served, organizations, systems, or communities. Outcomes are often talked about in terms of happening in the short term, intermediate term, and long term.
Types of Change/Outcomes Shorter-term outcomes Knowledge Skills Attitudes opinions or values Motivation or aspiration Behavior Condition Policies/laws Longer- term outcomes
Additional Resources Transformative Scale: The Future of Growing What Works by Jeffrey Bradach & Abe Grindle W.K. Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide Grantcraft: Using a Theory of Change