Rhetoric Versus Reality

We might add a fifth reason to decline proposals: rhetoric that is not descriptive of reality. Whenever a foundation publishes its interest and priorities, grantseekers tend to write proposals that tailor their rhetoric to fit these interests. This behavior is entirely appropriate so long as the idea being described truly fits with the foundation's expressed interest. The temptation for grantseekers, however, is to use the rhetoric to make it appear as though ideas that don't match foundation interests at all really are a good fit.

This gap between rhetoric and reality is occasionally evident in the proposal. Sometimes, for example, the outcomes desired by the foundation will be stated as the project's goals, but the work plan will use methods that are highly unlikely to produce the stated result. More often, however, you cannot find the discrepancies simply by reading the proposal; it is often necessary to visit the applicant's offices and to discuss the proposed project with those who would be running it should it get funded. Even then, it is not always possible to detect rhetoric gaps before funding a project.

When you do detect such a gap, however, the best course is to decline the request. Although it might be possible to negotiate an agreement for a grant that more closely adheres to the foundation's interests, it is clear that the applicant does not really share these interests and really wants to work on other pursuits. It is best in such cases to acknowledge such differences and decline the “rhetorical” proposal.