The Q&C Format

In many ways, a Q&C letter is reminiscent of Pat O'Malley's observation that “Speeches are like babies—easy to conceive, but hard to deliver.” To coach without dictating and to inform without promising are much easier said than done. In order to stay on track, it is helpful to follow a formula in writing Q&C letters. The formula that will be discussed in the following pages is one that works well, but it is by no means the only one that you could employ. You can “mix and match” the elements it contains, and you may want to omit some for certain requests. You could use a completely different format. The important thing is to create a general template so that you can maintain consistency and remember to ask important questions.

Opening Paragraph

The Q&C should begin with a paragraph identifying the proposal to which it is a response. This identification includes the date of the proposal, the name of the applicant, the amount requested, the purpose of the proposal, and its identifying number (if the foundation assigns one). All of this information will eliminate any ambiguity as to the purpose of the letter or as to the proposal to which it refers.

Second Paragraph

This paragraph should identify the status of the proposal. Keeping always in mind the need to manage grantseeker expectations, you should tell the applicant that the proposal has been reviewed and that there is interest in considering it further as a candidate for possible funding. Further underscore these qualifications by saying that the Q&C is requesting information that will allow the foundation to make a final decision, and that it is very possible that the proposal still may be declined.

Third Paragraph

This paragraph should convey to the applicant the format in which the foundation expects a response. If there is a deadline by which the Q&C must be answered, it should be stated clearly in this paragraph. There are essentially two types of responses: the addendum or the rewritten proposal. The addendum allows the original proposal to stand and merely adds information to it. A rewritten proposal requires the grantseeker to start over from scratch. You should request an addendum when the original proposal was basically sound, but there are a few points that require clarification. Requesting a rewritten proposal places a hardship on the applicant, and such a request may create in the applicant's mind an implied contract. (“Since I am being required to do all this work, the foundation should be willing to fund the rewritten proposal.”) You should request a rewritten proposal only if there are major issues that need resolution or if it is a classic good idea–bad proposal situation.

There is no simple guideline for making the choice between requesting an addendum or a rewritten proposal. A crude but generally effective consideration is to estimate how long the addendum might be. If it is likely to be more than half as long as the original proposal, you almost certainly need to ask for a rewritten proposal. And if the rewritten proposal is likely to be significantly longer or more complex than the original proposal, probably the better course would be to decline the proposal altogether. The choice frequently boils down to a matter of instinct and experience, and it is appropriate for you to make the call based on which of the two—addendum or rewrite—would make it easier to see the idea through to funding within the foundation.

Fourth Paragraph

This paragraph should list any special requirements for answering the questions. Some foundations prefer, for example, to have applicants copy the questions and then provide their answer to them, so that the program officer does not have to toggle back and forth between a copy of the Q&C and the response. If the foundation wishes the applicant to go into greater detail on any particular question, you should also disclose such information in this paragraph. In any case, you should specify that the questions be answered and numbered so as to correspond to the order and numbering of the questions and concerns sent to them. Applicants have been known to answer questions randomly or to respond in essay form, making it difficult to tell exactly which questions they are answering or whether they are in fact answering the questions at all.

List of Questions and Concerns

Having presented this preparatory material, you now list the questions and concerns. There are a number of effective ways to organize such questions and concerns in the letter. If there are only a few issues, it makes sense simply to list them in the order in which you encountered them in the proposal. If the number is larger, it might make sense to arrange them by proposal section; that is, you would create subheadings for the implementation plan, the continuation plan, the evaluation plan, the dissemination plan, and the budget. Other methods are possible, such as listing the questions and concerns in order of descending priority. No matter what organizational method you use, it is good practice to label the questions and concerns with either a letter or a number, so that both you and the grantseeker can refer to them later without ambiguity or confusion.

If the questions and concerns are many in number or higher in complexity (as is often the case when requesting a rewritten proposal), it usually makes sense to divide the questions and concerns into two classes: overarching and specific. Overarching questions and concerns pertain to fundamental issues that undergird the entire project, such as, “Were young people consulted about this youth serving project?” or “Does the omission of formative evaluation make sense? If so, why?” Specific questions and concerns are those that pertain to only a limited area of the proposed project, such as, “Is the amount budgeted for meetings adequate?” or “Might video be a more effective means of dissemination than a book?” Generally speaking, the number of overarching questions should be smaller than the number of specific ones. If there are more than five or six overarching questions about a proposal, the sheer number of troubling “big issues” suggests that the proposal should probably be declined. There is no ideal figure regarding numbers of specific questions (ten to twenty are not unusual for a complex proposal), but if the number rises above thirty or so, you might wonder if there are simply too many questions and consider declining the request.

Final Paragraph

The final paragraph in the Q&C letter should serve the function of a reminder; because the questions and concerns can be rather lengthy, it is wise to restate the deadline, the format, and the special requirements for answering the questions. Most important, the last paragraph should contain one more disclaimer, stating that even if the applicant satisfactorily answers all the questions posed in the Q&C, there can still be no guarantee of funding. This disclaimer will serve both to control expectations and to document that the applicant was not unduly encouraged, should questions arise in the future.

Information Worksheet

If there are pieces of information that the foundation needs to share with virtually every applicant to whom a Q&C is sent, it often makes sense to create a separate worksheet on that topic and enclose it with the Q&C letter. Doing so avoids the necessity of retyping budgetary or evaluation requirements, for example, which can be quite involved and lengthy, in every Q&C. Finally, if you are the program officer taking the lead on responding on behalf of a review team, it is good practice to share a copy of the Q&C letter with all members of the team, so that they can be kept abreast of the progress of the request.