Skip to main content

Chapter 3: Developing Project Ideas: Chapter 3: Developing Project Ideas

Chapter 3: Developing Project Ideas
Chapter 3: Developing Project Ideas
    • Notifications
    • Privacy

“Chapter 3: Developing Project Ideas”

Chapter 3: Developing Project Ideas

In early 2024, the National Book Foundation announced a funding opportunity where nonprofit literary arts organizations could apply for up to $10,000 to support increasing their capacity. This could include anything from fundraising capabilities, to marketing, to training opportunities for staff, to…well, pretty much anything that would enable the organization to increase their reach.

The genesis of any successful grant proposal is a well-conceived project idea. This involves not just the spark of inspiration but the careful cultivation and refinement of ideas to ensure they meet both community needs and funder priorities. It's a stage where creativity meets strategy, allowing for the exploration of innovative solutions to pressing problems while also considering the practical aspects of funding, implementation, and impact. This section delves into the processes of generating project ideas, making a distinction between reactive and proactive grant writing, and getting into the specifics of two different types of brainstorming.

Ensuring that you understand this phase of the process will get you through the, “okay, now what?” part of finding an opportunity such as the one offered by the National Book Foundation.

Reactive and Proactive Grant Seeking

The two primary approaches to grant seeking are reactive and proactive methods. Understanding the differences between these approaches is essential, as it impacts how nonprofits come up with project ideas. Each method has its unique characteristics, benefits, and challenges. By comprehending these differences, a nonprofit can significantly enhance its ability to secure necessary funding and sustain its operations.

Reactive Grant Seeking

Reactive grant seeking involves responding to requests for proposals (RFPs) issued by grantmakers. This approach mirrors common practices in the business and government sectors, where companies or organizations bid on projects by submitting detailed proposals that align with the outlined requirements of the RFP. So, if a city was looking to replace an intersection that has a stoplight with one that manages traffic using a roundabout (aka a traffic circle or rotary depending on your geographic location), they are unlikely to accomplish this using their own city employees. Rather, they put out an RFP that explains what they are looking for and then it is up to private companies to submit proposals, or bids, for how much they would charge the city to do that work for them. Funders do similar things with RFPs for the projects/programs that they would like to see carried out.

Key Steps in Reactive Grant Seeking

  1. Identifying Opportunities: Nonprofit organizations are frequently on the lookout for RFPs from various sources, including foundations, government agencies, and other grantmaking entities. These RFPs outline specific issues or problems that the grantmaker aims to address, along with the criteria for proposal submissions.
  2. Proposal Development: Once an RFP is identified, the nonprofit develops a proposal that addresses the specified issue, demonstrating how it will execute the project effectively and efficiently. This proposal includes the project plan, budget, and the qualifications of the organization.
  3. Submission and Waiting: After the proposal is submitted, the nonprofit waits for the grantmaker to review all submissions and select the most suitable proposals for funding.

Examples and Applications

Regranting is a common form of reactive grant seeking. Larger entities, such as foundations or government units, receive substantial grants and then issue RFPs to distribute portions of these funds to smaller, often local, nonprofit organizations. For example, funds from the tobacco settlement judgment were distributed to community foundations, which then regranted to local organizations focusing on educational or smoking cessation programs.

Another instance is the federal government's effort to involve small faith-based and community organizations (FBCOs) in grant programs. Since many small FBCOs lacked the capacity to manage federal grants directly, larger nonprofits applied for these grants as fiscal agents. Upon receiving the grants, they regranted a portion of the funds to the local FBCOs and managed the administration and reporting processes.

Advantages and Challenges

Reactive grant seeking allows nonprofits to access specific funding opportunities tailored to particular projects. However, it is highly competitive, and success depends on the nonprofit's ability to align closely with the grantmaker's objectives. Additionally, the process can be time-consuming and may not always align with the nonprofit’s strategic priorities.

Proactive Grant Seeking

Proactive grant seeking, on the other hand, involves identifying potential funding sources that align with the nonprofit's mission and goals, and then reaching out to these sources to secure funding. This approach requires a deep understanding of the philanthropic landscape, including the giving patterns and priorities of various foundations and corporations.

Key Steps in Proactive Grant Seeking

  1. Research: Nonprofits invest time in researching potential funders, examining their past giving patterns, and understanding their strategic priorities. This helps in identifying the foundations and corporations that are most likely to support the nonprofit’s initiatives.
  2. Building Relationships: Establishing and nurturing relationships with potential funders is crucial. This may involve initial meetings, attending networking events, and consistent communication to keep the funders informed about the nonprofit’s work and impact.
  3. Tailored Proposals: Proactive grant seekers develop tailored proposals that highlight how their projects align with the funder’s mission and goals. These proposals are often submitted without an RFP, showcasing the nonprofit’s initiatives and seeking support.

Examples and Applications

Proactive grant seeking can be highly effective for long-term funding strategies. For instance, a nonprofit focused on environmental conservation might research foundations dedicated to sustainability and renewable energy. By understanding these foundations' priorities, the nonprofit can propose projects that not only align with their mission but also offer innovative solutions to pressing environmental issues.

Advantages and Challenges

Proactive grant seeking allows nonprofits to align their funding strategies with their long-term goals, potentially leading to more sustainable funding sources. It also helps in building lasting relationships with funders, which can result in ongoing support. However, this approach requires significant effort in research and relationship-building and may not yield immediate results.

Both reactive and proactive grant seeking are essential strategies for nonprofits aiming to secure funding and sustain their operations. Reactive grant seeking is effective for accessing specific, often larger grants through a competitive process, while proactive grant seeking focuses on building relationships and aligning funding sources with the nonprofit's strategic goals. A comprehensive fundraising strategy should incorporate both approaches, balancing the immediate opportunities provided by reactive grant seeking with the long-term sustainability offered by proactive grant seeking. By leveraging both methods, nonprofits can enhance their funding prospects and better achieve their mission and goals.

Generating and Refining Ideas for Grant Proposals

Developing a grant proposal begins with generating innovative ideas, followed by careful refinement to ensure these ideas are impactful and feasible. This phase lays a strong foundation for your project, resonating with both the community it serves and potential funders.

The generation of project ideas is a creative process that often involves brainstorming sessions, engaging with community members, and consulting with experts within your field. Encourage a free flow of ideas without judgment to foster an environment where innovative solutions can emerge. Consider the following strategies:

  • Brainstorming Sessions: Gather your team for structured brainstorming sessions. Use techniques like mind mapping, the Six Hats or the SCAMPER method (See below for more information) to explore different angles and perspectives. These sessions can generate a wide array of potential project ideas by encouraging team members to think creatively and collaboratively.
  • Community Engagement: Directly involve community members or the target population in the ideation process. This can provide invaluable insights into their needs, challenges, and the types of solutions they believe would be most effective. Engaging the community ensures that the project is grounded in real-world issues and has the support of those it aims to benefit.
  • Expert Consultation: Seek advice and input from subject matter experts. Their knowledge can spark new ideas or highlight emerging needs and trends in the field that your project could address. Experts can provide a broader perspective on potential challenges and opportunities, helping to shape more innovative and effective project concepts.

Once a broad range of ideas has been generated, the next step is to refine these ideas into a coherent and focused project concept. This involves evaluating each idea against criteria such as impact potential, alignment with organizational goals, feasibility, and fundability. Key steps in the refinement process include:

  • Assessing Relevance and Impact: Evaluate how each idea addresses the identified needs of your target population and the potential for making a meaningful impact. Prioritize ideas that offer innovative solutions to pressing problems. This assessment ensures that the project will make a significant difference in the community.
  • Alignment with Organizational Goals: Ensure that the project ideas are in harmony with your organization's mission and strategic objectives. This alignment strengthens your proposal and ensures the project is a natural extension of your organization’s work. Projects that align well with your organization's goals are more likely to receive support from stakeholders and funders.
  • Feasibility Analysis: Consider the practical aspects of implementing your project ideas. Analyze resources, capabilities, timeframes, and potential obstacles to assess whether the project can be realistically executed. This analysis helps identify any potential challenges early on and allows for the development of strategies to address them.
  • Funder Compatibility: Review potential funders' priorities and interests to gauge the compatibility of your project ideas with their funding goals. This step is critical for identifying projects that stand a better chance of receiving support. Understanding the funder's mission and priorities ensures that your proposal is tailored to their interests.

Identifying Existing Needs within the Nonprofit

One of the easiest ways to come up with a starting point for proposals is to take inventory of needs within the organization. Ask yourself questions like:

  • Do you have adequate funding for an existing program?
  • Do you have funding that is time-limited? If so, when will that funding run out?
  • Do you have the material needs covered for your programs, or are you lacking equipment, transportation, or technology?
  • Do you have enough paid staff to carry out the mission activities?

Recognizing Programs that Need Expansion

If your nonprofit is staying on top of its current needs, you might be thinking about how to expand programs so that they have a greater reach. Consider the following:

  • Do you have programs that are successful which could be built upon?
  • Do you have programs with more demonstrated needs than you are currently able to serve?
  • What types of resources would allow you to serve more patrons?

Brainstorming the “Nice to Haves,” Not Just the “Need to Haves”

When looking at the vision of your nonprofit, dream for the future. Think about the long-term goals of the organization. Many times, when nonprofits are just staying afloat, the vision goes by the wayside. But don’t be afraid to visualize the future and become a little idealistic. Ask yourself these questions:

  • What would we do if we had $20k, $50k (or fill in the blank) more dollars?
  • What could we do with more staff, or another car, van, office (replace with whatever need you have)?
  • What are we always wishing we had that always seems out of reach?
  • Does the staff have enough training to do their jobs, provide the best service, etc?

Not everything will be a suitable request right at the moment, but taking this pause to brainstorm ideas can help you seek out potential funding opportunities and create a plan to go after them.

Conducting a Search for Funding Opportunities That Align with Your Mission

Once you have identified some of your nonprofit’s current or future needs, the next steps are to find suitable funders and to craft a compelling proposal. It’s important to come up with an identified need first, then seek opportunities for funding, and not the other way around. Many new nonprofits get into the habit of “chasing dollars” rather than establishing what they need first, then seeking opportunities that align with that need. When you find a funder whose mission aligns with yours, that’s a great springboard for your ideas.

There are many search options to help find grant funders that align with your mission. Networking with other nonprofit leaders, using online search tools, and subscribing to email updates from known funders are just a few resources. To make your search for funders more efficient and productive, check out Instrumentl’s intelligent matching feature with a 14-day free trial.

Reviewing Applications, 990s, and Other Reports from Funders

When you find a potential funder, check out the application questions and requirements. This will give you a better understanding of the projects they will likely fund and the data that you’ll need to make a strong proposal. For example, look at the following types of information on the application:

  • Do they fund general operations or only projects?
  • Are there specific focus areas on which they concentrate?
  • If awarded, how long is the grant period?

Reviewing 990 reports from funders, which are year-end reports that grantmaking foundations must file, can provide insights into who they have awarded funds to and the types of projects and amounts funded in the past. This information can serve as a good starting point for your proposal.

Describing How Funding an Identified Need Would Help Your Organization and Those You Serve

When you create a grant proposal, the reviewer should clearly see how the requested amount is going to help with the capacity of your organization. If you know that you need a vehicle, for example, select a request amount appropriate to that price tag. Then, describe to the reader how this vehicle would help the nonprofit as a whole and/or its staff. Reviewers appreciate knowing the impact that their contribution will have.

Strong proposals also clearly discuss how the request amount will help the patrons you serve, even if that’s by way of helping the staff. For example, describe how this vehicle will allow staff to deliver more food, transport rescued animals, or visit far-away homes—whatever need it is serving in your nonprofit. Funders will appreciate seeing how the request connects to the greater mission.

Conclusion

Generating and refining ideas is a dynamic and critical phase in the development of a grant proposal. It requires a balance of creativity, strategic thinking, and practical considerations. By fostering an environment that encourages innovation, actively engaging with your community and experts, and rigorously evaluating your ideas against criteria of impact, feasibility, and funder alignment, you can develop a project concept that is compelling, actionable, and poised for success. This thoughtful approach to ideation and refinement is what ultimately transforms a good idea into a great project ready for funding.

Brainstorming

Effective brainstorming is one of the most important tools when it comes to generating ideas and solutions, whether you are working individually or as part of a team. In this section, we will explore three powerful brainstorming techniques: Mind Mapping, the Six Thinking Hats method, and the SCAMPER method. Mind Mapping, a visual tool, helps organize and connect ideas through a central concept, promoting creativity and clarity. The Six Thinking Hats method encourages participants to explore different perspectives systematically, and the SCAMPER method prompts creative thinking by challenging individuals to Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to another use, Eliminate, and Rearrange aspects of a concept or problem. These are just a few examples of many of the brainstorming methods that are out there, however they represent diverse and structured approaches to brainstorming. Learning techniques like these will help writers generate fresh, innovative solutions and ideas for grant proposals.Mind Mapping

Mind Mapping

A mind map is a tool used to represent ideas and concepts visually. In other words, it is a graphical way to illustrate connections between various pieces of information or ideas. Mind maps are used for brainstorming, problem-solving, decision-making, and organizing information, and can be a great way to develop project ideas.

Mind maps typically start with a central concept or idea, from which related subtopics radiate. These subtopics can then branch out further into more specific details or related ideas. The hierarchical and associative connections between ideas are emphasized by lines or arrows, while keywords, symbols, images, and colors can be used to enhance memory and organization.

Example of a Mind Map

Imagine a nonprofit organization is developing ideas for a grant proposal. They may create a mind map to organize their thoughts and processes.

Central Idea: Grant Proposal Development for Nonprofit Organization

First-Level Branches (Main Categories):

Community Needs Assessment

  • Local Issues
  • Beneficiary Demographics
  • Surveys and Data Collection
  • Key Stakeholders

Project Design

  • Goals and Objectives
  • Activities and Interventions
  • Timeline
  • Resources Needed

Budget and Funding

  • Cost Estimates
  • Funding Sources
  • Budget Justification
  • In-Kind Contributions

Partnerships and Collaboration

  • Potential Partners
  • Roles and Responsibilities
  • Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs)
  • Community Support

Evaluation and Impact

  • Metrics and Indicators
  • Data Collection Methods
  • Reporting
  • Long-Term Impact

Sustainability

  • Future Funding
  • Capacity Building
  • Scalability
  • Community Ownership

Each of these branches would then extend into more specific sub-branches. For instance, under "Project Design," there might be further branches for "Goal Setting," "Specific Activities," "Detailed Timeline," etc.

Optional Additional Elements:

  • Images: Pictures representing community activities, charts, dollar signs, partnership logos, etc.
  • Colors: Different colors to distinguish between the various branches and levels of hierarchy.
  • Connections: Lines or arrows to show how different subtopics interrelate, such as connecting "Local Issues" with "Goals and Objectives" or "Future Funding" with "Sustainability."

The mind map helps the nonprofit organization visualize the structure of their grant proposal and the connections between different components, making it easier to identify potential gaps, overlaps, or areas for new development. It can be used as a starting point for discussion and further detailed planning.

Six Thinking Hats 

The Six Thinking Hats technique is a method, developed by Edward de Bono, for guided discussion and brainstorming that involves metaphorically "wearing" six different hats, each representing a distinct type of thinking. By systematically focusing on each of these hats, an individual or group can explore various perspectives, leading to more well-rounded and effective decision-making. Here’s a breakdown of what each hat represents:

  • Blue Hat: "The Conductor's Hat" Focuses on controlling the thinking process and managing the discussion. This hat is used to set agendas, summarize progress, and reach conclusions.
  • Green Hat: "The Creative Hat" Encourages creative thinking and the generation of new ideas. This hat is all about innovation and exploring alternative possibilities.
  • Red Hat: "The Hat for the Heart" Represents emotions and intuition. Participants can express their feelings and gut reactions without needing to justify them logically.
  • Yellow Hat: "The Optimist's Hat" Emphasizes positive thinking and exploring the benefits and value of ideas. This hat looks at the bright side and identifies potential gains.
  • Black Hat: "The Judge's Hat" Involves critical judgment and identifying risks and flaws. This hat is used for caution and careful evaluation of ideas.
  • White Hat: "The Factual Hat" Focuses on gathering information and analyzing data. This hat deals with facts, figures, and objective data analysis.

How to Use the Six Thinking Hats Technique for Grant Writing

Step 1: Define the Focus

Start by clearly defining the problem, idea, or topic that needs brainstorming. For instance, if you are writing a grant proposal to secure funding for a community garden project, the focus could be on identifying the project's main objectives, the community needs it addresses, and the expected outcomes.

Step 2: Select Participants

Choose a diverse group of individuals who bring different perspectives, expertise, and roles to the discussion. This diversity will enhance the brainstorming process and ensure a comprehensive exploration of ideas. For example, include community members, gardening experts, local business owners, and grant writing specialists.

Step 3: Introduce the Six Hats

The facilitator introduces the concept of the Six Thinking Hats and explains the meaning and role of each hat. Participants should understand the thinking styles associated with each hat and the purpose they serve during the session. For example, explain that the Green Hat will focus on creative solutions for garden layout and sustainability practices.

Step 4: Assign Hat Roles

The facilitator assigns specific hat roles to participants. Each person is responsible for wearing a particular hat for a given period. This ensures that all perspectives are covered during the brainstorming session. For instance, assign the White Hat to the participant who will gather and present data on local soil quality and weather conditions.

Step 5: Hat Rotation

Participants switch roles by changing hats at designated intervals. This rotation ensures that everyone has the chance to contribute from different perspectives and prevents individuals from becoming fixated on a single thinking style. For example, after 15 minutes, the person wearing the Red Hat (focusing on emotions and community sentiment) will switch to the Black Hat (focusing on potential risks and challenges).

Step 6: Hat Exploration

While wearing a specific hat, participants share their thoughts, ideas, observations, or questions related to the topic. The facilitator guides the discussion, ensuring that the focus remains on the thinking style represented by the current hat. For example, during the Yellow Hat phase, participants might discuss the positive impact of the garden on local food security and community cohesion.

Step 7: Summarize and Analyze

At the end of the session, the facilitator summarizes the key insights, observations, ideas, and conclusions from each thinking style. This summary helps to consolidate the collective understanding, identify patterns, and inform subsequent decision-making processes. For example, compile a summary highlighting the creative solutions, potential risks, factual data, and emotional responses discussed during the session.

Benefits of Using the Six Thinking Hats for Grant Writing

Enhanced Creativity

The Green Hat encourages participants to think outside the box and generate innovative ideas. For instance, participants might suggest unique garden designs, partnerships with local schools for educational programs, or innovative methods for water conservation.

Balanced Thinking

By systematically considering all perspectives—facts, emotions, risks, benefits, and process control—the technique ensures balanced and fair thinking. This comprehensive approach results in more robust and well-rounded grant proposals. For example, by wearing the Black Hat, participants can identify and address potential risks like vandalism or maintenance challenges, ensuring the proposal is realistic and thorough.

Improved Collaboration

The structured framework of the Six Thinking Hats facilitates effective collaboration by ensuring that all participants can contribute to the discussion without conflicts or interruptions. This inclusivity fosters a more cohesive team effort. For example, community members and experts can share their viewpoints openly, leading to a richer and more diverse set of ideas.

Efficient Decision-Making

The method enables faster and more efficient decision-making by systematically analyzing different aspects, risks, benefits, and alternative possibilities. This streamlined approach helps reduce the time spent on deliberation and enables timely outcomes. For example, quickly identifying the most feasible and impactful solutions for the community garden project.

Reduced Bias and Subjectivity

Participants are encouraged to set aside personal biases and judgments and focus on the specific thinking style that their appointed hat represents. This objectivity leads to more rational and well-founded decisions. For example, the White Hat ensures that decisions are based on accurate data and evidence, rather than personal opinions or assumptions.

Increased Productivity

The structured and organized approach of the Six Hats process keeps discussions concentrated on the overall goal. By channeling efforts towards a common objective, participants can maintain focus throughout the session, leading to heightened productivity. For example, by having clear roles and focused discussions, the team can efficiently develop a comprehensive and compelling grant proposal.

Conclusion

Incorporating the Six Thinking Hats technique into the grant writing brainstorming process can significantly enhance the quality and effectiveness of grant proposals. By encouraging diverse perspectives, fostering creativity, and ensuring balanced thinking, this method helps teams develop well-rounded and compelling proposals that stand a better chance of securing funding. For grant writers looking to improve their brainstorming sessions, the Six Thinking Hats technique offers a powerful and structured approach to achieving success.

SCAMPER Technique

The SCAMPER technique is a creative brainstorming method that helps individuals and teams generate innovative ideas by prompting them to think about existing concepts in new ways. SCAMPER is an acronym for Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to another use, Eliminate, and Rearrange, each representing a different strategy for thinking about improvements or alternatives. By systematically applying these prompts to a product, process, or problem, participants can uncover fresh perspectives and potential solutions. For instance, substituting one component with another might lead to a more efficient design, while combining elements from different sources could result in a novel product. Adapting an existing idea to a new context or market might reveal untapped opportunities. Modifying aspects of a concept can enhance its appeal or functionality, and considering other uses can broaden its application. Eliminating unnecessary parts can simplify and streamline, and rearranging components can lead to more effective configurations.

This technique can be valuable when it comes to brainstorming and developing innovative ideas in grant writing. When applying SCAMPER to grant writing, you might substitute one element of your project with a more effective alternative, combine different ideas to create a more comprehensive approach, or adapt a successful strategy from another field to your project. Modifying certain aspects can make your proposal more appealing to funders, while thinking about how to put your project's outcomes to other uses can demonstrate its broader impact. Eliminating non-essential components can streamline your proposal, making it more focused and easier to understand, and rearranging parts of your plan can lead to a more logical and persuasive narrative. Using SCAMPER, grant writers can think creatively and develop robust, compelling proposals that stand out to potential funders.

Substitute

The "Substitute" component of the SCAMPER technique encourages us to consider what elements of a product or process can be replaced to achieve a different or improved outcome. This might involve substituting materials, people, rules, or even the use of the product itself. By experimenting with different substitutions, we can identify changes that enhance functionality or efficiency. This trial-and-error approach allows for creative problem-solving by asking questions such as: What else could be used instead? Who else could fulfill this role? What other elements, processes, approaches, or forces could be applied? Could this take place in a different setting? By exploring these possibilities, we open up new avenues for innovation and improvement.

Example: Innovative food items often use the substitute technique–consider the “cronut”, a combination of croissant and donut that hit the NYC food scene in 2013. But also imagine a nonprofit organization running a community garden project aimed at providing fresh produce to low-income families. The "Substitute" component of the SCAMPER technique could be applied to improve this project.

For instance, the organization might consider substituting the type of crops grown. Instead of traditional vegetables like tomatoes and lettuce, they could substitute with more culturally relevant crops that better meet the dietary preferences of the community they serve. This could involve growing vegetables that are staples in the diets of the local immigrant population, thereby increasing engagement and satisfaction.

Alternatively, the nonprofit could substitute volunteer roles. If the project currently relies on community volunteers for all tasks, they might substitute some of these roles with skilled horticulturists or agriculture students who can provide expert knowledge and improve crop yields.

Combine 

The "Combine" component of the SCAMPER technique asks us to consider how different features, uses, or components can be merged to create a superior or more comprehensive product. This might involve synthesizing features from various projects or programs to develop a more holistic solution. When applied this way, it might mean bringing together different team members to collaborate and combine their work for greater synergy. By thinking about how two or more parts of a product or process can be integrated, we can generate innovative outcomes and enhance overall effectiveness. Typical questions to consider include: Where are there overlaps in missions and goals? What ideas, purposes, units, or appeals might I combine? This approach allows for creative combinations that can lead to novel solutions.

Example: You might be reading this on one of the greatest examples of combining features that has ever happened, the smart phone. A phone, computer, calculator, television, radio, and more…all in one product? Brilliant. Now consider an organization that runs youth education and community health programs. Applying the "Combine" component could create a more impactful and holistic initiative.

For example, the organization could combine the youth education program with the community health program to develop a comprehensive after-school health and wellness curriculum. This new program could integrate educational activities with health workshops, teaching students about nutrition, exercise, and mental health alongside their academic subjects.

By combining the expertise of educators and health professionals, the program could offer hands-on learning experiences, such as cooking classes that teach healthy eating habits, or fitness sessions that double as physical education. The collaboration could also extend to including parents and community members, creating a support network that reinforces the lessons learned by the youth.

Furthermore, the combined program could utilize resources more efficiently. Shared facilities, joint training sessions for staff, and unified outreach efforts could reduce costs and maximize the reach and effectiveness of both initiatives.

Adapt

What aspects of a product or process can be adjusted to enhance its performance? This involves thinking about how solutions to one problem might be adapted to address another issue, or how a product or process can evolve to meet changing contexts or needs. By identifying which parts can be modified, we can improve functionality and relevance. Key questions to explore include: Does the past offer a parallel? What else is similar to this? What other ideas does this suggest? What could be adapted for use as a solution? Is there a model that we could copy? Who might I emulate? By adapting elements thoughtfully, we can achieve innovative and effective improvements.

Example: Readers of a certain age may remember a period of time where “Netflix” meant picking out what you wanted to watch and then waiting on the DVD to arrive in the mail so you could watch it. Not too long thereafter, the technology became available to stream these videos directly. Netflix adapted their model and began focusing on their streaming service.

Imagine a nonprofit organization that runs a successful job training program for adults. Applying the "Adapt" component of the SCAMPER technique could expand the program's impact by tweaking it to address another community need. For instance, the organization could adapt the job training program for high school students who are at risk of dropping out. By slightly modifying the curriculum and structure to suit younger participants, the program can help these students gain valuable skills and work experience, potentially keeping them engaged in their education and improving their future job prospects.

The adaptation might involve adjusting the training schedule to fit around school hours, incorporating mentorship from industry professionals who can inspire and guide the students, and adding elements that address the unique challenges faced by teenagers, such as balancing school and work or preparing for college applications. Additionally, the program could adapt some of its content to be more relevant to the interests and career aspirations of the youth. This might mean including modules on emerging industries or technology skills that are particularly appealing to younger generations.

By adapting the existing job training program to serve at-risk high school students, the nonprofit can leverage its proven methods and resources to make a significant difference in a new demographic, ultimately broadening its impact on the community.

Modify

The "Modify" (or sometimes, "Minimize/Magnify") component of the SCAMPER technique encourages us to change aspects of a project or program to achieve different outcomes. This could mean magnifying certain parts to highlight their importance or minifying elements to enhance overall efficiency. Consider modifying the structure, scope, or focus of the project to see how these changes impact its effectiveness and impact. Typical questions to explore include: What other approach or scale might we adopt? What might we add or remove? By thoughtfully modifying elements of a project or program, we can create improved versions that better meet the goals and needs of stakeholders.

Example: Consider a nonprofit organization that operates a mentorship program for young entrepreneurs. Applying the "Modify" component could help enhance the program's effectiveness and reach.For instance, the organization might magnify the networking aspect of the program. They could create larger-scale networking events or conferences, inviting successful entrepreneurs, investors, and industry experts to interact with the mentees. This could provide more significant opportunities for the young entrepreneurs to build valuable connections, gain insights, and find potential collaborators or sponsors for their ventures.

Or, as an alternative, the organization could minimize the mentorship sessions to focus on more frequent, short, and intensive coaching interactions rather than less frequent, longer meetings. This modification could make the mentorship more dynamic and responsive to the immediate needs of the young entrepreneurs, allowing for quicker adjustments and more agile development of their business ideas.

Additionally, the program could modify its content by incorporating new topics such as digital marketing, sustainability practices, or leveraging social media for business growth. These updates would keep the program relevant to current market trends and the evolving needs of new businesses.

By modifying these elements thoughtfully, the organization can create a more impactful, relevant, and efficient mentorship program that better supports the development and success of young entrepreneurs.

Put to Another Use

This piece has us consider how a project or program can be utilized in different contexts or fields. This involves considering the potential benefits of applying the project in a new industry or for a different purpose than initially intended. By reimagining the use of the project or program, we can uncover new opportunities and expand its impact. Typical questions to guide this process include: What new ways are there to use this? Might this be used in other places? What if it was modified? By thinking creatively about alternative applications, we can maximize the value and relevance of our projects and programs.

Example: The ‘put to another use’ technique can inspire creative ways to serve a larger audience. For instance, a literacy program for immigrants might consider adapting to also serve young parents. By integrating literacy training with parenting classes, for example, the program can help parents improve their own skills while also learning how to support their children's early literacy development. This dual-focus approach could enhance the educational outcomes for both generations in addition to the new Americans that were being served before. By reimagining the potential applications of the literacy program, the nonprofit can maximize its resources, reach new audiences, and create a broader, more versatile impact on the community.

Eliminate 

The "Eliminate" component focuses on improving a project or program by removing unnecessary elements. Simplifying or streamlining components can often enhance overall efficiency and effectiveness. Consider what might happen if certain parts were eliminated or minimized. Typical questions to guide this process include: What might I understate? What might I eliminate? What might I streamline? What might I make smaller, lower, shorter, or lighter? By thoughtfully eliminating redundant or non-essential elements, we can create a more focused and efficient project or program that better serves its purpose and meets the needs of stakeholders.

Example: The same readers who remember getting deliveries from Netflix may remember inserting CDs into a drive in their laptops. This was largely how one would download new software, watch a movie, or even make music mixes to listen to later. But then–computers stopped coming with these drives. While it was tough for many to get used to at first, technology had moved forward such that it was now possible to download programs and software directly from the internet. Furthermore, streaming of video and music had become more common so there was less of a need in that department. The big benefit for the computer companies was that by eliminating that drive, they were able to save a significant amount of space, allowing for thinner and lighter computers.

We can apply this same principle to programs and projects. Think about a nonprofit organization that operates a comprehensive after-school program for children, which includes various activities such as tutoring, sports, arts and crafts, and computer skills training. Applying the "Eliminate" component of the SCAMPER technique could help streamline the program to improve its efficiency and effectiveness.

For instance, the organization might consider eliminating redundant or low-impact activities. If feedback and data show that certain activities, like a specific arts and crafts project, are not as engaging or beneficial as others, these can be removed. This allows the program to focus more on high-impact activities like tutoring and computer skills training, which have shown significant benefits in improving academic performance and digital literacy. Additionally, the organization could eliminate complex administrative processes that slow down program operations. Simplifying registration procedures, reducing paperwork, and utilizing digital tools for communication and tracking can make the program more accessible and easier to manage.

By eliminating unnecessary components and streamlining processes, the nonprofit can create a more focused, efficient, and impactful after-school program that better serves the needs of the children and the community.

Rearrange

The "Rearrange" component has us explore how changing the sequence or order of a project or program can produce different outcomes. By rearranging, flipping, or swapping parts, we can discover new patterns and improve effectiveness. Consider what might happen if components were interchanged, if the process worked in reverse, or if the sequence were altered. Typical questions to guide this exploration include: What might be rearranged? What other pattern, layout, or sequence could be considered? Can parts of the program/project be interchanged? Could roles be reversed in some way? By experimenting with different arrangements, we can uncover innovative approaches and optimize our projects and programs.

Example: An organization may look at elements of a program such as the order of operations. For instance, consider a nonprofit that helps prepare people to take the U.S. Citizenship exam and become active, knowledgeable citizens. In this case the organization might consider rearranging the sequence of the training modules. If the current sequence starts with basic facts for the exam and progresses to advanced topics like how to file taxes and how to vote, they could experiment with integrating practical, hands-on experience earlier in the program. By rearranging the sequence, participants might gain immediate context for their learning, making the theoretical components more relevant and easier to grasp.

Conclusion

In grant writing, using SCAMPER can lead to the development of robust and compelling proposals. By systematically applying each SCAMPER prompt, grant writers can enhance the creativity and thoroughness of their proposals, making them stand out to potential funders. This approach ensures that all aspects of a project are considered, from innovative solutions to potential challenges, ultimately leading to more successful grant applications.


References

4A’s. (2018, October 9). Alex Osborn, the Father of Brainstorming. https://www.aaaa.org/timeline-event/74179/ 

Buzan, T., & Buzan, B. (1996). The mind map book: How to use radiant thinking to maximize your brain’s untapped potential. New York: Plume.

Byrnes, C. (2010). Mind mapping. Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2010—North America, Washington, DC. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.

de Bono, E. (1999). Six thinking hats: Revised ed. New York: Back Bay Books.

de Bono, E. (1985). Six thinking hats: An essential approach to business management. Little, Brown, & Company.

Elmansy, R. (2015, January 1). The six hats of critical thinking and how to use them. Designorate. https://www.designorate.com/the-six-hats-of-critical-thinking-and-how-to-use-them/ 

Elmansy, R. (2015, April 10). A guide to the SCAMPER technique for creative thinking. Designorate. https://www.designorate.com/a-guide-to-the-scamper-technique-for-creative-thinking/ 

National Book Foundation. (2024). Capacity Building Grant Program. Retrieved from https://www.nationalbook.org/national-book-foundation-announces-a-new-funding-opportunity-for-literary-arts-nonprofits/ 

Serrat, O. (2010). The SCAMPER technique. Washington, DC: Asian Development Bank.

Serrat, O. (2017). The SCAMPER technique. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318018918_The_SCAMPER_Technique 

Contents
Powered by Manifold Scholarship. Learn more at
Opens in new tab or windowmanifoldapp.org
Manifold uses cookies

We use cookies to analyze our traffic. Please decide if you are willing to accept cookies from our website. You can change this setting anytime in Privacy Settings.