Example Of A Grant Process

Help our residents with any choices and decisions they need to make without making the decision for them.

budget in places that would harm the city. It would have to cut money from the police, and fire

The grant proposal application states that the project must have an end date on or before August 31, 2014. However, this proposal says the project end date is ongoing, which violates the rules. There was no indication how the project would impact those involved, or how it would impact the community. This proposal never indicated how they would evaluate the project itself once it was over, and the project had no prediction of the sustainability after the grant either. The only strengths this grant proposal had was providing a budget match, and fitting within the community service, and civic engagement categories. I felt this grant proposal was pointless, and I would not fund this proposal at all.

“Think back on (or read again) the discussion in Chapter 2 about the functions that nonprofit organizations perform with regard to government. How does the case of the National Trust for Historic Preservation reflect those various roles?”’

The Mayor’s decision to accept these gifts was ethical because anyone who is receiving gifts would automatically accept and wouldn’t even think twice about accepting them. But I believe it is wrong for the Mayor to accept gifts from organizations that have not business with them because it might cause controversial between them if they don’t

Besides being the most responsible for addressing the problem, government officials also have the most to gain from a successful policy proposal. This is why government officials are also this proposal’s target audience. If the homeless population can be reduced or the issue completely resolved to the point where homelessness is no longer an issue, government officials would benefit greatly from the publicity of such success. City officials, given their responsibility, are thus both the key player and target audience for this policy analysis and proposal.

We will fund our organization by applying and receiving grants from local community organizations, governmental agencies like the Fulton County Health Department, the Georgia National Guard and the federal government.

In this article, Jennifer Mosley and Colleen Grogan, professors at The University of Chicago, concludes that the more public participation in administrative decision making in different urban areas is an important target in majority of public organizations. The author states that many public agencies develop different strategies on who should be able to participate in open decision making. The strategies determined how they will prevent different type of biases. Often leaders of the nonprofit organizations are asked to serve as representatives of the community in a variety of participatory processes. They came up with something called mixed-methods. Mixed-methods are used in order to address whether residents believe nonprofit

The city council of Atlanta, Georgia servers as a local legislative government branch. The council is made of the president, Ceasar Mitchell and fifteen members elected from district within the city. The city of Atlanta is broken up into twelve different districts and three post, each councilmen is responsible for representing the needs and wants for their district. The members of the council are elected by the citizens, and they work together to pass laws, make general policies, supervise city government, and appropriate funds for various needs. Usually, council meetings are open to the public, and public input is welcomed. The majority the councils work is done in committees. In the committees proposed legislation is debated and the members of other government branches and the public are given a chance to comment. Each council member serves on at least three of the council's standing committees, and select committees and panels. This week the author had the chance to attend a City of Atlanta council committee meeting and view how the meeting was conducted and went.

Discussion of local government is a subject where eyes glaze over and information floats in one ear and right out the other. Most citizens know in greater depth about national politics rather than local, even if the city government has a greater influence and impact on daily life. With the permission of Professor Duckworth, I watched Frisco Independent School District’s board meeting online (link provided, pg. 4). The school board meeting explained a lot about the process, organization, and the structure of local politics.

The meeting continued with the Joint Consent Calendar, the consent calendar is a grouping of routine matters to be acted on in one motion. There were six items considered and recommended actions taken anywhere from issues related to utilities to professional services. At the end of this presentation it was open to public hearing providing any concerned resident an opportunity to speak. This was followed by consent ordinances which city staff members began to speak about Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and its draft citizen participation plan for years 2015-2019. This was followed by an ordinance for the Civic Plaza which would limit the use of skateboards, bicycles, and leashed animals during special events held at this location. Following these issues the council would make a decision which would be placed on record for public view. New business was proposed where an approval of long ranged property management was projected, but they motioned to push this event forward to the next meeting due to the absence of a council member who was more familiar with the issue.

I chose to attend a city council meeting for this assignment and was very surprised at what I witnessed. The city council served an important purpose and the meeting actually accomplished many important goals. Among the interesting things that I saw at the council meeting were the people who attended, the people who presented, the people who sat on the council, and the subjects that were being voted upon in the meeting.

I have never attended a community meeting or any meeting regarding my community therefore, attending this meeting for the first time was a great first experience. I was able to see how a meeting is ran and how the organization works in order to help make improvements in my community. When I went into the office the meeting was being held, I was offered an agenda and other informational forms regarding the meeting. The agenda provided information of how the organization of the meeting would be and who will be going over what topics. The meeting was a timed meeting where Richard Hernandez and Bill Houtt managed on recording to keep data. The issues that were discussed were citizen’s request for city improvements, a short review of the 2016 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) Accomplishments, which is a grant that helps build homes for low income families and was reviewed by Rhonda Haynes a community developer. Lastly, the Sidewalk at Divisadero and Rinaldi, North Visalia citizen report were also discussed by Bill Houtt a member of the committee, and construction issues in N. Visalia discussed by Lt. Brent Abbott.

These 8 propositions provide a basis from, which to explore the ramification of public participation, both as a concept and as a decision-making technique. The need of public participation in planning is more clearly expressed by Bolan (1967), “No matter how we improve our substantive knowledge of how cities function, and no matter how we improve our capabilities in information handling, operations research, and prediction, if there is not a corollary development of community’s capacity for improved decision-making within the framework of democratic process, there is the real possibility that heavy investment in the current forms of city planning techniques will have been in vain.”