Which Programs Will Be Nourished and Which Will Be Starved Under the Trump Administration?

Trump's stunning upset victory over Hillary Clinton has given us a president who is likely to shake up the goals of federal grant making in a similar manner. Consequently, the surprising results of the presidential election are causing non-profit executives to wonder what, if anything, they can do to ensure a steady supply of federal grants for non-profits in California and across the country. 

While we do not know the specific policy changes that the new president and his Republican-led Congress will pursue, non-profit executives can make reasonable guesses about the increase, repeal, rollback or decrease of various federal grants based on what political scientists tell us about the broad patterns of American government. Based on these patterns, I think it is safe to offer my predictions for federal grants from the Trump administration in the space below. 

Basically, you are best off investigating congressional behavior and specific presidential appointees if you want to accurately predict what will happen to your particular niche in the federal grant system. This is because grant programs are low visibility items. They are barely, if at all, even noticed by the general public so members of Congress have nearly complete autonomy to do what they want without the burden of public attention. The federal grants that you and I compete for on a yearly basis are more likely to be influenced by the behavior and preferences of little known interest groups, bureaucrats and congressional staffers. 

Accordingly, the election results will not be a strong predictor of Trump's presidency unless the policy matters impacts a high visibility, high conflict issue such as building a border wall or cancelling previous trade agreements. Off the top of my head, however, I would say that grants to study or prevent global warming are a dead end on arrival for the foreseeable future. On a more optimistic angle, I think the Trump administration will be open to new ideas that increase the number of construction jobs and construction workers, particularly in the key swing states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. 

As you contemplate the future of federal grants, it is probably a good idea to understand how long the Trump administration will last and what may happen to partisan control of Congress.

Right now, the indications are that Donald Trump will be reelected in 2020 and serve out two terms in office or eight years total. My confidence in this prediction is that it is fairly easy for presidents to get re-elected in general. As you may know, twenty presidents have competed for reelection since 1900: Of those, 15 won and five lost. (I am counting Gerald Ford as one of the losers even though he was initially appointed and not elected to the office). Incumbent presidents have a lot of advantages in terms of visibility, name recognition, fundraising resources and, of course, all the money and influence available to them through their control of the Executive Branch. Even unpopular presidents tend to get more popular when it is time to file for office again. 

Unless, Trump loses a war or zigs off in a completely unpopular direction (or faces a strong third party candidate) there is little chance that he will be a one-term president. Accordingly, it is safest to assume that - for better or worse - your charity will be serving in a Trump administration dominated political environment for the next eight years. 

Historically speaking, Trump should lose congressional seats in the next mid-term election. In all likelihood, it will be much harder for him to pass new legislation after the mid-term elections are over. Right now, Republicans have a positive outlook since of the 25 Democrat Senate seats up for re-election include senators from ten states in which Trump won large victories. Nevertheless, it is rare for a president to gain legislative strength over time. Although he would be unlikely to lose the House of Representatives, there is a chance he could lose control of the Senate. The significance of this possibility is probably not lost on Trump. He has every reason to make the best of the next 200 days and the next two years when his legislative majorities will most certainly be at their peak. 

Given Republican advantages in the electoral college and their control of most of the state legislatures, I believe that the House of Representatives will stay in Republican hands for the foreseeable future. Due to Republican dominance among governors and statehouses, they will be able to gerrymander their congressional districts and carefully apportion their voters so that they get the maximum number of congressional leaders elected to the House of Representatives. The bottom line is that the trends you see in funding right now, as indicated in the first few months of the administration, are highly likely to be the ones that control the pace, focus and size of federal grants in your field for the next eight years or so, if not longer. 

Finally, it is important to understand just how significant will Trump's appointees be in regards to any changes we might see in federal grants. This issue goes to the heart of the limits on executive power and the natural constraints placed on a chief executive like Donald J. Trump. Since no U.S. president can personally control the day-to-day operations of a cabinet department, much less the entire federal government, it makes a lot of sense for non-profit executives to drill down and pay greater attention to the folks that Trump appoints to lead the departments that distribute the grants you want for your non-profit organization. Personally, I have found it helpful to do a little Google research on the key people who are taking over the government departments where I compete for federal grants. 

For example, you might start getting to know the following cabinet officers or potential cabinet officers by using this handy list:

Appointee	Department	Wikipedia Research
Ben Carson	Housing and Urban Development	Wikipedia Research
Betsy Devos	Education	Wikipedia Research
Tom Price	Health and Human Services	Wikipedia Research
Sonny Perdue	Agriculture	Wikipedia Research
Andy Puzder	Labor	Wikipedia Research
Elaine Chao	Transportation	Wikipedia Research
David Shulkin	Veterans Affairs	Wikipedia Research
Ryan Zinke	Interior	Wikipedia Research

If you research President Trump's appointments, then you will certainly help your non-profit agency prepare itself to win federal grants. You will also be among the most knowledgeable people in America, among the very few who will be able to predict for others much of what will happen over the course of the next eight years. 

One Key Question: Does Donald J. Trump Really Mean What He says?

My study of similar charismatic leaders indicates that charismatic leaders like Donald J. Trump really do mean what they say. Since they are traditionally seeking to upset existing power structures, they cannot survive unless they take care of the followers who they ask to trust them and be willing to follow them despite high risks and potential social pressure. Unlike Obama, demonstrably Trump cannot lean on the support of a sympathetic press or the adoration of Hollywood. Instead, he has to rely on his relatively smaller base of working class voters in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania to hold on to power. Given the narrowness of that band of political support, he really cannot afford to offend that base or back off his promises to them. 

Indeed, one of the consistent patterns seen in charismatic leaders like Lincoln, Washington or Napoleon is that they were known for their commitment to strong principles of justice and fairness. If charismatic leaders were simply chaotic, insincere liars, then it would be difficult for them to attract die-hard followers. Their key inner core of supporters would abandon them if they lacked fidelity to their closely cherished beliefs. Followers maybe patient with their leaders, but they are not stupid about them. Like Napoleon and other leaders, you have seen and can count on Trump to say different things to different audiences to win their support. We can predict that he will occasionally offer alternative facts to get temporary advantages. In the long-run, however, it is a safe bet to assume that Donald Trump believes what he says and that he fully intends to make the sort of changes he promised during his campaign, particularly on the big picture issues like trade, immigration, and fighting ISIS. 

The most important question is not whether Trump is sincere, but to what extent will he be able to do what he wants given the constraints of our U.S. Constitutional system.

 

The simple answer is no, as the highly charismatic Barack Obama learned. It is not so easy to get things done and make them stick because the U.S. Constitution created three separate branches of government and gave to each its own tools for protecting its turf, i.e. the famous checks and balances. 

One of the best ways to improve your predictions of how much of their agenda any president will accomplish is to pay attention to the priorities of the legislative branch, Congress. In this regard, Trump does have an advantage in getting his policies put into law. His party controls both parts of the Congress, the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. Perhaps due to all the media attention focused on the president, one of the truisms of American government is that, the legislature has a lot more power than people think it does. After all, most of us do not pay much attention to how government really works and fail to follow how the actual details of a president's legislative agenda are hammered out in the House, the Senate and then the conference committees which combine their separate bills into one law that the president can then either sign or veto. 

Unlike many U.S. governors, the president suffers from limits to his executive power because he does not have a line-item veto. Such a veto power would allow him to pick and choose which parts of a proposed law to accept or reject. 

In view of these real world constraints, I think it is a wise bet to assume that President Trump will end up approving a lot of the existing, conservative, Republican policies that have been bottled up in the legislative branch under the Obama administration. This is because the quickest and safest way for Trump to get quality legislation completed quickly is to simply rubber stamp the legislative changes which have been consistently repressed and vetoed by Obama. If you know what the Republicans have been wanting to do in your particular field of interest, then it is a safe bet to assume they will get their way under President Trump. 

How to Win Grants from the Trump Administration

NON PROFITS FACE UNCERTAINTY AND ANXIETY REGARDING FEDERAL GRANTS.

Trump's stunning win will install a president in the White House who is likely to shake up federal grant making just as aggressively as he plans to disrupt Washington. Consequently, the unexpected results of the 2016 Presidential election have triggered profound questions regarding the future of federal grants for California and across the country.

President-Elect Donald J. Trump

While we do not yet know the specific policy changes that the new President-elect and Republican-led Congress will pursue, we can make reasonable guesses about the increase, repeal, rollback or decrease of various federal grants. We can make sense of the a priori questions about American politics and government, including:

• Does Trump mean what he says?
• Will Trump be able to do what he says?
• What programs will be nourished and which ones will be starved?
• How long will the Trump administration last, and what will happen with Congress?
• How significant will Trump's appointees be to changing federal grants?
• What hot button issues should non-profits avoid to stay fundable?
• How much, if at all, will the federal bureaucracy change under Trump?
• What is in store for healthcare, science, education, or climate change grants?
• What Obama administration achievements are most likely to be reversed?
• How can we keep our critical programs funded in this dramatically new season?

For most grant writers, it is far beyond their job descriptions to embrace the expertise needed to anticipate the impact of a new administration on federal grants. Nevertheless, this knowledge is crucial to grant planning, strategies, research and time management. Although there are on-line resources available to answer the above questions, it is difficult for grant writers and agency leaders to know which ones to trust, which ones are biased, and which ones have the best reputations for making accurate predictions.

The wealthiest institutions, including colleges and universities, often have high-paid Washington lobbyists available to answer their questions. For most of us, however, this is an un-affordable luxury. Even worse, the new Trump administration is so radically different than its predecessors, that even professional analysts and political pundits are hard-pressed to provide reliable insight into what will take place. After all, most of them have been wrong about Trump from the beginning.

You owe it to your staff and clients to get the answers to these questions from a reliable source, a source who understands Trump, politics, elections, American government and the field of non-profit grant writing. Once you know how to answer the big questions, you will find that your own intuition and specific program knowledge will be empowered to provide you with an excellent grasp of the best and most profitable path for your upcoming federal grant campaign.

DR. DREW'S SECRETS OF SUCCESS FOR WINNING FEDERAL GRANTS FROM THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

Course Description

"Winning Grants from the Trump Administration" is a four-hour workshop, including lunch, handouts, and a PowerPoint presentation that applies the insight of an award-winning political scientist to make sense of the risks, threats, challenges and opportunities for California's non-profit agencies and educational institutions seeking federal grants in the foreseeable future. "It is easy to predict political trends," says Dr. Drew, "if you understand the enduring patterns of behavior associated with political realignment, the roles of Congress and the President, the key features of charismatic leadership, and the role of bureaucracy in American government." 

In this workshop, Dr. Drew provides a simple, common sense, research-based model which tells you what to expect regarding grants over the next four years of the Trump administration. 

Applying this model, Dr. Drew answers the most important questions facing non-profit leaders, including what to expect regarding education, science, environment, juvenile justice and social service funding. In addition, he will layout simple suggestions for repackaging existing programs so that they appeal to the core values of the Trump administration including its commitment to economic nationalism, and assisting the working class.

While the federal bureaucracy is slow to change, elections do have consequences. Understanding those consequences will be the key to keeping your federal revenue flowing no matter who is living in the White House. This knowledge will help board members, volunteers, executive directors, principle investigators, and grant-writers secure millions in federal funding and avoid the costly mistakes associated with misunderstanding the current political environment.

 

Course Topics

In this workshop, Dr. Drew will supply the general principles used by political scientists to predict and explain political behavior as it affects specific field of federal grants. These principles will give participants the framework needed to leverage their own unique knowledge and to make strikingly compelling predictions about the key issues and trends that will impact federal grant writing for the next four years of the Trump administration.   

1. Guerrilla Political Science: The Most Important Variables for Predicting Presidential Behavior

• Do elections have consequences?
• Why we can predict Trump's behavior on the basis of his prior statements?

2. The Unprecedented Value of Predicting Congressional Behavior

• Why congressional priorities are ultimately more important than presidential priorities?
• Who will win and who will lose under the Trump administration? 
• What Obama administration achievements are most likely to be reversed? 

3. What are the Specific Implications for Healthcare, Science, Education Grants?

• How will grants for healthcare change under the Trump administration? 
• How much of our science funding will remain the same or similar? 
• Will Trump continue to support career technical education and community colleges? 

The end result of this workshop is that you, your staff and your clients will benefit financially from a clear, no nonsense understanding of how the basics of political science will allow you to predict the trends which will control federal grants for the next four to eight years or more relative to your specific field. 

Time in class will be allotted to giving the participants the opportunity to test their own predictions for their fields given the logic of Guerrilla Political Science. The ultimate benefit of this program will be to foster a clarity and understanding which will allow you and your agency to understand the risks, threats, challenges and unique opportunities you will face over the years no matter which party controls Congress or who is occupying the White House.  

Course Schedule

"How to Win Grants from the Trump Administration" will run from 10:00 a.m. to 11:55 a.m. on Thursday, January 19, 2017. Snacks and soft drinks will be provided for all participants. The location for this workshop will be Coaching Center of Orange County located at 1231 East Dyer Road, Suite 215, Santa Ana, CA 92705.  

 

Course Fee and Early Bird Rate

The program, "How to Win Grants from the Trump Administration," will be offered at a discounted rate of 50% for non-profit organizations including charities, schools, colleges, universities, county and state agencies. The total fee for non-profit organizations will be $125 per person. The early bird rate will be $95 for all registrants who pay for the workshop prior to January 12, 2017. All participants will receive handouts, and an easy to refer to fact sheet to provide a reminder of what was taught in the class for future reference. 

Event: "How to Win Grants from the Trump Administration

Instructor: John C. Drew, Ph.D.

Time: 10:00 a.m. to 11:55 a.m.

Date: January 19, 2016

Location: 1231 East Dyer Road, Suite 215, Santa Ana, CA 92705

Early Bird Price (Before January 12, 2017): $95

Regular Price $125

JOHN C. DREW, PH.D. AUTHOR, TRAINER, CONSULTANT

Your Instructor

Before Dr. Drew became a grant writer he was an award-winning political scientist who taught the presidency, elections, and public policy at Cornell University, University of Oregon and Williams College, the nation's number one liberal arts college according to U.S. News & World Report. As a grant writing consultant, Dr. Drew and his team have consistently won large federal grants, through the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations for charitable organizations, community colleges and universities. All together Dr. Drew has won more than $40 million in funding. "I've consistently won large federal grants," said Dr. Drew. "The secret of my success has always been my understanding the most urgent needs of the new administration. By quickly adapting your programs to match their needs you can almost always find the support needed to maintain or grow your existing programs."

 

What Workshop Participants Say About Dr. Drew

"Very informative, with positive energy transferred to the students."

"The course was very inviting. Dr. Drew was very clear and knowledgeable. He made it worth my while to achieve my goal and have success in life."

"Dr. John Drew was very knowledgeable, invigorating, timely, and made learning interesting and clear."

"This was constant, good practical information. The first 15 minutes made the whole class worth it!"

"Dr. Drew is wonderful. He taught me a lot in a very short time."

Dr. Drew is a native of Southern California. He attended Occidental College in Los Angeles on a track scholarship in 1975. While at Occidental he won a scholarship to study in Europe where he was first exposed to the horrors of the poverty associated with child labor. Later, he won another scholarship to earn his Ph.D. in Government at Cornell University. Later, he taught politics, economics and leadership at Cornell University, Hope International University, University of Oregon, and Williams College. He is a published author on the topic of child welfare and protective programs. Dr. Drew remains active in political and economic matters by contributing articles to American Thinker, David Horowitz's Front Page Magazine and PJMedia. To wind down from grant writing, Dr. Drew enjoys walking, studying foreign languages and acrylic painting. He and his wife, Patricia Drew, live in Laguna Niguel CA where he serves on the board of directors of his HOA.

The Most Important Fundamental of All: Study the Largest Funders to Get the Largest Amount of Money

I won the first eight federal grants I wrote. In addition to helping jump start my career as a grant writing, this experience taught me the considerable advantages of going after the largest funders first. This principle may seem counter intuitive at first because it is natural to assume that the smaller, local funders - even the tiniest family-run funders - might be softer targets.

In reality, these small local funders provide grant writers a number of sometimes insurmountable obstacles. Since they are so small, they only have a little money to give and they tend to give only a small number of grants each year. Due to their limited resources, they are less likely to have staff to answer your calls or provide you with additional assistance. The information on their website will most likely be out-of-date. Many, in fact, won't have a website at all.

In contrast, the largest funders - including the federal government - have full-time staff available to provide you with advice and guidance. In my experience, some of these program consultants will almost write your grant for you if they like your cause. Their websites are usually quite detailed and include links to earlier grantees and other valuable program information. The federal government is especially valuable to grant writers because it goes out of its way to refer you to the latest peer reviewed, state-of-the-art research. 

(It is often a good practice, as Beverly A. Browning notes, to begin your grant writing campaign with your federal grant applications so that you will learn enough new information to write really great state and local-level grants.)

All in all, it pays to go after the largest funders if only because they can give larger grants. After all, for virtually the same amount of effort you access greater possibilities and eventually win much larger grants. My most recent federal grant, for example, was a $1.5 million win for Irvine Valley College. 

Best of all, the larger funders - especially the federal government - are relatively slow to change their interests or application requirements. Once you master their system, you are virtually set for life. For these larger organizations, change comes slow so you can count on the fact that your study of the largest funders will benefit you for many years to come, no matter where you work or how many times you need to craft grant applications. 

Finally, the largest funders have such large endowments that they will probably be the largest funders even decades from now. Smaller foundations may find themselves vulnerable to running out of money because they cannot hire sophisticated investment advisers to manage their portfolios. Again, you have an advantage if you study the largest funders because they will most likely be the same ones you will revisit over the course of your grant writing career. 

The Most Important Fundamental of All: Study the Largest Funders to Get the Largest Amount of Money

I won the first eight federal grants I wrote. In addition to helping jump start my career as a grant writing, this experience taught me the considerable advantages of going after the largest funders first. This principle may seem counter intuitive at first because it is natural to assume that the smaller, local funders - even the tinest family-run funders - might be softer targets.

	Drew & Associates has moved to Santa Ana, CA. Here are some pictures of the new offices including the conference room and lobby. Starting in November, we will offer Dr. Drew's workshops and retreats here.

In reality, these small local funders provide grant writers a number of sometimes insurmountable obstacles. Since they are so small, they only have a little money to give and they tend to give only a small number of grants each year. Due to their limited resources, they are less likely to have staff to answer your calls or provide you with additional assistance. The information on their website will most likely be out-of-date. Many, in fact, won't have a website at all.  

In contrast, the largest funders - including the federal government - have full-time staff available to provide you with advice and guidance. In my experience, some of these program consultants will almost write your grant for you if they like your cause. Their websites are usually quite detailed and include links to earlier grantees and other valuable program information. The federal government is especially valuable to grant writers because it goes out of its way to refer you to the latest peer reviewed, state-of-the-art research. 

(It is often a good practice, as Beverly A. Browning notes, to begin your grant writing campaign with your federal grant applications so that you will learn enough new information to write really great state and local-level grants.)

All in all, it pays to go after the largest funders if only because they can give larger grants. After all, for virtually the same amount of effort you access greater possibilities and eventually win much larger grants. My most recent federal grant, for example, was a $1.5 million win for Irvine Valley College. 

Best of all, the larger funders - especially the federal government - are relatively slow to change their interests or application requirements. Once you master their system, you are virtually set for life. For these larger organizations, change comes slow so you can count on the fact that your study of the largest funders will benefit you for many years to come, no matter where you work or how many times you need to craft grant applications. 

Finally, the largest funders have such large endowments that they will probably be the largest funders even decades from now. Smaller foundations may find themselves vulnerable to running out of money because they cannot hire sophisticated investment advisers to manage their portfolios. Again, you have an advantage if you study the largest funders because they will most likely be the same ones you will revisit over the course of your grant writing career. 

Pay Attention to the Points: Simple Tips for Winning Federal Grants

Writing a successful federal grant demands the exact same skills, resources, and product positioning skills discussed in A Really Great Booklet on Grant Writing.  The only real difference is that you need to apply these skills with even greater depth and discipline.  As you may know, I created my best, early successes writing federal grants.  

I have found them to be an arena that verifies everything I have said earlier on the sudden appearance of money, and the need to move quickly when money arrives.  The necessity of quick action in this field makes perfect sense to me because of the process surrounding federal grant applications.  After these grant appropriations are approved by Congress, the money slowly trickles down, and then the government agency that is giving away the money needs to scramble to let everyone know that the money is now available.  Often, it is not really their fault that they could not move faster, simply because they are not sure what is going to be available.  (I imagine this was done on purpose in the past to give an advantage to existing interest groups over insurgent interest groups.)

For whatever reason, the same process is still taking place today.  Accordingly, to win one of these federal grants, you need to have everything set up ahead of time.  The main season for federal grants runs from January to May.  So, ideally, if you get yourself set-up with grants.gov in the Fall, you will be able to apply for funding in the Spring.

There are some things about applying for federal grants that are remarkably different from applying for corporate or foundation grants.  It pays to know, for example, what some of these differences are if you want to get ahead.  For example, federal applications list their guidelines so that you can find out what criteria are used to screen your application, and you can even find the score attached to each separate criteria. 

It is best to request this on behalf of your agency, not as a consultant to an agency.  (I tried this as a consultant and federal staff frightened the nonprofits into backing down and not insisting on their rights.)  I have found it extremely profitable to pay great attention to the weighting of the different sections of a federal grant application.  There are also great advantages in answering questions exactly according to what the federal request for proposal demands from you: word for word.  This operating strategy can, at times, create an almost idiotic question and response style of writing useful to nobody in the real world.  As crazy as this sounds, perfect and consistent compliance will win you funding in the long-run.

In my experience, it seems to help to have a good friendship with your member of Congress, Senator, or other political official.  They and their staffs can be very helpful in assisting you in finding available pots of money.  Surprisingly, you can even include letters of support from local political figures in your applications for funding - a fact that first struck me as almost like cheating.

Finally, one good idea for winning money from the federal government is to focus on those programs which have the largest amount of money and the largest sheer number of potential grants.  I like looking for programs like Drug-Free Communities which offer up to 300 grants every year in the $100,000 to $200,000 range.  As a taxpayer, you may be very disappointed by how easy it is to receive funding from the federal government for your pet project.  As a recipient, however, I think you will be very happy.