Strategies for Sustainability of  
Grant-funded Programs 

Introduction 

While some grants are awarded to address a specific question or conduct research trials on a one-time basis, others are broader in scope and carry an expectation that projects/programs begun with start-up funds will continue after original awards are expended. The issue, defined as sustainability, will be discussed in this fact sheet.

Nearly every state and federal grant Request for Proposal (RFP) involving human subjects and programming components requires the submission to include a plan for sustainability. The sustainability plan is often the most difficult piece of the proposal to write and can be a huge hurdle to complete the proposal. However, strategies are available for systematically designing and presenting the sustainability plan, including: utilizing data obtained from the project; aligning the targeted audience with the Request for Application (RFA), developing detailed descriptions of services and activities post-funding; identifying key staff needed to manage future programming; involving key stakeholders in identifying strategies; and finding champions for your cause.

Addressing each of these strategies in the proposal narrative assures grantors the writer has systematically considered the main aspects of sustainability. After receiving funding, these key points will need to be revisited regularly to receive additional funding throughout the term of the grant. 

Why do funders place such great importance on program sustainability? Consider that introduction of a new endeavor (program) may have high visibility for a short period but fail to be sustainable after initial efforts.  If this happens, a sense of resentment within local communities is likely.  Communities may become wary of participating  in other opportunities in the future if it is perceived that these, too, may be short lived. The possibility of this result alone is reason to require grantees to document sustainability beyond the life of funding even though it can be very difficult. (JOE, Feb 2002).

I. The reality of sustainability, if funding is received

When an author puts together a successful application and receives word the proposal is going to be funded, it is news certainly worth celebrating. However, once the initial excitement wears off, receiving a grant may also produce anxiety. One of the greatest causes of anxiety is the reminder that along with the start-up money comes the expectation the program will be sustainable when the funding is over. (JOE, Oct 2001). Inevitably, new grantees will find themselves asking the questions “Now what?” and “How do we get to
where we said we will be in 3-5 years?”

II. Breaking it down. What is sustainability? What does a sustainable program look like?

Sustainability refers to the continuation of a project’s goals, principles, and efforts to achieve desired outcomes. Although many grantees think that guaranteeing the sustainability of a project means finding the resources to continue it “as is” beyond the grant period, ensuring sustainability really means making sure that the goals of the project continue to be met through activities that are consistent with the current conditions and resources that are available. (U.S. Department of Labor).

In fact, grant-funded programs may be considered sustainable even if they don’t look exactly like the program that has been running for several years. As funding runs out, an assessment will need to be made regarding the specific activities that can and should be continued, how many employees or volunteers will be needed, and how large (scale) the
program will be (how many youth will be served; how many mentors to be recruited, etc.) (U.S. Dept. of Labor).

III. Refining the Plan- Looking to the Future

Once a new program has its feet on the ground, so to speak, one must always be looking forward to the future. As the next phase of a project approaches, (perhaps in year 2) and sustainability becomes a more tangible future need, the project administrators must use feedback and evaluation todetermine how and if the program is moving in the
direction of initial goals. At this point, the administrators and evaluators have a new series of tasks to tackle what is termed the 3R’s: review, refine, and renew. All members of the team need to review what has worked, what needs modification, what needs expansion, what budgetary issues have surfaced, and what the findings from early evaluation data indicate? Also, members of the program team need to work on refining goals (with staff and stakeholders), objectives, the program design, and the research design.

When should plans for sustainability be addressed?

Movement towards sustainability requires appropriate decisions be made at each stage of program development. This is a journey that must be taken by stakeholders, program participants, university/Extension Service faculty and program staff. Involvement of stakeholders is a critical responsibility of program administrators. What the stakeholders want remains an essential question to consider at each stage if there is to be true collaboration and movement towards sustainability (JOE Oct 2001).

Even if the grant recipient does everything right and has an exemplary program, keep in mind that as worthy as a project or program may be, it is not going to sustain itself. The plan must be carefully planned followed by systematically undertaking the appropriate steps to sustain it. To continue a program after initial funding is gone, consider the following tips from the U.S. Department of Labor:

1. Base decisions on data, to the extent possible. A good starting point is quarterly performance reports. Assessing the project now compared to what it was three months ago or three years ago can allow project staff and partners to make informed decisions on any changes or adaptations that may need to be made to meet goals and objectives.

2. Specify target audience. If there has been a need to change the targeted audiences, for whatever reason, make certain it is justified. If the targeted audience was youth referred
by juvenile court, for example, but the numbers are low, there may be a need to include youth in foster care, or youth from single parent homes to meet the number of youth served as identified in the proposal.

3. Develop a detailed description of what services and activities are planned for sustainability. All activities do not need to be sustained; just the ones that are intended to achieve desired outcomes. For example, will 4-H youth activities still be available for the youth? Is there potential to find sponsors for Family Night Out?

4. Identify what is needed to manage and operate the selected activities. Once the project activities have been established, it may be determined that either a smaller or larger commitment of management resources, including the number of paid staff will need to change. 

5. Make current and potential partners and other stakeholders aware of sustainability planning activities. Whether it takes place in a formal meeting setting or in written form, disseminate key information to them.

6. Find champions. Locate and encourage
organizations and interest groups that
benefit from the project’s activities or who
are interested in the target groups being
served. These make the best allies. (U.S.
Department of Labor- Employment and
Training Administration)
IV. Refining the Plan using Stages of
Program Development
Another way of looking at a sustainability plan is in
stages laid out in charts. Banach and Gregory (JOE,

Oct. 2001) offer a detailed example that charts
progress in community-based program development
over six distinct phases. Included in their detailed
charts are roles for an administrator, evaluator or
program staff. Then, they include details for tasks to
be completed, core questions to ask, and feedback
loops for all who may be included in a particular
stage of development. For example, as the project
administrator prepares to conduct a needs
assessment, he/she may question, “What resources
are needed?” “What skills are needed from the
community?” and “How will feedback flow through
the community, the evaluator, and the funder?” (See
Five-Stage Model of Developing Sustainable
Programs.) (JOE, Oct. 2001.)
V. Sustainable Program Structures: Before
and After
Again, grantees should remember that what a grantfunded
program looks like now, may not be the
same as it will look in sustainability mode. To help
the grantee visualize what the difference in structure
may look like, Banach, LaPointe and Zunz (JOE,
2006) illustrate a sample for consideration below:

VI. Remaining Focused on Sustainability
A final reminder is to remain focused on the goal of
sustainability throughout the duration of the project
or program. Although this is particularly important
for programs funded with time-limited start-up
grants, all programs can benefit from constantly
monitoring viability. A focus on sustainability
requires:
1. Monitoring whether the community has
embraced a program and its efforts through
steering/advisory committee member
feedback. Discussions may include
possibility of future financial support from
the community to support specific program
components, in-kind contributions of time,
space, etc., and even perceived popularity
with participants based on rate of
participation or waiting lists.
2. Advancing public relations to highlight the
need for the program and publish its
successes. Keeping the media informed of
events or inviting a member of the press to
participate on advisory boards can improve
publicity and make the public more aware of
what the community is offering in support of
families.
3. "Keeping an eye on the clock." The pursuit
of multiple sources of funding is needed
early on. Consideration of steering/advisory
committee composition is important to
ensure that there are members who are
knowledgeable about financial
considerations and avenues for future
funding. (Banach, LaPointe and Zunz 2006)
VII. Crucial Points for Success
a. It is interesting to point out that in a report
summarizing projects funded by W.K.
Kellogg Foundations in the 1990s an
“insightful lesson” was indicated as to what
sustainability really means. According to
their report on lessons learned from these
projects, those coalitions and projects most
likely to be sustained after the initial life of
the project were ones that created project
materials and developed new
“organizational legacies” (i.e., changes in
organizational structure, changes in how the
work is done, and changes in prioritization
of program implementation (Hahn, Greene,
& Waterman, 1994 as cited in JOE, Feb.
2002).
b. In addition, Stevens and Marin-Hernandez
(1999) point out that programs that don’t
address the local realities of the community
will not be sustained. (As cited in JOE, Feb.
2002). In other words, projects must address
real needs of the community in order to
obtain community buy-in.
c. Don’t forget the crucial role of a Coalition
or Advisory Board- (JOE, Feb 2002,
Results).
Additional Considerations for Sustainability
now and in the future
No funders like to think that their grant will only
fund a project for a short time. Before investing in a
project, the funder will want to know what plans are
in place for carrying the project into the future, with
or without this particular funder’s help.
Cheryl A. Clarke, author of the very useful,
Storytelling for Grantseekers Second Edition,
Jossey-Bass, 2009), suggests that grant writers think
of the sustainability part of the grant (or the future
funding plan) as the sequel to the story told
throughout the proposal. Make sure that the future
funding section provides a solid and specific
blueprint of how the writer’s agency and partners
intend to raise the money to continue operating
programs and continuing to serve its clients and
community. (www.About.com “How to Write the
Sustainable Section of Your Grant Proposal”)
Clarke provides a menu of funding strategies that a
nonprofit can draw on to compose a future funding
plan. One or more of these strategies could be
included as part of the overall sustainability plan.
 Fee for service. Can clients be charged a fee
for the services provided? This can be a flat
fee or a sliding fee based on individual
income.

 Entrepreneurial business ventures. Consider
hosting a thrift/yard sale, create and sell
greeting cards or family photos, create a
DVD or CD staring clients/youth and
families.
 Create annual fund campaign. Is there a way
to create a membership program that charges
dues? Or an annual fund campaign to reach
donors interested in this kind of charitable
program?
 Major gifts program. Can donors that have
the potential of making large financial gifts
be identified, befriended and then solicited?
 New donor acquisition program. Consider
starting a direct-mail campaign to add new
donors and thus increase income for the
project.
 Use the internet. This provides easy ways
for donors to give online.
 Corporate sponsorships. Partner with
corporate and business sponsors, especially
for funding events such as galas, golf
tournaments, or charity runs.
 Tap employer-based fundraising. Can the
agency qualify to participate in employerbased
fundraising campaigns such as the
United Way or other federated campaigns?
 Government funding. Do some research to
find out if local, state, or federal agencies
provide funding for the program being
implemented.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSION
Thinking about sustainability is not something that
should be left until a grant is coming to an end.
Time will be needed to:
 Identify short-term and long-term
sustainability strategies that will work.
 Conduct an assessment of the current
project, and use collected data to help
determine what the future scale/scope of the
program will be.
 Conduct a planning process for
sustainability
 Identify what resources are needed to sustain
the project
 Develop buy-in among advisory board
members and other strategic partners

 Market the idea both internally and
externally
(U.S. Dept. of Labor factsheet, p.1-2)
In summary, key questions regarding sustainability
have been addressed here as well as various
strategies to sustain programs initially funded by
grants that now need local buy-in to continue. As an
assurance the reader understands key sustainability
points, below are some statements to wrap-up and
reinforce the highlights covered above.
1. T/F Searching for funding to continue
programming that is grant-funded is most
effectively done as the grant is coming to an
end. This statement is False. Sustainability
must be addressed throughout every phase
of the program including before it even
begins.
2. T/F Most successful programs may use
grant dollars for “start-up” funds but look
to the community or other sources for longterm
sustainability. This statement is usually
True. While there are times follow-up grant
funding may be obtained to extend a
program, the longest and best successes of
programming will take place when a
community adopts a program and is willing
to allocate resources for its continuation.
3. T/F There is currently an increase in state
and federal grant dollars available so
applications are not as competitive as they
were five years ago. Generally, this
statement is False. Most state and federal
grantors have seen drastic reductions in
available funding over the past five years.
Hopefully, levels of funding have at least
stabilized with increases to be seen in future
years. The private sector and foundations are
still offering grant dollars but in most cases,
the amounts being offered have decreased.
4. T/F It is more important to focus on
successful program activities than
evaluation to prove to grantors a
program/project should continue to receive
financial support. Successful activities are
what may win the hearts of program

participants and build community support.
However, programs operating with grant
dollars need evaluation to justify funding so
this statement is False. Funders/grantors will
want to see outcomes that can be measured.
So, evaluation must be considered a crucial
piece of program planning. The type of
evaluation will depend heavily on whether
the program design lends itself to qualitative
or quantitative research results.
5. T/F Diversifying funding is a key principle
to sustaining programs. This statement is
True. Especially if a program has more than
one site, or several staff members,
diversifying the funding helps ensure that
partial or smaller programs can still operate
if one or more sources of funding end. This
also allows time to locate financial resources
to expand the program back to previous
levels without losing a presence in the
community; an important aspect of
maintaining community trust.
6. T/F If only a portion of a grant-funded
project can continue to be funded when the
start-up funding (grant) ends, it is not
considered a sustained program. As has
been pointed out above, streamlining a
program to keep only a few key components
still indicates sustainability. Therefore, this
statement is False. It may be that there is
local funding for a staff position but the
program will depend on donations to carry
out activities. This is still a sustained
program even if it may be smaller in scope.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
“How to Write the Sustainable Section of Your
Grant Proposal,” www.About.com
Banach, M. & Gregory, P. J. October 2001.
Essential tasks, skills, and decisions for
developing sustainable community-based
programs for children, youth and families at
risk. Journal of Extension. 39(5). Electronic
version available from:
http://www.joe/org.joe/2001october/a4.php .

Banach, M., Zunz, S., & LaPoint, N. 2006.
Community collaboration: Effective
partnerships with steering committees. Journal
of Extension. 44(1) (Figure 1). Electronic
version available from:
http://www.joe.org/joe/2006february/a3.php .
Fritz, J. How to write the sustainability section of
your grant proposal. About.com. Nonprofit
Charitable Orgs. Electronic factsheet available
from:
http://nonprofit.about.com/od/foundationfundin
ggrants/a/grantssustainabi.htm .
Lodl, K. & Stevens, G. 2002. Coalition
sustainability: Long-term successes & lessons
learned. Journal of Extension. 40(1). Electronic
version available from:
http://www.joe.org/joe/2002february/a2.php .
U.S. Department of Labor. Employment and
Training Administration. Moving forward: Tips
for program sustainability. Electronic factsheet
available from:
http://www.doleta.gov/business/PDF/SustainTip
s.pdf
Utah State University is committed to providing an
environment free from harassment and other forms of illegal
discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national
origin, age (40 and older), disability, and veteran’s status.
USU’s policy also prohibits discrimination on the basis of
sexual orientation in employment and academic related
practices and decisions.
Utah State University employees and students cannot, because
of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or
veteran’s status, refuse to hire; discharge; promote; demote;
terminate; discriminate in compensation; or discriminate
regarding terms, privileges, or conditions of employment,
against any person otherwise qualified. Employees and
students also cannot discriminate in the classroom, residence
halls, or in on/off campus, USU-sponsored events and
activities.
This publication is issued in furtherance of Cooperative
Extension work, acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in
cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Noelle
E. Cockett, Vice President for Extension and Agriculture,
Utah State University.