Even though I'm totally exhausted after once again rushing to the finish line on my grants (many of the deadlines are on March 1st), I thought I would share a few things I've learned from my almost 10 years of experience writing applications and being on juries. (You'd think after that long I'd have learned to finish before the deadline, but so far it hasn't happened....)
Peer assessment juries are like lotteries. Sometimes you get one that just understands your work, and sometimes you don't. The reality is that usually no more than 10% of applications will get funded, so they have to unanimously love your proposal for it to make the cut. Unfortunately, success often has little to do with the actual idea and a lot to do with the way it's presented.
When getting started, pay special attention to the application form for each agency, and read ALL the guidelines carefully (I would even suggest printing them off so you can have them beside you as you write). NEVER re-use a grant you wrote for the Canada Council when applying to SODEC, and vice versa. You can recycle some of the content, but always be sure to present it in a way that follows exactly what is on the form, in the same order. This simple step will help you immensely, as jurors will quickly be able to skim through and see that you hit all the marks.
No matter how good your idea, one thing alone will ensure that you stand out from the crowd: great writing. I can't stress this enough. Not only must you be a competent filmmaker with a track record and a clear concept, you must also be a good writer in order to get money.
Make sure to edit what you've written. Ask someone to read it (preferably at least 24 hours before the deadline) and LISTEN to their suggestions. If something doesn't make sense to them, cut it or change it. Most of all, have someone else proofread for you; you'd be surprised how many things you'll overlook when you've been working for the last 14 hours straight and are running on no sleep. Juries hate spelling mistakes because they demonstrate sloppiness and a lack of commitment--they'd rather give the money to someone who is meticulous and hard-working.
Jury members usually receive a binder with 300-500 pages of reading material. They will thank you for being concise, not using a $10 word when a $2 word will do, and making sure that every sentence presents a clear idea, rather than running around in circles. If your writing flows like water and the concept is easy to define, they will see that you worked hard on your application and will most likely recommend you for funding.
If you should receive a rejection letter (a "Thin Letter," as a prof of mine used to call them), it might not be because they didn't like your project, but because you failed to explain it clearly. They should be able to visualize it as if it were right there in front of them. Call and ask for the comments so you can improve your submission next time, and never submit the same application at future deadlines without making changes. Whatever you do, don't unload a bunch of negativity on the funding officer because, although they don't decide the outcome of a grant, they can still be of help to you in other ways if you're on their good side.
Finally, remember that these are your peers and chances are you might know a person on the jury; I always caution against making enemies in this business, and now is the time when you really don't want personal disputes to come back to haunt you.
Hi Lea,
ReplyDeleteLots of good advice here and in the previous post on "working a room".
I think that enemies are an unfortunate consequence of living one's life. One tries to limit the damage, by choosing one's battles - and by trying to be conciliatory and treat people in a fair and decent manner. But there comes a time when one needs to stand up for a friend or an important principle - or deal with the irrational resentment of a colleague. And often you're going to make an enemy (or weaken friendships) in any case, no matter what you do. Nothing you don't know, I'm sure.
The chances of a mortal enemy ending up on your jury are very slim. One who feels no need to recuse his/her self from a decision on your work due to personal bias. If that happens, well - there's always next time. If one's work is good, it will survive the temporary setback.
As you state - more often than not, the reasons for being turned down have little to do with anything personal: agency underfunding (hence the 10% success rate), the project not being someone's cup of tea (for stylistic, political or other reasons), and shortcomings in the application itself are all factors in play.
As you say, the main advice is to be persistent, improve the application/work and stay positive. All easier said than done. It's a tough business, but (to repeat myself) if one's work is good, it will eventually be supported.
Michael