I reviewed a grant proposal recently that proposed training, mentorship, and producing specific results with 100% success every step of the way. That’s never going to happen – no way, no how. Have you ever seen 100% of enrollees complete a training, master all the skills, integrate the skills into their work, and achieve optimal results as did the pilot project conducted by professional staff? Never happens

That latest proposal was only one of the thousands of proposals that I’ve read that never acknowledge failure, attrition, dis-adoption, non-compliance, or lack of competence along their causal chain from training to results. From the funder’s perspective, that gap is a clear signal that the applicant does not have a realistic grasp of risks and the realities faced by their partners, clientele, or beneficiaries.

The trap of excessive optimism is so prevalent, that our eyes gloss over the metrics and targets and pass proposals on through the system. Does the funder really believe in your numbers? Probably not. Do you really believe in the numbers in your proposals? Probably not. But hope and optimism are powerful and are inherent to those who battle societal problems against all odds. Nonprofit staff and funders are optimists and they should be.

Hope and optimism have a viral quality – a contagion. Each staff person up the organizational hierarchy in both the grantee and the donor have desires or incentives to put forward the best-case scenarios. That keeps the fire burning and the vision clear. However, the second edge of the optimism sword is that goals and results propagate up to the CEO and to Boards in simplified forms whose comparison reveals repeated shortfalls. It is no surprise that leadership is often impatient for results and strategy change.

Instead, picture a proposed plan that includes an attrition factor at every step of a phased project, while still striving for stretch goals. That proposal is honest about risks, cites prior experience and client behavior, sets thresholds that trigger risk mitigation, and provides specific safety nets to catch “drop-outs.” That proposal communicates knowledge, confidence, caring, and promotes learning and adaptation. And as results come in, just falling short or beating a realistic goal motivates performance and dynamic strategy refinement. That is a winning proposal.