Why Asset-Based Framing Matters in Grant Writing
Boring title, I know! But stick with me for a minute. What do these three things have in common?
1. A rehab patient recovering from an accident
2. Mike and Sulley in Monsters, Inc.
3. Your nonprofit's clients
Starting with an example
Since he retired a few years ago, my dad has cycled around 5,000 miles annually. (For context, I got my “new” bike almost eight years ago, and it only has about 12,000 miles.) He’s in his early 70s and is in great shape.
A few weeks ago, though, he had a bike accident that resulted in a fractured pelvis and surgery to place two screws to realign his pelvic bone. While the bone heals, he can’t bear weight on his leg and will have weeks of physical therapy to get back to baseline.
It would be a hard injury for anyone. But any time you have a serious injury over the age of 65, people look at you differently. In his weeks in the hospital and rehab facility, I noticed his medical professionals walk into the room with preconceived notions about who they would be treating. After all, it’s likely much of their experience is of “elderly” patients with a limited range of motion. Why would this individual be any different?
Each time, I watched the provider’s attitudes change as they learned more about him. They started to realize their assumptions were incorrect. Rather than seeing him in the bed or walker or wheelchair, they saw him as the cyclist who had an accident 22 miles into a 40-mile route. Certainly, age is a complicating factor, but it isn’t the only factor in his recovery.
It reminded me of something we talk about in grant writing: how easy it is to define people by their challenges instead of their capabilities.
Defining deficit- and asset-based framing
There’s great writing out there on how the language we use exposes our underlying assumptions. In the 1990s, John L. McKnight and John P. Kretzmann introduced asset-based community development (ABCD), which countered the tendency for systems to focus on deficiencies rather than on the “capacities, skills, and assets” of a community. McKnight and Kretzmann argued that the primary building block in community development isn’t investment from outside the community, but rather using the community’s own strengths to its advantage.
The idea gained traction in the intervening years, particularly when philanthropy started to have broader conversations about equity and person-first language. I remember first hearing about asset-based language as taught by Trabian Shorters, who explained how cognitive errors lead us to rely on deficit framing and coined the cognitive framework Asset-Framing. It takes awareness of our own biases and deficits to use this framework.Instrumentl has a detailed guide about deficit/asset language if you’d like to learn more.
For example, deficit framing could include describing communities only by poverty rates, students only by the rate of below-grade reading, or neighborhoods only by crime. Terms like “at-risk,” “marginalized,” and “underserved” are usually dead giveaways for this kind of thinking.
As writers, it can be easy to fall into these traps, particularly when the funder uses the terms themselves in their guidelines or prompts. We feel pressure to prove the need behind our programs, particularly as we compete for limited funding. And certainly, funders need to understand barriers and challenges.
But rather than problems waiting to be solved, the communities we serve are made up of resilient individuals with many layers to their story.
Deficit and asset framing in Monsters, Inc.
Did you wonder when I was going to get back to this? (Only the prospect of poor SEO kept me from making a door frame joke in relation to asset framing in this section title.)
The first time I considered writing this post was when I watched Monsters, Inc. last year. If you've never seen the film, the basic premise is that there's an entire system of monsters who power their city by scaring kids in their bedrooms at night. In the face of an energy shortage (with kids less scared through the years), the company’s leadership did everything it could to preserve the assumption that fear was the most powerful resource available. It never occurred to anyone that joy might produce more energy than terror. And in fact, that discovery leads to an energy surplus. Huzzah! The community (children) had both challenges (fear) and strengths (laughter). Employing the community's assets rather than its deficits resulted in a stronger community.
Philanthropy can fall into a similar trap. Deficit-based storytelling assumes fear and crisis are the strongest motivators. But some of the most compelling nonprofit work comes from possibility, creativity, resilience, and community strength. I recently reviewed a grant application for Unfunded List that was so captivating, I was ready to volunteer. The application told the story about a small nonprofit that used its community strength to overcome a systemic issue. It could have easily focused on the negative, but instead told an uplifting story about the power of community.
How asset-based framing could translate for your nonprofit's clients
Amaya Howard wrote on the Grant Professionals Association blog about how asset framing is the future of grant writing. She suggests that we speak to our clients’ humanity within our narratives by having them use their own words to describe their challenges and opportunities.
Within the arts and culture sector specifically, it can be easy to fall back on the trope of “limited arts exposure” being the primary challenge for local students. But consider where else these students might have arts exposure in their lives. In South Georgia, for instance, many children grow up in churches with well-established chorus programs. How could that community strength dovetail with your arts education programs? What sort of community support do students have within their congregation? In your community, students may already be musicians, storytellers, dancers, creators, or leaders in their own right.
A major challenge for a grant pro is that you could be physically and organizationally siloed away from the program staff and clients. You might feel that you have to make educated guesses (based on data) about the people your nonprofit serves. Where possible, take time to talk to your program staff about exactly who they're interacting with in your programs. Arrange to observe programs or (even better) interview clients or their families.
As you're working on your grant narrative, you can ask yourself a few questions to see if you're on track.
Have I identified strengths alongside barriers? In your need statement, circle the barriers you've identified for the folks you serve. Now circle the strengths, maybe in a different color. It becomes easy to see how balanced your narrative is.
Would the people in the proposal recognize themselves in the description? How have I brought their humanity to bear?
How would I feel if someone described me this way? Put yourself in your client’s position.
Is my nonprofit being portrayed as a savior or as a partner? As in, the only way these individuals can survive their circumstances is through your work? Or is your nonprofit a partner in the community and its citizens?
I'm not perfect by any means – but I'm learning
There are so many nuances here, and I'll be the first to admit it's really tough! I'm a natural pessimist, and I've spent a lot of time in my career thinking about the negatives - the deficits. I also don't often get the chance to see my clients' work firsthand (with some exceptions), so my work sometimes relies on data shortcuts rather than on people-first language.
Watching my dad navigate recovery has reminded me how quickly people can shrink someone’s identity around a perceived vulnerability. Writing, and grant writing specifically, can do the same thing to communities if we are not careful. Language has power.
The strongest proposals do not erase hardship. But they also leave room for strength, agency, dignity, and possibility. Before you submit your next proposal, take a few minutes to review your narrative through an asset-based lens. You may be surprised by what you find.
I’ll continue working on this, too, and I’d love to hear what you’ve learned.
P.S. If you'd like help reviewing your organization's narratives, developing a grant boilerplate document, or strengthening your overall grant strategy, let's talk.