This is Sunday, the last day of Spring Break for most of the folks in education in Arkansas.
Just before the break, I spent the week working solidly on E-Rate and on the grant proposal being used to attempt job security.
The E-Rate process is insane. Period. And, for those of us filing for plain telephone service, long distance and cell phones only, it is a matter of mindless repetition. I will say, though, that the process has gotten better to some degree. The ability to copy the list of entities from a previously submitted application makes filling in part of the form as simple as a few clicks and a couple required numbers. My complaint is that applicants who are only filing for the same old thing as they have for the last ten years should be given a pass. That is, we should be allowed to check a box marked "See 471 Number..." and fill in the form we used the previous year.
At least I got smarted this year. We have ONE local telephone carrier in my area. So, this year, we signed a 4-year agreement. Now, all I have to do in the future is say, "Hey, we have a multi-year contract. Thanks." I did the same with Long distance (only it's a two-year agreement).
As for the grant proposal, I worked it and reworked it until I felt good about it. Basically, the process includes a place for what I've done in the past year and a place to explain what I plan to do next year should I be funded. There is more to it than that, but for the purposes of posting here, that's enough to get the idea across. The biggest problem I had was coherently explaining everything I do without making it look like a laundry list. In truth, a laundry list would be easy to whip out. I enjoyed the process of narrowing focus and creating (for lack of a better word) categories of tasks.
We were told that we would know something near the beginning of April, with solid confirmation coming closer to the turn of the fiscal year. My fingers are crossed, though if I end up not funded, it only means that I did not convey everything I do well enough. I wish we could defend our proposals in person along with the written submission. I think that would prove very compelling. As it is, we can only hope that our words (each state tech had to submit a proposal) portray the necessity of our positions.
No comments:
Post a Comment