# Sample Grant Proposal: Cedar Bend Youth Alliance **This is a fictional sample.** Cedar Bend Youth Alliance, the Maple Grove Community Foundation, and every figure in this document are invented for teaching. Use the structure and the level of specificity; replace every fact with your organization's verified evidence. Your funder's current guidelines override this structure wherever they differ. --- **Applicant:** Cedar Bend Youth Alliance (fictional) **Request:** $48,500 over 12 months **Funder:** Maple Grove Community Foundation (fictional), Children and Youth fund **Program:** Read Together, an after-school reading program for grades 2 to 4 ## Executive summary Cedar Bend Youth Alliance requests $48,500 from the Maple Grove Community Foundation to operate Read Together, an after-school reading program serving 60 students in grades 2 to 4 at two Cedar Bend elementary schools during the 2027 school year. On the district's 2025 state reading assessment (fictional figure), 41 percent of Cedar Bend third graders scored below proficiency, against 33 percent statewide, and the two partner schools sit above even that district rate. Read Together provides structured small-group reading practice twice weekly for 28 weeks, delivered by two part-time reading specialists and trained volunteers, with progress measured three times per year using curriculum-based measurement. The program's target: at least 70 percent of participants who attend 80 percent or more of sessions will gain one or more benchmark levels by the spring measurement. Cedar Bend Youth Alliance has operated youth programs in this community for nine years, currently serves 340 children annually, and runs Read Together's pilot site this year with 22 students, funded by individual donors. ## Organization background Cedar Bend Youth Alliance is a 501(c)(3) organization founded in 2018 to support school-age children in the Cedar Bend area outside the school day. The organization operates with a staff of five, a working board of nine, an annual budget of $420,000, and 60 active volunteers. Current programs include after-school enrichment at three sites, a summer learning program, and a family resource desk. The organization's finances are reviewed annually by an independent accountant, and its last three annual reports are public on its website. The executive director and program manager together hold 22 years of experience in youth programming; the program manager previously coordinated volunteer tutoring for the district. ## Statement of need On the 2025 state reading assessment (fictional figure), 41 percent of the Cedar Bend school district's third graders scored below proficiency, against 33 percent statewide. At the two schools this proposal serves, Hollis Elementary and Park Lane Elementary, the below-proficiency rates were 48 and 46 percent. Third grade matters because reading proficiency at that point predicts later academic outcomes; students who are not reading proficiently by the end of third grade are substantially less likely to graduate on time, a relationship documented in national longitudinal research. Behind these numbers is a service gap rather than a knowledge gap. Both schools operate reading intervention during the school day, but intervention slots cover fewer than half of the students below benchmark, and no structured reading support exists in the after-school hours at either site. Sixty-eight percent of families at the two schools qualify for free or reduced-price lunch (fictional figure), and in family interviews conducted during our 2026 pilot planning, the most cited barriers to private tutoring were cost and transportation. Families named the after-school window at the school site as the only practical time and place. Cedar Bend's families bring real assets to this problem: high program attendance at existing after-school sites, an active grandparent volunteer base, and school staff who share assessment data with community partners under an existing agreement. This proposal builds on those assets rather than importing a service over them. ## Program description Read Together provides small-group reading practice for 60 students in grades 2 to 4, 30 at each partner school, from September 2027 through May 2028. Students attend two 45-minute sessions per week for 28 weeks in groups of no more than four, led by a part-time certified reading specialist at each site and supported by trained volunteers at a ratio of one adult to two students. Sessions follow a consistent structure: 10 minutes of fluency practice, 20 minutes of guided reading at the student's assessed level, and 15 minutes of paired reading with a volunteer. The curriculum uses the district's leveled book room under the existing partnership agreement, supplemented by 420 purchased titles. Students are referred by school reading staff from the below-benchmark group not served by in-school intervention, with family consent required for enrollment and data sharing. Volunteers complete three hours of initial training covering session structure, paired reading technique, and confidentiality, plus monthly coaching from the site specialists. The program manager oversees both sites, manages the volunteer roster, and holds the family relationship: each family receives a mid-year and spring progress summary in their home language. ## Goals and objectives **Goal:** Participating students strengthen grade-level reading skills through sustained, structured after-school practice. - **Objective 1:** By May 2028, at least 70 percent of students attending 80 percent or more of sessions gain one or more benchmark levels on curriculum-based measurement from the fall baseline. - **Objective 2:** Across the program year, average session attendance is at least 80 percent, tracked weekly per site. - **Objective 3:** By May 2028, at least 85 percent of enrolled families attend or complete at least one progress conversation (in person or by phone) per semester. ## Evaluation Progress is measured with curriculum-based measurement administered by the site specialists three times per year (September baseline, January, May), using the same instrument the district uses so results are comparable with school data. Attendance is recorded per session per student. Family engagement is logged by the program manager. The program manager reports to the board quarterly, and results, including results that fall short of targets, are shared with both school principals and the foundation in the final report. The evaluation budget funds specialist time for administration and scoring and a summer analysis session that feeds the following year's design. ## Budget summary | Line item | Amount | | ---------------------------------------------------- | ----------- | | Program coordinator (0.5 FTE of program manager) | $24,000 | | Reading specialists (2 part-time, 28 weeks) | $12,600 | | Books and session materials | $4,200 | | Volunteer training and coaching | $1,800 | | Evaluation (measurement administration and analysis) | $2,400 | | Administrative allocation | $3,500 | | **Total request** | **$48,500** | The full budget narrative justifying each line, including calculation bases and the organization's cost-allocation method, accompanies this proposal as an attachment. Site space, the leveled book room, and student assessment data access are contributed by the district under the existing partnership agreement and appear in the full budget as in-kind contributions. ## Sustainability Read Together's pilot year is funded by individual donors, and this request funds the first full two-site year. The board has committed to a three-source funding model for year two: renewal or successor foundation funding, a dedicated appeal to the existing donor base (which grew 18 percent in 2026, fictional figure), and a request to the district to absorb specialist hours if year-one results meet the objectives above. The volunteer corps and the district partnership, the program's two structural assets, do not depend on this grant. --- _End of fictional sample. Every organization, school, funder, and number above is invented. Replace all of it with your verified facts, and follow your funder's current guidelines wherever they differ from this structure._