Sustainability Planning for Federal Grants: From Closeout to Continuity

Sustainability planning for federal grants is the disciplined process of ensuring a project’s goals, principles, and activities endure after the award period ends. Federal funders increasingly prioritize long-term impact; proposals and performance reports should demonstrate a credible plan for lasting success. We share guidance on sustainability planning to support your federal grant.

Start early. Treat sustainability as a design constraint from day one, not a scramble in the final quarter. Build time, roles, and budget for sustainability work into the management plan, and revisit it at every reporting cycle.

Use a sustainability assessment. At Shaffer Evaluation Group, we guide clients with the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool (PSAT). The PSAT helps teams score and prioritize capacity across eight domains: Environmental Support, Funding Stability, Partnerships, Organizational Capacity, Program Evaluation, Program Adaptation, Communications, and Strategic Planning. A quick PSAT baseline early in Year 1, a midpoint check, and a final assessment create a clear trajectory of capacity-building for your organization and evidence of progress for funders.

Build a sustainability plan. Your sustainability plan should be developed early in your grant term. Here are the core components a sustainability plan for a federally funded project should include, distilled from cross-agency best practices:

• Purpose & outcomes. A concise statement of your project's value proposition, intended outcomes, and beneficiaries, aligned to a logic model you will continue to monitor and adjust post-award.

• Core program model & operating protocols. A description of your core program model and what must be maintained (including workflows) so the project can persist with quality after grant closeout.

• Governance & ownership. Named post-award owner(s) and ongoing “champions” to anchor the work.

• Funding strategy (braided financing). Targeted mix of reallocated (internal) funding and external sources, with milestones, responsible leads, and cultivation plans (e.g., philanthropy, fee-for-service).

• Partnerships & MOUs. Roles, cost-shares, and data-sharing agreements with agencies, nonprofits, and community partners that are essential to sustain activities.

• Workforce continuity & knowledge transfer. Staffing map, cross-training to avoid single-points-of-failure, onboarding materials, and a schedule for refresher trainings.

• Communications & stakeholder engagement. A plan to keep sponsors, end-users, and other stakeholders informed and invested.

• Data, evaluation & learning. Post-grant metrics, feedback loops, and routines for using evidence in decisions.

• Policy & institutionalization. The specific policies, procedures, and standards that will embed the work into normal operations.

• Risk & scenario planning. Anticipated risks (funding gaps, turnover, vendor change), trigger points, contingencies, and “minimum viable operations” to protect continuity.

• Technology & infrastructure. Post-award requirements for platforms, equipment, licensing, accessibility/privacy, and support so services can run at steady state.

  
  

Operationalize it. Translate the plan into a 12–24 month roadmap with owners, milestones, and a lightweight dashboard, and budget explicitly for sustainability tasks (e.g., grantwriting time, partnership stewardship, training refreshers).

How we help. Shaffer Evaluation Group uses the PSAT to run a rapid diagnostic using the PSAT, co-facilitate strategy sessions with leadership and partners, and co-develop a sustainability roadmap that balances quick wins (policy changes, SOPs, cross-training) with longer-horizon plays (braided funding, institutionalization). A thoughtful sustainability plan signals stewardship, strengthens proposals, and, most importantly, keeps effective work alive for the communities it was designed to serve. For more information, contact us today at seg@shafferevaluation.com.

Key Considerations for Evaluating Career and Technical Education (CTE) Programs

Shaffer Evaluation Group partners with a wide range of Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs supported by various grant initiatives, including the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA), the Native American Career and Technical Education Program (NACTEP), and the National Science Foundation (NSF).

When designing an evaluation strategy for CTE programs, consider the following two key factors:

Capture the Full Range of Program Impact

Outcome measures should reflect both short-term achievements and long-term impacts. While traditional metrics like completion rates, graduation rates, and post-program plans are essential, they only tell part of the story. To gain a deeper understanding of program effectiveness, collect data throughout the program’s duration. This might include:

• Surveys that track changes in participants’ beliefs, attitudes, and dispositions

• Measures of academic performance and engagement

• Insights into future educational or career plans

• Enrollment in additional training, educational programs, or courses

These broader indicators provide a more complete picture of how the program shapes participants’ trajectories.

Account for Attrition in Your Evaluation Design

Attrition is a reality in many CTE programs, so it’s crucial to build evaluation measures that reflect progress, even when participants don’t complete the full program. Consider tracking the following:

• Milestones toward program completion

• Course-level completion rates (e.g., percentage of students who finish individual courses)

• Endorsement or certification attainment

These metrics can demonstrate early wins and incremental progress, offering valuable insights into program effectiveness even when full completion isn’t achieved.

Final Thoughts about Evaluating Career and Technical Education Programs

Effective evaluation of CTE programs requires a thoughtful and flexible approach that captures both the breadth and depth of program impact. By incorporating diverse outcome measures and planning for participant attrition, evaluators can build a more accurate and resilient picture of program success. Whether you're working with DoDEA, NACTEP, NSF, or other grant-funded initiatives, these strategies help ensure your evaluation reflects the real-world progress and potential of your CTE efforts.

---

Shaffer Evaluation Group is committed to helping programs tell their story through meaningful data. With the right tools and insights, your evaluation can do more than meet reporting requirements—it can illuminate the transformative power of CTE. Contact us today for a free 30-minute consultation.

The headline in federal funding this year: Workforce development

Across federal agencies this year, Notices of Funding Opportunity (NOFOs) and Federal Register notices explicitly tie dollars to apprenticeships, work-based learning, and training pipelines through dedicated set-asides or invitational priorities. The signal is clear: the Administration plans to use grants to implement its workforce development strategy to Make America Skilled Again.

To that end, the U.S. departments of Labor, Commerce, and Education released on August 12 their blueprint to revamp the federal government’s approach to workforce development. The 27-page paper — “America’s Talent Strategy: Equipping American Workers for the Golden Age” — explains the plan is geared to “empower more Americans to access good-paying jobs, build pipelines of skilled talent for critical industries, prepare the workforce system for an AI-driven economy, and position the U.S. as the dominant global economic leader.”  The plan rests on five strategic pillars:

• Industry-Driven Strategies. This pillar calls for refocusing the workforce system on employer demand and national economic priorities. It aligns education and training with clearly defined career pathways, scales Registered Apprenticeships and other high-quality work-based learning, and targets federal investments to employer-led upskilling initiatives that address shortages in priority industries.

• Worker Mobility. This pillar aims to broaden labor-force participation and advancement by shifting from a “college-for-all” mindset to skills-first pathways. It promotes transparency about credentials valued in the labor market, integrates AI-enabled guidance and competency-based assessments so workers can advance based on demonstrated skills, and reconnects disengaged workers with training that leads to self-sufficiency and high-wage employment.

• Integrated Systems. This pillar seeks to replace today’s fragmented and duplicative programs with a streamlined, coordinated system that delivers unified services. It simplifies governance so states can braid funding streams and provide a single, clear access point for employers, and it advances structural consolidation through the Make America Skilled Again proposal and the reorganization of federal statistical functions within the Department of Commerce.

• Accountability. This pillar requires that federal workforce investments be explicitly linked to outcomes and program performance. It harmonizes metrics, strengthens data linkages, and mandates transparent reporting on placement and wages, while reforming or eliminating programs that fail to connect participants to high-wage jobs and reserving taxpayer-funded services for individuals legally authorized to work.

• Flexibility and Innovation. This pillar recognizes the need to adapt at the pace of AI-driven economic change. It uses existing authorities to enable regulatory flexibility, embeds AI literacy and skills throughout the workforce system, and launches rapid pilot projects for reskilling and other AI-era innovations so the nation can build an adaptive, AI-ready workforce at scale.

Two recent higher education programs make this emphasis on workforce development unmistakable.  Education’s 2025 Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions (NASNTI) competition listed an invitational priority to “expand access to… pre-apprenticeships, apprenticeships… career preparation, work-based learning” and to build programs that lead to “in-demand, industry recognized credentials” (Federal Register). Likewise, the Department’s 2025 Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions Program, Part A (ANNH) competition includes the same invitational priority language—explicitly encouraging workforce-based options and work-based learning models (Federal Register). 

The Department of Labor is a major contributor of workforce development funding, and it announced on August 11 the availability of $30 million in grants to train American workers for jobs in high demand, emerging industries. The 2025 Industry-Driven Skills Training Fund supports “outcome-based reimbursements to employers for providing training in . . . industries” that align with recent Executive Orders, including Preparing Americans for High-Paying Skilled Trade Jobs of the Future,  Restoring America’s Maritime Dominance, and America’s AI Action Plan; at least $5 million in funding is carved out to support training in the shipbuilding industry (DOL). The State Apprenticeship Expansion Formula (Round 3) backs states to grow Registered Apprenticeship Programs with research- and evidence-based approaches (DOL). The Workforce Data Quality Initiative (WDQI) invests in states’ longitudinal systems so they can evaluate which training programs and services are most effective (DOL).

This workforce focus is seen across grant solicitations from other agencies, too. At the Department of Transportation, the Federal Transit Administration’s FY2025 Low- or No-Emission Buses and Bus Facilities NOFO requires that 5% of federal funds for zero-emission projects be used for workforce development (with defined eligible activities such as retraining and registered apprenticeships) (Federal Transit Administration). MARAD’s FY2025 Port Infrastructure Development Program NOFO states program goals that include “workforce development, job quality, and wealth creation” (Maritime Administration). Similarly, MARAD’s FY2025 Small Shipyard Grant NOFO explicitly funds maritime training programs to build technical skills and productivity in shipbuilding and repair (Maritime Administration).

For colleges, states, and workforce boards, workforce development is more than a theme—it’s a scoring advantage under this Administration. Proposals that braid institutional reform with employer partnerships, apprenticeships, and measurable job placement are best aligned with the 2025 federal funding landscape.