By Gwenn Gebhard, Luther I. Replogle Foundation
As a foundation, it can be difficult to find ways (beyond making grants) to support our grantees and, at the same time, improve their visibility in their communities and the wider world. With this challenge in mind, the foundation’s board of directors and I developed a two-pronged project inspired by a webinar I attended in September 2016.
The webinar was hosted by Foundant Technologies, a grants management software company (and our foundation’s vendor since 2009), and GuideStar, a nonprofit that manages public data on all nonprofits operating in the United States. Working together, Foundant and GuideStar developed software called GuideStar for Grant Applications to pull information from organizations’ GuideStar profiles into Foundant grant processes through web-based links. Keep in mind: Using GuideStar for Grant Applications requires nonprofits to complete their GuideStar profiles, funders to accept the data as a means of populating their grant applications, and software vendors to incorporate the technology into their solutions.
After discovering that only five of our 16 current Washington, DC grantees has developed a GuideStar profile, I decided that assistance could be very useful to them. Further research showed that in Minneapolis, one out of nine of the foundation’s grantees has a GuideStar profile. The story is slightly different in Chicago, where four out of six of our grantees has a GuideStar profile. None of our grantees anywhere has a Platinum profile, and only a few have Gold.
By Dr. Stacy Van Gorp, R. J. McElroy Trust
Our goal is to make the McElroy Trust the easiest place to seek funding for good ideas. It’s not the easiest place to get a “yes,” because we see a lot of proposals, ask hard questions, and have high standards. But we try to never make a grantseeker jump through hoops.
I estimate that changes we have made in recent years to streamline our grant application and reporting process save our grantseekers (in total) about 840 hours each year, increase our net grant size—the dollars received after subtracting the cost of applying for and reporting on a grant, and save time for our staff and board.
Our changes were driven by several factors:
- Our approval rate moved from about 6/10 approved proposals in 2005 to 3/10 during the depth of the recession in 2009.
- Our trustees were interested in ways to enhance our support of youth-serving organizations, even as our assets had decreased.
- For a few years we asked our applicants how long it took to apply. The average response was 10 hours for a 4- to 6-page application. Time spent writing our application ranged from one hour to 80 hours! We discovered there was no relationship between the amount of time spent and our decision to fund. People who spent more time writing were no more or less likely to be approved.
- I was ready for change internally. We had been using staff time to summarize proposals for the board, which seemed cumbersome for us and the seekers.
- We were also asking questions we knew the answers to! For example, we asked the Boys and Girls Club to describe its mission and organization every year, even though we had funded them several times.
Earlier this month, Project Streamline’s lead consultant, Jessica Bearman, talked with ASF members June Wilson and Lenore Hanisch of the Quixote Foundation about the small foundation’s unique style of grantmaking and the values that underlie it—a grantmaking program that includes conversations in lieu of proposals and “Bright Spots” funding, in which they sent unanticipated, unrequested grants with no strings attached to organizations doing work they believed in.
One of our core values is standing shoulder to shoulder. This is why we don’t accept proposals. When we see something interesting, we have conversations with the people who are behind it. We are trying to achieve our mission of free people in fair societies on a healthy planet… and our grantees are the ones doing this important work. We think the best way to do it is for the grantee to lead and we try to learn and share what we know.
When we say partnership, we really mean it.
Do you have—or do you want to cultivate—relationships with grantees that allow you to give in this way?
Read the full post on Project Streamline’s blog.
By Gail Vento, Lana Vento Charitable Trust
Lana Vento Charitable Trust (LVCT) recently tailored its grant process to fit a local theater’s organizational capacity and reflect the size of its grant. Read about the steps it took to minimize the theater’s paperwork and maximize its time spent on programs.
For the past 7 years, Lana Vento Charitable Trust (LVCT) awarded Pistarckle Theater program-specific grants. Pistarckle is a small nonprofit theater that provides educational programs to youths in addition to running a regular performance program. It is a relatively small organization with an operating and program budget of $330K.
Initially Pistarckle was asked to submit a complete grant application, but, during the grant evaluation process, it became evident that Pistarckle is truly a grassroots program with few staff, none dedicated to grantwriting.
LVCT saw the need to minimize the theater’s time spent gathering paperwork and maximize its time spent on programs. In an effort to do so, and only after establishing a healthy grantmaking relationship, our application process was streamlined in the following ways.