Grantmakers: Listening Leads to Resilient Philanthropy

I love all manner of self-help topics, especially those about forming good habits, improving health, being kinder, and managing money. I have folders full of articles and shelves full of books, and someday I will read them all. Although much of my well-intentioned collection goes untouched, I’ve found that listening to audiobooks or podcasts is an easier way for me to consume the lessons prescribed. Somehow hearing another person lay out the path is simpler to digest.

 

In philanthropy, honest feedback from applicants and grantees may be hard to come by, even if it is requested in earnest. As many funders no doubt find, when holding the proverbial purse strings, one is often the wittiest, smartest, and most attractive person in the room. This funder bubble can make comments from those seeking funding seem suspect. However, continual improvement in grantmaking requires that we listen to what applicants, grantees, committee members, and other stakeholders have to say. This in turn facilitates the growth of the adaptive skills resilience demands.

 

Let your applicants know you care what they think. Preface questions in both written surveys or verbal conversations with the goal of your request - improving all aspects of the grantmaking process. State clearly that applicant comments will have no repercussions on future funding. Remind applicants that your role is to support work that aligns with your foundation’s mission, and developing grant programs and processes that allow you to make sound decisions and assist applicants in building their capacity is key. By listening to applicants, you can strengthen their resilience through easy to navigate forms that clearly outline funder expectations and reflect nonprofit best practices. 

 

Grantmakers can invite cohorts of applicants and grantees to brief get-togethers to ask for candid feedback in a casual setting. Anonymous surveys can be used to ask what the grantmaker might have done differently or better. Some grantmakers even include question groups in their applications or follow up reports seeking feedback on topics such as the length of time it took to complete the form and the clarity of the language used. Collecting this type of feedback directly onto grant forms makes applicant responses easier to track over time in a consistent manner.

 

While applicants and grantees can provide useful information to help improve your programs, it’s also important to include grant review committee members in a separate survey or debrief session at the end of each grant cycle. Build this expectation into your committee timeline and remind members you will be asking for their comments after grant recommendations or decisions are made.

 

During the initial implementation of GLM or SLM, you’re asked to create a base or master process from which you’ll build all others. The expectation is that you make the process, including all forms, as perfect as you can before copying it forward for use. However, the assumption is that this “perfect” process will not stay “perfect,” and if you are listening to the feedback you’ve been given, it likely won’t. Copying and revising your processes annually is the best practice, especially when creating a durable process. Small revisions may be made when a process is live, but more substantive changes should be made less often, if feasible.