Grant Conversations

Online communications are preferred for an ever-growing number of nonprofit professionals today, whether that be via email, secure website form, secure internal communication platform, by telephone, Facebook Messenger, LinkedIn Messaging, video or phone conference call, and more. This, combined with the fact that there are a growing number of applicants seeking grant funding often means the communication between grant seeker and funding entity is even more limited.

It can be a challenge to get in touch with those in charge of making grants and/or those charged with interfacing with grant writers about potential grant requests. Yet, if funding entities want to support the highest quality, most effective programs – whether they be corporations, foundations, donor advised funds, federal and other government agencies – then it would make sense to converse with applicants prior to their spending enormous amounts of time writing grants and submitting them, only to find the interests of the prospective donor have changed, or funding is tapped out, for instance.

The point of my post is simply to ask those involved in making grants to respond in a timely fashion to requests for information in whatever fashion they prefer. You do sometimes read online, “so many” people are reaching out for financial support that the staff, “don’t have the time” to respond.

If that is true, why not hire more staff to field requests? By doing that, you prevent unnecessary applications and wasted time by potential applicants who literally spend hours and days crafting what they believe are meaningful and appropriate grant proposals. You also ensure that you receive the best possible applications, perfectly tailored to your interests.

It is also good public relations. Even if the job of your staff is simply to say you are not accepting proposals, this would help nonprofit fundraising staff redirect their time in more productive ways and not be longing needlessly for a grant that will certainly be rejected.

As I wrote this post originally, most were working from home. And it occurs to me that this kind of clear and courteous communication with applicants is ideal for grant making staff who can and do work from their homes. Don’t let nonprofit grant seekers misunderstand your lack of a response as meaning, “we don’t care about your nonprofit and we are just too busy to respond.”

Having said this, there are some funding entities with which I have worked that are quick to respond with, “we will let you know if we need more information.” “Yes, you can apply during our next funding cycle, but now is not a good time.” “Let us know if you have any questions.” To them, I give a high five!

I also interacted recently with a corporate community relations executive via email who responded to my questions about the company’s online application immediately. “Let me check.” “I’m not sure why you cannot upload that attachment.” “I will get back to you.” And they did so on multiple occasions. Frankly, even if my project is not funded in the end, I am left with a feeling of gratitude for their being honest and responsive. And I think the world of their company now.

Having said this, in my experience responsive grant professionals are relatively few in number. Respectfully, I urge corporations, foundations, donor advised funds, government agencies and the like to put more energy and resources into responding to those reaching out for guidance. You will shine in the end and improve your grant making in the long run. That’s a win-win for everyone.

You might enjoy reading, “Grantmaker Tech Trends That Nonprofits Should Know About” from TechSoup (March 1, 2021), to see how technology is being used by grant makers today. Also, check out PEAK Grantmaking’s article, “How Today’s AI Could Change The Grant Making of Tomorrow” (August 9, 2018). I wouldn’t mind chatting with a “bot” for many questions, although some of my application questions are a bit more complicated.

Baby Boomers and Older Adults: Go For Startups

Despite the ups-and-downs of my experiences in the nonprofit sector over the course of thirty years, I remain optimistic about the future. A few years ago, I wrote a blog post on LinkedIn about the Millennial generation. There, I reference an article by Jean Case, in Forbes (June 18, 2014), “The Business of Doing Good: How Millennials Are Changing the Corporate Sector.”

“Many in this generation are known for being well-educated, entrepreneurial, tech savvy and idealistic. They take risks, are bold and want to change the world. Unlike past generations, they want to make their passions, inspirations and desire to do good part of their identity—and part of their work. The lines between personal passions and professional engagements are already rapidly disappearing. As a result, this commitment to doing good in the workplace is quickly becoming the new norm that will define the generation.”

#2030NOW

My experience is that Millennial and younger generations following on their heels are committed to a fixing the problems of society and to creating a better world at all levels. They are unafraid of tackling difficult challenges with creativity and conviction. And, they are already dominating the workforce. Their impact will continue to be far-reaching for decades to come. Hardly any American corporation today can afford to ignore them.

As I note in, “Nonprofits and Boomers: Are We Missing the Boat,” nonprofit organizations must also be mindful that Boomer and older generations are key for successful fundraising, for their knowledge and their valuable life experiences. Boomers are a generous generation and highly supportive of nonprofit endeavors, yet they are often seen as being stodgy and old fashioned.

Marketing professionals continue to focus on the young and the aesthetics of youth. And while many older adults do strive to be “younger” in some ways, as time moves forward and the aging population explodes worldwide, we are seeing a growing pride in being “older” and in the aesthetic preferences of older adults.

Entrepreneur

A few months ago, I approached a large national foundation that also has a substantial number of donor advised funds. I wanted to submit a proposal to fund an outstanding nonprofit project. But the nonprofit’s annual operational budget – being “under $1,000,000” – meant the foundation declined support based solely on that criteria. They would not take even a cursory glance at what the nonprofit is accomplishing, at how well it operates and how worthy it could be as a partner. On a personal note, what that foundation’s professional advisors also missed is that some of the Board members and donors of that nonprofit were capable of establishing donor advised funds. They would have been thrilled to receive even a modest grant and might have themselves become donor advised fund clients. But the “under $1,000,000” rule supplanted all other considerations. But why is operating budget size so important?

Since returning to Austin in 2013 and helping nonprofit “startups” bolster their infrastructure and credibility in order to secure more substantial donations, I have noticed some of them are reluctant to support younger nonprofits because they are, “too small.” Potential donors cite the nonprofits have not been in existence long enough (i.e., five years or more). Some decline because these smaller and younger initiatives have not had formal audits, which are an expensive undertaking for most small nonprofit organizations (and there are reputable alternatives). I visited with one foundation a few years ago that required every nonprofit applicant to have four consecutive years of professional audits. That is way over the top. I advised focusing instead on gold-level or higher GuideStar profiles, and GreatNonprofits reviews by those actually involved with and volunteering for the nonprofits applying.

The fact is, many of these startups and young nonprofits are lean staff- and budget-wise, and they operate highly efficiently. They accomplish amazing things with relatively little and the staff are deeply loyal to their missions. In my opinion, there seems to be a disconnect between the donor and professional advisor sectors, and the vast majority of nonprofit organizations, which are in fact smaller in size.

From the GuideStar Blog comes, “What Does the Nonprofit Sector Really Look Like?” (January 6, 2017):

“The majority of nonprofits (66.3%) have annual budgets of less than $1 million. From there, as organization size increases, the number of nonprofits decreases. For every 1 powerhouse (annual expenses more than $5 billion) nonprofit, there are thousands of grassroots organizations.”

My hope is for deeper, long-term partnerships between younger and older generations, the latter holding significant disposable income to make charitable donations. Boomers and older adults (and their professional advisors), often focus their charitable giving on tried-and-true nonprofits that have been in existence for many years. That is certainly their choice to make, but having seen nonprofits large and small in some detail as a professional fundraiser, I can say without hesitation many of younger and smaller nonprofits, startups and social good enterprises are more efficient and more likely to create positive change in society than the older, top-heavy ones. But these younger initiatives are often seen as being, “riskier.”

Lose your fear and support startups and smaller nonprofit organizations. Younger generations are – and will be – driving much of the social change ahead. We need to trust and encourage them. But also, younger generations need to engage older citizens and tap their knowledge and enthusiasm for social good, as well as their charitable donations. Together we can change the world for the better.

You might also enjoy reading these articles from Carolyn’s Nonprofit Blog.

Thanks to the Adobe Creative Cloud free image library for the photographs used to illustrate this blog post.