Hi everyone, happy Pride month. Please put on your calendar to attend this webinar on June 18th from 11:30am to 1pm Pacific: “What If our Trans siblings were fully included and protected in all spaces? A guide to substantive allyship for Trans rights and how to do better with Nathan Rodriguez of Trans Equity Coalition.” It’s free. Register here and spread the word.
There are a few things our sector sucks at, and one of those things is feedback. How to give it, how to receive it, and why it’s never a good idea to walk silently to stand behind someone when they’re microwaving their lunch and whisper in their ear, “You did something I didn’t like, Jeremy…”
This week, though, I’m talking specifically about feedback from funders to nonprofit leaders in the grantmaking process. In the usual process, hundreds of organizations apply. A lucky few are awarded the grants; the rest get a generic rejection letter to read in while weeping softly in the supplies closet.
Some funders provide helpful and specific feedback on what applicants could do better next time, such as “your community needs section didn’t include enough data.” The majority do not, leaving most nonprofit leaders bewildered and frustrated.
So, should funders do a better job providing feedback to grantseekers? Please vote by selecting one of the following options:
A. Absolutely! It’ll help nonprofits improve their grantwriting skills
B. No, funders are too busy to give feedback to hundreds of applicants!
C. So? If nonprofits each spend ten or more hours writing grant proposals, the very least funders could do is spend 30 minutes giving some helpful feedback to each applicant!
D. You’re wrong, and your mother is a hamster and your father smells of elderberries!
E. Worst. Survey. Ever.
The correct choice is Z: Most grant processes are arbitrary, inequitable, and pointless, so feedback on them is meaningless and distracts us from the real problems.
…
Read full article here…
