Grantmakers of all kinds care about tangible progress on tough problems, but we also seek harder-to-measure results. Networks for social change can help on both of these fronts, building new capacity for making progress on complex problems and achieving significant measurable results. Tapping into network connections is becoming the norm for social change makers, whether we’re mapping influential relationships for an advocacy campaign, coordinating a protest to fight climate change or spreading an approach to community engagement
For the last couple of years, Covid-19 has made social separation a necessity for public health. But distance should not curb progress – as grantmakers continue to make shifts in philanthropic culture and practice, we too have seen our own changes here in the GEO team.
A nonprofit organization’s resiliency and capacity to navigate change successfully depends largely on its people. Ask any grantmaker about the distinguishing characteristics of strong and effective nonprofit organizations, and the conversation inevitably will turn to leadership.
Nonprofits need certain capacities in order to deliver results. These include things like strong leaders, financial management, technology and office space, as well as softer things like communications, adaptability and relationships.
In September 2018, Grantmakers for Effective Organizations released "Get on the Balcony: How Grantmakers Can Ignite Change." This members only publication explores helpful approaches for jump-starting a change initiative, drawn from the reflections of GEO members.
Have you made improvements to your grantmaking, including the idea cultivation/grantee relationship management, application process, approval process, reporting requirements, or other elements you've deemed important, and are you willing to share them with us? Did you work with any consultants on the above whom you'd recommend?
I am spearheading a Salesforce adoption process within our foundation’s Program department. Our Philanthropy Group (development and donor services team) implemented it successfully over a year ago. Given the inherent Salesforce benefits (and clear use cases) for the development and donor services side of things, I am curious to learn if other foundations have successfully implemented Salesforce (or are on the journey to) within their grantmaking departments? If so, I would be grateful to learn and chat more with folks about:
- What benefits have you seen from the process/adoption of Salesforce among your Program staff? (I.e. time saved, stronger relationships with grantees/community partners, automated processes and workflows, increased collaboration across your foundation’s departments, better knowledge management etc.)
- What has not gone well? And/or what roadblocks do you see ahead?
- Broadly, what does success look like for you?
- What core or baseline data about your interactions with grantee (or non-grantee) partners does your Program staff consistently log (or is expected to log) in the system?
When funding social impact projects, grantmakers have historically not provided contingency funds to address unexpected obstacles and adapt to changing environments. Social entrepreneurs need flexible funding to be nimble and responsive. This post makes the case for thinking differently about investments in nonprofits.
Hi GEO community--
The Sobrato Family Foundation team is interested in learning about how foundations have structured their capacity-building grantmaking. Do you have a separate team (which partners with program teams) to manage grants to improve grantee capacity? Or does the program team manage the grants themselves, with a capacity-building team as a resource to support and advise these decisions? We’re interested in learning about the range of ways this support is structured within foundations, so would love to hear your thoughts and experiences.
Thanks in advance,
