Applying for Grants Is Still a Burden, Say Fundraisers

As a grant writer, Emily Keilback is accustomed to glitchy online applications, unwieldy budget templates, and donors who ask for 30 copies of everything. But the requirements for a local United Way grant were even worse.

To begin with, there was the six-part paper application. Next, Ms. Keilback’s group, Girl Scouts of Northern Illinois, met first before a panel of community members and a second time in front of the United Way’s board. Then there was the site visit. And, of course, quarterly reports on the charity’s results.

All that work for a $2,000 grant.

And when Ms. Keilback’s organization tried to cut back on the time her staff spent managing that process by asking volunteers to help out, the United Way reduced the grant to $500.

“It cost more than $500 for my staff to do the application,” says Ms. Keilback, director of grants, research, and evaluation.

Too Much Effort

Asking fundraisers to expend so much effort for so little money is one of many practices discouraged by the Grant Managers Network’s Project Streamline, a six-year-old collaboration among associations of grant makers and fundraisers to reduce the inefficiencies and headaches of the grant-seeking process.

But according to a new study by the group, grant seeking remains a very burdensome process.

Although 77 percent of donors say they have taken steps in the last four years to “streamline” their giving process by requiring less information for small grants, shifting to online systems, simplifying the process for renewing support, or making other tweaks, fundraisers say they are not experiencing any widespread change.

“For your typical grantee, maybe one or two of their funders have done a good job and made some changes, but that doesn’t make their full experience of seeking grants all that much better,” says Jessica Bearman, a consultant with Project Streamline.

“There’s not a concerted, coordinated effort by the field to minimize these burdens,” says Ms. Bearman.

Among the key findings, which were based on surveys of 460 grant makers and 300 grant seekers as well as in-depth interviews:

• While the majority of grant makers say they have revised their grant applications (55 percent) or reporting requirements (59 percent) to ask less of grant seekers applying for small sums of money, 72 percent of fundraisers say that applications for small grants are rarely, if ever, appropriate for the amount of money at stake.
• More than 80 percent of donors say they now ask charities only for information that’s necessary to make decisions about giving or renewing a grant. But most grant seekers say their donors rarely or never accept common applications (84 percent) or standard annual reports (62 percent).
• Grant makers are overwhelmingly shifting to online applications or accepting proposals via e-mail (91 percent). But poorly designed and untested online systems remain one of the biggest sources of aggravation for grant seekers.
• Grant seekers’ other big gripe: donors that require grantees to fill out financial information in a specific format rather than simply accepting an organization’s own budget and financial information.
• Nearly all (91 percent) of grant makers say they have revised their Web sites, print materials, and other forms of communication with grantees to be more clear. But grantees say they still face a challenge in getting clear guidance and arranging a conversation with an employee of the foundation.

Change Comes Slowly

Foundations say they understand the importance of simplifying the grant-seeking process but are feeling little pressure to make changes quickly.

More grant makers are motivated by a desire to improve their internal efficiency (89 percent of survey respondents) than they are by a wish to reduce the burdens on grantees (68 percent).

“There’s no real incentive the way there is in the for-profit world for making life easier for our clients,” says Jonathan Goldberg, director of grants management and information systems for the Surdna Foundation. “The tendency is to do what’s best for us as opposed to the people we really should be serving. It’s a mind-set that’s difficult to change.”

Surdna has tried to follow Project Streamline’s recommendations, says Mr. Goldberg. Among the recent changes the philanthropy has made: reducing the steps for grants under $50,000 and easing the requirements for renewing financial support.

Introducing new systems and eliminating old ways of doing things can also be difficult, says Miyesha Perry Chappell, manager of grants and administration at the Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation.

It took her foundation more than nine months to shift to online grant applications, she says.

The foundation tested its online system with grantees to ensure it would be easy to use and wouldn’t cause the kinds of headaches grant seekers often complain about.

For example, the fund’s online system doesn’t limit the amount of space fundraisers can use to write about the organization’s work—a common gripe.

Still, many of Ms. Campbell’s colleagues had concerns about moving online, she says.

“They were very apprehensive about the online application becoming too fancy and a barrier for our grantees,” says Ms. Campbell. “I told them I went to Trinity College and the nuns do a lot of things online. And if they can do it, I promise our grantees can do it.”

Unnecessary Questions

The fact that some grant seekers are trying to improve is good news for nonprofit fundraisers and leaders like Ms. Keilback, of Girl Scouts of Northern Illinois, and Dory Rand, president of the Woodstock Institute, which aims to advance economic equality.

Ms. Rand says that a handful of her donors have tweaked their application process and that she generally finds it easy to chat with program officers.

Still, she has the sense that foundations require grantees to fill out far more information about how they’re using a grant, and the progress they’re making, than the donor really needs or uses.

“You wonder if they’re just checking a box that it was filed on time and it went on a shelf or the trash can,” says Ms. Rand. “There’s never a case where you hear, Oh, I really liked that part of your report where you talked about X, Y, or Z. That never happens.”

Ms. Keilback likewise says that donors’ increased emphasis on data and results poses challenges for groups like hers.

For example, she says, she had to end a relationship with a donor because it required reports on the Girl Scouts’ academic performance in school, their disciplinary records, how involved their parents were in school—information the group sometimes cannot collect and doesn’t see as part of its mission.

That said, Ms. Keilback stresses that she’s grateful for donors’ support and that in general their focus on results has been good for her charity.

“Though it’s laborious,” she says, “it’s made us into a better organization.”

A copy of the report, “Practices That Matter,” can be downloaded at the Project Streamline Web site.

Grant makers can simplify applications: here’s how

Project Streamline says grant makers should follow these principles to make it easier for charities to apply for support:

• Request only the information necessary from charities to make a decision whether to award a grant
• Make sure the application and reporting requirements are appropriate for the size and type of grant
• Reduce unnecessary paperwork for applicants
• Communicate clearly with grant seekers