Coming From a Place of ‘Yes’: Behind the Scenes with Grants Management
By: Danielle Royston-Lopez and Ray Holgado
Trust is a word we hear a lot in philanthropy right now, particularly with progressive funders. Oftentimes, the conversation about trust-based philanthropy is seen as the purview of program staff at foundations. As the team at Kataly that is responsible for administering grants, we are asking ourselves: where does our work fit within the discussion about trust?
We believe the work of grants administration is actually deeply rooted in trust — trust in our grantee partners, trust between programs and operations, and trust in our own ability to create systems that are responsible, just, and responsive to the needs of the communities we serve.
So, what does it take to build trust? What are the systems and structures that make trust-building possible in managing the grantmaking process?
When we reflect on what it has taken for us to practice the principles of trust within our grants management work, we realized that for trust to guide relationships with grantee partners, it had to begin within our own institution.
One of the structures that can sow distrust is the decision-making power that board members and trustees exercise over grant recommendations at many foundations. This results in the grants management team being oriented towards “making the case” for grants to the board, and being beholden to the board’s analysis. When we have to navigate tension between community-identified solutions and the comfort of trustees, the result can be erecting processes that center the board’s political alignment and authority, while suppressing recommendations that exist on the outer limits of what the board is willing to support. This can create distrust between grants management staff who are forced into a position of centering the board’s and executive’s perspective, and program staff who are advocating for the perspectives of grantee partners.
It’s no secret that grants management left unchecked often extends beyond appropriate due diligence, compliance, and grantmaking best practices. Administering grants can devolve into a gatekeeping mechanism in which onerous reports and executive summaries serve to test whether grant recommendations are politically feasible and expedient within the context of the foundation, its leadership, and board.
At Kataly, our board members have chosen to de-center themselves from grantmaking strategies, processes and decisions, which in part means that they do not wield authority over grant approvals. Our board’s political alignment with our work and trust in our team is part of what has created a rare sense of spaciousness for us. In addition, our CEO, Nwamaka Agbo, embodies a leadership style that embraces humility, asking thoughtful questions instead of presuming to know all the answers, and respecting our expertise as team members.
The space created by trust has made it possible for us to prioritize the principle purpose of our work — making grants, loans, and investments that secure a world in which Black and brown people have the resources, power, and agency to execute their own visions for justice, well-being, and shared prosperity within their communities.
Trust has also allowed us to name what is challenging while leading with what is possible. As a group of practitioner funders with expansive lived experiences within and outside of philanthropy and the nonprofit industrial complex, honestly naming the tensions in our work feels less like a heavy burden and more like a deep, collective exhalation. This is how we manage to navigate the contradictions of working within a sector that benefits from structural economic inequity and extraction.
Ultimately, the internal trust within the foundation flows downstream to our movement partners. Because we come from a place of yes when our team makes a request, staff members understand that there is flexibility and nimbleness in our grants administration process, and they communicate that to our grantee partners. This creates an environment where grantees can ask for what they need and be advocates for themselves. For example, our grantee partners have asked us to accelerate the distribution of grants that were initially planned for later in the year, and we have been able to meet these needs.
Trust shows up in our grants management process in a multitude of ways. Because we are focused on being accountable to the communities we serve rather than to trustees or board members, we do not ask for extensive reporting from our grantee partners. Instead, there is consistent communication between program staff and grantee partners that is focused on how we can best support their work on the ground. Similarly, we do not have a formal application process. Our grantmaking is primarily based upon the relationships that our practitioner funders have in the field, and we rely on those partnerships to also expose us to groups that we may not already be aware of. This is possible because of the inherent trust that our leadership has in our team, the trust we have in our grantee partners, and the trust we have in each other.
For us, having the spaciousness to think creatively about grants management has been both exciting and overwhelming. When we are used to certain restrictions and structures that relate to existing in perpetuity, return on investment, and risk aversion, it can be hard to unlearn the patterns of behavior that accompany those structures. We are constantly learning from other philanthropic partners, and from the feedback of our grantee partners, how we can be more responsive and responsible in our administration of grants.
One of the practices that helps us interrogate assumptions and remain aware of how our past experiences are showing up in our work is asking questions. For example:
- What is essential to the grantmaking process? What information do we need to be able to make decisions about resource redistribution?
- How much time are we asking of the groups and people we are resourcing? Are our requests clear?
- What data do we need to ask for from our grantee partners? Why are we asking for it, and how much time will it take them to provide it? How will we use this data to assess our impact and inform adjustments in our work?
- How are we inviting feedback on processes as we develop them?
The work of building trust is messy and complicated, and there are many challenges. For example, as we navigate relational grantmaking we want to be mindful of how a “hands off”, “don’t ask questions,” and “no reports” approach can create pain points for grantee partners just as much as overly prescriptive and extractive approaches. When foundations are silent about their expectations, this can leave grantee partners without the necessary clarity and context they need in order to move forward.
Pain points are inevitable when we’re moving in a sector that was not built for any of us to actually thrive. We, as grants administrators, must handle the tools of power that philanthropy offers with a deep sense of responsibility and self-awareness. We need to remember that we bring our aspirations as well as our challenges (i.e. internalized oppression, capitalist perspective) with us. Instead of trying to avoid the pain, we are asking ourselves how to move through it, and how to use it, as we re-imagine and co-create new systems.
On Wednesday, May 25 at 10 am PT/1 pm ET, we are hosting a webinar with grantee and philanthropic partners to discuss the connection between grants administration and trust-based philanthropy. Register here: https://bit.ly/grantsmgmtwebinar.
