6 survey respondents
Location: 51 Madison Ave, New York, 10010 NY
EIN: 13-2989476
0%
100%
10 hours
Median
8%
92%
17%
83%
2017 Deadlines:
Types of Grants Awarded:
Geographic Focus:
For Fiscal Year
Total Assets:
Total Grants:
Change in Assets FY :
Amount of Grants to Minnesota Nonprofits:
Largest Grant:
Smallest Grant:
Average Grant:
Grant Applicant - applied in 2023
This application is a lot of work for what seems like a very slim chance of getting funded. It's not clear how many grants they award. I wish they would be more upfront about what they're looking for.
Doesn't "get" nonprofits and issues
New York
Applied and not funded
2023
Bad
Bad
Really hard to tell. I have a feeling they just fund their regular partners most of the time.
Adjust your expectations for this one and know that it's going to be a lot of work for a slim chance of getting funded.
They have a lot of pre-registration webinars and Q&A sessions.
15
Grant Applicant - applied in 2023
This is the worst kind of application. Funder should be upfront about how many awards they actually make so we can decide if it's worth it to jump through all of the hoops to apply. The Gantt chart is a colossal waste of time. Also wish they would be more clear on the importance of having a business relationship with the NY Life Insurance company. If that's a prerequisite it would save us all a lot of time.
Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field, Doesn't "get" nonprofits and issues, Bureaucratic, Risk averse
Massachusetts
Grant currently pending
Other
2023
Bad
Bad
Please rethink your guidelines and application. If you genuinely want to be a partner in the field you will create an application process that lets us tell you what we do and what we need to accomplish our work --unnecessary KPIs and Gantt charts don't do that.
Application pending
The webinars and Q&A's are accessible.
10
Grant Applicant - applied in 2023
This is the worst kind of application. Funder should be upfront about how many awards they actually make so we can decide if it's worth it to jump through all of the hoops to apply. The Gantt chart is a colossal waste of time. Also wish they would be more clear on the importance of having a business relationship with the NY Life Insurance company. If that's a prerequisite it would save us all a lot of time.
Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field, Doesn't "get" nonprofits and issues, Bureaucratic, Risk averse
Massachusetts
Grant currently pending
Other
2023
Bad
Bad
Please rethink your guidelines and application. If you genuinely want to be a partner in the field you will create an application process that lets us tell you what we do and what we need to accomplish our work --unnecessary KPIs and Gantt charts don't do that.
Application pending
The webinars and Q&A's are accessible.
10
Grant Applicant - applied in 2020
The Aim High opportunity is a cumbersome application and you won't receive any feedback. The New York Life Foundation outsources the process to the Afterschool Alliance, which seems to perpetuate the bad practice of making eligibility so wide that lots can apply, but then making very few awards. Thousands of collective hours lost. They have a detailed scoring rubric but don't give you access to the results to know where you lost points.
Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field
Maryland
Applied and not funded
2020
Bad
outsource to another organization to handle grantmaking and they just have a generic info session.
Bad
Given the amount of collective time wasted by those who apply and aren't funded, and how much it costs them to administer their cumbersome process, the net investment in youth is likely less than what it costs them.
They need to reduce the time burden, narrow eligibility (example: Don't give bonus points for some states, just limit the application to those states if that's your priority), and make as many awards to as many qualified organizations as they possibly can. And give feedback!
care about middle school education as a key time in a young person's educational journey
40
Reviewer 6611 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2021
Leave yourself plenty of time for this one -- the gantt chart is a huge pain in the neck. Also consider if the funding is worth the amount of post-grant requirements, which include regular small group cohorts and regular reporting.
Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field, Doesn't "get" nonprofits and issues, Difficult to work with, Culturally incompetent, Bureaucratic, Risk averse
Massachusetts
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2021
Average
Average
I don't really know how/if they're accomplishing their philanthropic goals. They require you to jump through so many hoops and I don't know how many applicants actually get funded.
Please, please, please ditch the gantt chart. And the small group work that takes place during the grant period is an added burden that is not helpful at all. I know it's well-intentioned, but it just adds work and takes up time.
The NAGC staff are very accessible.
10
Grant Applicant - applied in 2021
Application is pretty onerous: requires Gannt chart, their budget template, and if funded, requires ongoing monthly participation in their capacity building small groups and detailed grant reports every 6 months.
Doesn't "get" nonprofits and issues, Culturally incompetent, Risk averse
Texas
Applied and not funded
2021
Bad
The program officer is impossible to reach. Can gain support through the National Alliance for Childhood Grief but they aren't making the funding decisions and don't provide feedback on appliations.
Average
Examine the grant application process for accessibility and fairness. Many small organizations have to make careful decision about where to apply limited fundraising resources so investing the time to develop this application is time taken away from developing relationships with individual donors.
Provides support to the National Alliance for Childhood Grieving, including their annual Symposium, which is a wonderful opportunity for organizations approaching similar work to share ideas and mutual support.
10
