2 survey respondents
Location: 325 W Main St Ste 1110, Louisville, 40202 KY
EIN: 31-0997017
100%
0%
5 hours
Median
75%
25%
50%
50%
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:
Reviewer 2186 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2023
Community Foundation of Louisville recently issued a trust-based philanthropic RFP: the Community Safety and Healing Fund. Grassroots organizations were encouraged to apply. The whole application was through Formstack and there was an in-person presentation session to learn about it as well as a PDF preview of the application provided in advance. The whole idea of it was very intriguing to many nonprofits.
It seemed very straightforward when they went through the application process, but it was not as smooth as it was originally presented.
First, the application instructions said that each question allows for 500 WORDS. Actually, the Formstack allowed for a max of 3000 characters. That is a big difference for proposal writers when we are all on a tight deadline.
Also, I wrote out actual responses for the financial management questions out in advance. Once I was in the application form, I discovered then the answer format was multiple-choice and took maybe 5 sections to answer. That was a big waste of my time to have written out responses to these questions.
Then, CFL requests at the end of the application that organizations share optional information about organizational equity practices, governance, and leadership demographics. These optional questions were asked at the end of the Formstack questionnaire and not previewed in the application instructions. If they want those optional questions answered, they should disclose them in advance. I can’t imagine they will collect many of those responses.
Basically, this is cautionary information about funders presenting accurate overviews of proposal applications. Often the format of the grant tools does not allow the person filling it out to see the questions or responses in advance and so we rely on the exact instructions laid out in application preview documents. The application format needs to match up as presented.
Risk taker
Kentucky
Grant currently pending
2023
Average
Average
Please have your staff (or development professions in an advisory capacity) try out your application process for technical issues.
The funder seems to want to make money available to a wider array of partners.
10
Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
I found the Foundation contact to be easy to connect with, genuinely interested in helping, and very prompt in her response.
Risk taker, Openminded, Responsive
Kentucky
Grant currently pending
2017
Good
They hold informational sessions that are grant-specific and also coffee events, as well as provide contact info for staff. The staff make themselves very accessible to answer questions or chat about programs and projects.
Average
It would be nice if the funder gave more feedback post award. While I know that some of their opportunities are quite competitive, it would be nice to know specifics of what we were marked down on or what we did really well to improve our future applications.
They have one of the more simplified grant applications I've used!! This is so helpful in a busy grants office.
0
