What was the overall relationship with the funder?
How many hours did the grant application process take?
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
How successfully do you think the funder is accomplishing its current philanthropic goals?
Types of Grants Awarded:
For Fiscal Year
Change in Assets FY :
Amount of Grants to Minnesota Nonprofits:
Sample Grants to Minnesota Nonprofits in
Top descriptors for this funder
8Worth the time to pitch7Culturally sensitive7Positive leader in the field6Openminded5Risk taker4Builds relationships4Friendly4Responsive4Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field3Bureaucratic3"Gets" nonprofits and issues3Gives more than money
Bush is a notoriously fickle funder, with constantly changing priorities. They seem prone to staff in-fighting and lack a clear direction. If you get lucky with them, great, but they can like what you're doing one year and then couldn't care less the next.
Reasonable reporting terms
Unclear objectives, Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field
very few organizations get grants from this funder. It will be extremely competitive and you are likely to spend time preparing an application that won't get funded. BUT...if you get it, you'll get a lot of money.
Program officer was helpful, Funding equaled requested amount
They talk a good line, but they are so completely unresponsive to what people are saying to them. They know it all, they knew it first, and they know more than any "constituent" will ever know. Despite all their talk to the opposite. I am not a bitter non-funded org - I have actually gotten funding a number of times, and I still hate dealing with them.
They mean well, but they don't really fund nonprofits for their work or mission they fund their own status and you need to align with them in a way that will raise their stature. However, their work with Native communities has much to be applauded for.
Narrow guidelines, Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field