4 survey respondents
Location: 200 S Biscayne Blvd Ste 3300, Miami, 33131 FL
EIN: 65-0464177
50%
50%
23 hours
Median
25%
75%
33%
67%
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 2019
Avoid asking them for money. It isn't worth it.
Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field, Doesn't "get" nonprofits and issues, Difficult to work with, Culturally incompetent, Bureaucratic, Risk averse
California
Current or former grantee
Funded for lesser amount
2019
Bad
Terrible process - we would not hear from them for weeks and weeks and then would be asked to provide information on a 24 hour timeline. When I provided a budget that included percentages of existing staff who would work on the project, they asked why they should pay someone's salary that we were already paying. Even though this was a new project with requirements that we work in their priority areas.
They also clearly didn't read our reports ahead of a meeting with us. The PO had no idea what progress we had made.
Give away more general operating support, stop asking us to invent something new. Knight has wasted so much money on projects that have failed.
We need to all speak up about them.
It seems like their primary goal is branding and lavish parties.
Lavish parties.
40
Professional in the field
They'll make you think you're on top of the world when they see you at conferences, and then they'll ghost on you. They're flaky and scattered.
Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field, Risk averse
New York
Professional in the field
Other
2018
Bad
Average
They're risk-averse and they majorly fund "safe" things, or they minorly fund "shiny" things that are sort of frivolous and won't impact the bigger picture.
Stop gassing people up and making them feel really important and shiny when they're right in front of you, and then totally drop them when they're "out of sight, out of mind."
0
Reviewer 350 - Professional in the field
All funding opportunities seem to be limited to the Knight Arts Challenge. So whereas the program staff will be encouraging, the final review is done by community panel with varying qualifications.
Positive leader in the field, Friendly, Likes site visits
Ohio
Professional in the field
2017
Average
Bad
This funder tends to focus on the flashy rather than forward-thinking and sustainable grantmaking.
The geographic limitations perpetuate small-time, small-town thinking among artists when they have greater opportunities nowadays that need just as much funding and support.
The 150-word LOI is accessible and more than reasonable. The level of generosity is also unparalleled in most Knight cities.
30
Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
It feels like they prefer projects that are "out there" - they seem more partial to slightly crazy proposals by small groups of individuals, rather than more traditional proposals and organizations.
Risk taker, Culturally sensitive
Minnesota
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2017
Average
Often slow to answer emails, but answers, once they arrive, are clear.
Average
I think their primary goal is visibility for themselves, and they're pretty good at that, with a significant investment in marketing/PR support for themselves and stringent acknowledgement requirements for their grantees.
Remember that you are serving the grantees, just as much as they are serving you. The significant investment you make in your selected communities are truly great and impactful, but it's hard to jump through your hoops sometimes.
Just know that this will be a grant that requires a lot of communication *after* the award is made.
Get publicity for grant awards.
15
