Location: 777 3rd Ave 23rd Floor, New York, 10017 NY
Types of Grants Awarded:
For Fiscal Year
Change in Assets FY :
Amount of Grants to Minnesota Nonprofits:
Reviewer 1360 - Professional in the field
Most New York nonprofits will apply to the Mother Cabrini Health Foundation (MCHF). Most have too because their need is so great and MCHF simply has a lot of money to grant out. But please don't expect it to be a clear, transparent process. Go in prepared to be frustrated.
Doesn't "get" nonprofits and issues, Difficult to work with, Culturally incompetent, Risk averse
Professional in the field
Absolutely not accessible.
It is accomplishing its goal to award grants in New York, but its inaccessible staff, application forms that are not user friendly, repetitive questions, a lot of proofs requirements, and forms that frankly keep changing as applicants work on them, lends itself to be a granting agency that places itself on a pedestal and has no respect for the stressed directors suffering through its application process. For an organization with a lot of financial pros, it's confounding to wonder why its required Excel budget sheet is such a pain to work with. Grant applicants likely work with more required budget formats than any professional, but MCHF's is one of the worst.
Get off the pedestal and hit the ground. Have all staff, leadership, and board members leave the office, leave Wall Street, leave their luxuries for a while and travel around New York to visit its grantee organizations. Everyone go and spend a day or several days in the lives of grantee staff, or, especially, in the lives of very poor and vulnerable New Yorkers. Then design a grant application process that is stable, equitable, and humane.
Be prepared to prove that your work is important with application calisthenics because the funder does not have an equitable process. Be prepared to lose sleep, and, as many applicants report, actually have nightmares about the Mother Cabrini Health Foundation application process.
Possesses a lot of financial assets.
Reviewer 2730 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
This is their first year and they were overwhelmed by the number of proposals. Not a hard application, but very competitive. Only one year of funding which may be renewable.
Positive leader in the field
Current or former grantee
Wrote 2 applications. They gave us an amount for us to pick which program to fund. Was amount requested for one.
Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
Wait until they are a bit more organized with their guidelines and processes because it seemed to be a guessing game as to what to ask for and how much.
Applied and not funded
Guidelines were vague and not well developed, process not transparent, hard to get any feedback. Overall seemed disorganized. We were not informed of a decision in a timely manner.
Have a well developed and clear website with guidelines and also engage in conversations with prospective grantees.
Reviewer 1668 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
Its really hard to know. We technically haven't even been told we didn't receive the grant - we just know others were informed. They're new and clearly finding their way. That said, asking for a proposal after an LOI and then providing no feedback or any interaction is really challenging. We know 4 other orgs who also were asked to submit proposals and weren't funded, nor given feedback
Applied and not funded
No contact info and no humans
They say they're committed to community health but its unclear - no info has been released. We don't know who has been funded or not been funder.
Don't ask potential grantees to do a full proposal after an LOI if you aren't planning on funding them.
They appear to have considerable sums of money so its hard to know if they have any incentive to improve.
Give out lots of money