12 survey respondents
Location: 1 Embarcadero Ctr Ste 1400, San Francisco, 94111 CA
EIN: 01-0679337
30%
70%
5 hours
Median
33%
67%
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:
Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
This was when they were of the fiscal sponsor for the East Bay foundation on aging. I am very glad that you spray foundation has left SFF because when we did our grant it was an incredible amount of work and I found the staff to be not communicating amongst each other and one making assumptions about things that were not true.
California
Current or former grantee
Funded for lesser amount
2017
Bad
Bad
Remember that the people on the ground are doing the real work. Of course everyone is super grateful for your financial support but that does not put your staff and Nonprofits staff at different levels of worthiness.
They have really beautiful office space in San Francisco and put on a great lunch.
6
Reviewer 2263 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2018
No overall advice. See below for specific comments really directed to TSFF, not applicants.
California
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2018
I do finance, so this is a narrow review to give feedback on the financial portions of the current TSFF application. Briefly: the application forces applicants to gather numbers, do calculations, and plug them into TSFF's format. This is a waste of precious nonprofit time. TSFF should accept standard financial statements and should do its own calculations and its own data entry. Also, their financial questions make assumptions about how a nonprofit does and doesn't track information and uses the gathered information nonsensically. For example, they want to know about total revenue as well as cash as percent of total revenue. This is wrong in many ways: revenue is quite variable year-to-year for most nonprofits; accrual-based revenue is meaningless as a measure against use of cash (expense might be better); total revenue does not distinguish between unrestricted revenue that may be used now and time-restricted revenue that can't be; etc. So someone who understands nonprofit finance should restructure TSFF's financial portion, as well as the criteria by which TSFF judges applicants financially. There are years of discussion about good application process that all this ignores.
0
Reviewer 9976 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2018
Network network network. Try and build a relationship with a program officer in your area of specialization. As with any foundation.
Positive leader in the field, Culturally sensitive, Openminded
California
Current or former grantee
Other
2018
Average
Average
TSFF has good goals about advancing economic and racial equity. I think that their investments need to be larger-scale and longer term, and that they need to leverage their social and policital capital to help change the flow of public and private resources in their service area. They say the Bay Area needs to "come together" for equity and inclusion. I would like to see them convene people with power and get them together. And a few $150,000 grants aren't going to change decades of inequity and exclusion, especially in neighborhoods experiencing decades of disinvestment.
Drop the Fluxx portal like a hot potato. Or manage it better. Communicate regularly with your grantees. Tour their sites. Ask them what their needs are. Establish a true partnership.
Overall a positive relationship and several grants, for which this reviewer is grateful. However recent experiences seem to point to some disorganization within the Equity Grants program.
Organization applied for grant in 2-part process. Was invited to submit full proposal and told what amount to apply for, and completed the application by the announced due date. SFF then extended the due date because of technical problems with its Fluxx portal. SFF communicated poorly with applicants about the revised due date and about the technical problems. After submitting both parts of the application, the applicant was informed they were ineligble as they had already received a grant from a different program. This information was nowhere in the application materials, nor was it conveyed to the applicant after the Stage 1 application process, resulting in wasted time and effort by applicant's staff, board, and contractors.
The Koshland Fellowship program and the relationships that emerge from it seems to be a really effective strategy. Kudos for that!
20
Grant Applicant - applied in 2018
Try and find someone to talk to there who can be a champion for you. Otherwise, it's pretty futile. Our program officer left, and we have not been able to connect with anyone there--no responses to emails, calls, etc.
Doesn't "get" nonprofits and issues, Difficult to work with, Bureaucratic, Risk averse
California
Current or former grantee
Other
2018
Bad
Bad
Do not see evidence of success in racial equity, etc. that they tout. Meanwhile, they give money to Facebook to build housing.
Transition grantees to new personnel when you have changes. Meet with your grantees in the field. Get out of your plush offices and see what is happening. Talk to those most negatively affected by the current regime--those who are truly on the front lines carrying out the tenets of your strategic plan.
Funded for amount requested, then given a continuation grant while they were working on their strategic plan. Then, not funded even though the words in their strategic plan match our mission. Have re-applied and heard nothing.
Promote themselves.
5
Reviewer 7851 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
What a mess. They'd never put up with an agency they fund treating its own clients this way. A confusing process, a confusing website, a hideous new application site. Really, truly awful to navigate. And while their commitment to equity is great, maybe a community foundation should reserve a portion of its competitive funding for projects suggested by...the community? It's funny that a funder committed to equity has created a thoroughly top-down process where they dictate all the priorities. How about something that's a little more equitable in terms of sharing power with your non-profit partners?
Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field, Doesn't "get" nonprofits and issues, Difficult to work with, Bureaucratic
California
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2017
Bad
Months go by, and go by, and go by, without a response.
Average
The Bay Area is a big complicated place. You may not have figured quite everything out. Try being more open to a wider variety of issues and needs.
Yes. They are full of themselves. So play along.
They are really good at coming up with alliterative ways of naming their priority areas (People, Place, and Power) in ways that are utterly meaningless to outsiders.
12
Reviewer 1697 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
Try and find someone there to talk to before applying. And, if your contact leaves, good luck.
Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field, Bureaucratic, Risk averse
California
Current or former grantee
Other
2017
Bad
No outreach regarding our program officer leaving (even though she was a VP) or to let us know who our new contact should be.
Average
Unclear.
Communicate with your grantees; be more transparent.
After being funded successfully for a number of years, were were told that we were no longer aligned with their new strategic direction even though the description of one of their funding areas is almost exactly our mission statement.
Attract funding.
More than 15
Professional in the field
Recent reorganization of priorities shows responsiveness and dedication to equity.
Positive leader in the field, Culturally sensitive, Insightful, Responsive
California
Professional in the field
2017
Good
Good
Encourage collaboration through grants by funding cohorts and other models.
Gets that social impact work isn't about being charitable for the "thems" but rather fuels shared values like justice, equity, and diversity because our liberation is bound up.
0
Reviewer 758 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
Read through the website thoroughly to ensure alignment. The Foundation is currently focused on advancing racial and economic equity, which feels broad, but if you read details on their website, you will see there are very specific goals and outcomes.
Positive leader in the field, Culturally sensitive, Friendly, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Responsive
California
Current or former grantee
Funded for greater amount
2017
Good
Good
Works with prospective grantees to improve outcome language to be clear and measurable.
Less than 5
Reviewer 152 - Professional in the field
Talk to a program officer to learn more about their goals and targets. Just because it appears that your project fits their guidelines, it is worth finding out if they have any more specific criteria that doesn't appear in the guidelines.
Bureaucratic
California
Professional in the field
Before 2014
Average
When they are able to respond, they are very helpful. But it can take a while to get a date to talk. So, plan ahead.
Average
Their new grant making initiatives are very new, so it is hard to tell.
Be more transparent about specific regional and demographic goals.
After creating the new initiatives, what areas of funding have you significantly reduced? Are there other funders who have stepped in to cover those areas?
Commit to social equity.
Grant Applicant - applied in 2014
They have a very complicated internal process and sometimes they pass proposals around from desk to desk for months. Nobody wants a grant to come out of their own budget.
Inadvertently exerts negative influence in the field, Bureaucratic
California
Current or former grantee
Funded for lesser amount
2014
Bad
Average
Mystery.
Do a little less grandstanding?
Make inspiring statements about equity and economic opportunity. No one seems to know if this is translating into what they fund though. They mostly seem to fund their own projects.
