1 survey respondents
Location: 213 W. Institute Place #302, Chicago, 60610 IL
EIN: 36-4111723
100%
0%
15 hours
Median
50%
50%
0%
100%
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 9350 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
I would say that it is not worth it. Their decisions are made by a community review group, not the staff or board. I have been writing grants for over 22 years. I am used to being turned down - that's part of the job. But the reasons that this community review group gave in the feedback bordered on insulting and confirmed that they had no experience in reviewing grants, nor did they read the grant well.
Likes site visits
Illinois
Current or former grantee
Other
2019
Average
Bad
Very poor. Our geographic area was selected as a priority area in their strategic plan, yet this year, they are funding nothing here. We had had a very successful and long time relationship with the funder. they had come out on multiple site visits, loved what we were doing, and felt it was innovative and effective. They understood what we were doing. That did not matter in the review process, apparently.
Change your review process. It's great to get a community group to give input on and assist in reviewing the grants, and even present recommendations to the staff and board. But it is irresponsible to leave all decisions on grantmaking to a group that has potentially no reviewer experience.
There seems to be much more focus and care given to the fund-raising side than the actual grant making and service delivery side. I understand that the fundraising funds the work, but the service delivery IS the work.
We had been funded for many years by this organization. Their grant application is an online one, and extraordinarily clumsy and difficult to navigate. It comes with an instruction book, and is not intuitive nor readily understood.
15
