68 survey respondents
Location: 111 18th Street Se, Washington, 20003 DC
EIN: NA00001
100%
0%
10 hours
Median
100%
0%
97%
3%
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 5667 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2018
Understand Open Road's criteria for funding, have an initial call to see whether and how your project might align, be thorough, and be honest.
Gives more than money, Risk taker, Culturally sensitive, Insightful, Friendly, Responsive
Oregon
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2018
Good
Open Road staff are very accessible and helpful throughout the entire process. They lay out clearly what they are looking for, ask all the right questions, and are very available.
Good
I am so impressed that Open Road had the foresight to establish a mechanism for covering unexpected funding gaps. It is vital.
None, for us, everything went really smoothly and the process was very transparent.
Open Road fills a very unique and vital niche. For organizations who find themselves in the horrible and unexpected position of having a project funding gap for reasons beyond their control, Open Road is a critical partner.
They are communicative, clear, and smart.
15
Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
Communicate directly and often with Open Road. They sincerely want to help companies that provide positive impact but have hit unexpected roadblocks. They are very responsive and were a big helpful throughout the entire application process.
Positive leader in the field, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Responsive
Texas
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2017
Good
ORA are fantastic communicators. They were very responsive and worked with us every step of the way.
Good
We believe they are achieving their goals. They provide funding to social enterprises that have hit roadblocks and have taken strides to streamline the process as much as possible.
N/A funder has done a great deal to streamline the process and are very responsive. It's hard to imagine a simpler way they could still meet their impact criteria.
Extremely efficienty, communicative and organized. Set a timeline and stuck to it.
10
Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
Be clear and comprehensive. ORA is smart and will see right through a request that isn't substantive.
Risk taker, Culturally sensitive, Insightful, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Responsive
Maryland
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2017
Good
Once you're in the door with them, they're unusually hands on and responsive.
Good
They're identified a need for nonprofits that not sexy or glamorous, but critical .
Scale up.
There should be more funders like ORA.
They understand the realities of doing this kind of work.
10
Reviewer 6178 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
Be sure to carefully review their four criteria — unexpected, mid-implementation, discrete, and catalytic. Ensure your situation meets each of the four criteria before applying, and be as clear, detailed, and straight-forward as possible about your roadblock, what caused it, and how you will move past it.
Risk taker, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Openminded
Massachusetts
Applied and not funded
2017
Good
Open Road Alliance gave us great feedback on our initial proposal, and helped us reorganize our points to better highlight what their review committee was looking for.
Good
Open Road Alliance's model is unique in the field, and takes into account nonprofit realities where unexpected events can really take impact off track.
6
Reviewer 126 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
An initial meeting or call is important to understand how your project fits with ORA's unique criteria, and to develop a compelling narrative. The ORA website is a comprehensive and a good starting place for understanding the criteria.
Positive leader in the field, Risk taker, Insightful, Builds relationships, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Openminded, Responsive
(Unknown)
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2017
Good
Very accessible and open-minded. They were also willing to provide detailed feedback.
Good
ORA has an interesting approach and their application process, criteria and type of grants available seem to match well with their aims.
Unique approach and quick responses for catalytic funding.
Clear articulation of their criteria and aims as a foundation.
15
Reviewer 162 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
The funder is willing to act quickly - answering questions, reviewing responses, scheduling calls - so don't drag it out on your end. Complete the application quickly and thoroughly, update the application based on the feedback received carefully and quickly, and be very responsive.
Risk taker, Insightful, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Openminded, Responsive
Indiana
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2017
Good
We were introduced to the funder by a third party. I believe that helped immensely in accessibility to the funder.
Good
Based only on our experience: the funder wants to provide emergency funding to get over an unexpected crisis with a clear plan and path of post-funding stability. Our project fit that bill well (we though) and it felt that our funding came quick readily once the need and opportunities were clearly articulated.
No advice. Our experience was outstanding.
We approached them with fairly simple roadblock but a very complex program and situation. The folks we worked with were bright - they "got it" quickly, when many funders (and others) we work with never really seem to get it.
Quick turn-around and very thorough responses - I was quite impressed!
10
Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
Think about your need and structure it thoughtfully, what problem do you have and what do you need to solve it, could there be several solutions?
Gives more than money, Risk taker, Friendly, Openminded
(Unknown)
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2017
Good
Average
10
Reviewer 864 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
Open Road Alliance is an open, easily accessible funder. Before an NGO approaches them, they should know that ORA’s funding requirements are very specific, and they will only consider applicants that are experiencing un-anticipated challenges or obstacles that fit within a certain set of requirements. The NGO should research their website thoroughly to decide whether their circumstance is applicable, and then should fully flesh out the timeline of the obstacles that they have faced before considering applying. ORA will require at least one conversation which will address in-depth, detailed aspects of the application. NGOs need to be prepared to argue for their case in these calls.
Positive leader in the field, Builds relationships, Responsive
New York
Current or former grantee
Funded for lesser amount
2017
Good
ORA is a very accessible funder. They respond quickly to requests and NGOs can expect to wait no more than a week to hear back about any given inquiry. ORA is honest about their timelines and respectful of NGOs’ time.
Average
ORA is a funder that seeks to provide contingency funding to NGOs experiencing unforeseen obstacles or challenges. They do a good job of filling this gap in the sector—not many funders are striving to address the reality of conducting development work. They understand that organizations are constrained in typical funder-grantee power dynamics and are often unable to seek help in the face of serious challenges that they could not have anticipated. That being said, ORA’s criteria (especially for “catalytic” impact) are narrow. They consider funding only projects that fit their own criteria for having a widespread impact around the globe. If you are an NGO that works in one area, with a smaller amount of beneficiaries, you may not fit their specific criteria for impact.
ORA should keep in mind the fact that those who are best positioned to deliver systemic change are often closest to the problem. While they do a good job of trying to truly understand and mitigate the obstacles organizations face, they could be more trustworthy of the work and impact that NGOs are doing every day on the ground. ORA could potentially visit sites of projects they are funding, so that they see the impact NGOs are having.
ORA does a lot of good work on spreading a positive dialogue around risk in the development sector. NGOs should check out their op-eds, toolkits, and articles to gain a better understanding of their overall goal.
ORA communicates their timeline, schedule, and grant decisions very honestly. This is important and helpful in a sector where most funders do not explain their reasoning for making funding decisions.
12
Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
We were introduced to ORA by a development officer, and we received immediate access to their portfolio manager. They were incredibly professional and highly responsive. I recommend that you carefully review their criteria before contacting them.
Positive leader in the field, Friendly, Responsive
North Carolina
Applied and not funded
Other
2017
Good
Average
ORA could define their criteria more clearly.
Take the opportunity to experience their process. It's a non-traditional, rapid review process that you might find refreshing.
Not funded.
ORA has a user-friendly application platform, and they provide helpful guidance while that proposal is in the portal.
20
Reviewer 788 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
If you plan to reach out to them you have to make sure that you are sure their intervention will both remove the obstacle you face AND put you on a better/healthier/onward path. They have a brilliant mission/vision and a team to match - they ask excellent questions, approach with compassion and want you to succeed.
Positive leader in the field, Gives more than money, Risk taker, Insightful, Friendly, Builds relationships, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Openminded, Responsive
New York
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2017
Good
Good
These folks are thought leaders in terms of how philanthropy should be run - I think they ought to be more prominent in a thought leadership role.
The process they have is simple and straightforward, their turn around time is unparalleled. Would that more donors could be as concrete, transparent and professional.
Responsiveness - I have never worked with any donor that comes even close to the alacrity and thoroughness with which the ORA team responds to questions/requests etc.
10
