Dreaming of new community grant models: Three unexpected learnings from recent projects

May 25

There is over $80 billion in grants given away each year in Australia, across more than 3,400 programs[1]. This is not small change, yet the granting landscape continues to be challenging. For potential grant recipients, the challenge is not only finding out what funding is out there, but the required effort, skill and time required to apply. For grant makers, the challenge is about being able to reach diverse potential grant applicants, especially in a crowded sector, and finding the right mechanisms and approach in which to assess the value and impact created through the grant.

These challenges haven’t stopped the continued investment in grants, as they are often the most effective mechanism in which to create, support and deliver better outcomes. For philanthropists, grants provide the ‘legs’ in which to deliver their desired outcomes; for government, grants help to reach different communities and achieve outcomes they may not be best placed to deliver directly; and for others, such as corporates, grants provide a channel in which to support their local community and/or outcomes that are in the interest of their customers, business and stakeholders. For the grant recipients themselves, this money is often a critical part of their funding and sustainability to deliver their programs, services and purpose.

Despite this huge investment and the knowledge of their impact, investment in how we deliver effective grants programs is often ‘under cooked’. It is all too common to find a grant program that is disproportionately arduous to apply for, based on the amount of money available. We still find that there is little meaningful evidence or activity in place to assess the value or impact of a grants. Finally, we still find that the way grants are structured, fail to enable recipients fully with what they need.

Grant reviews, for a lot of people, don’t raise too much excitement, but if done well and embedded into the process add so much value, both in terms of the cost effectiveness of delivering a grants program and the impact of every dollar provided through a grant. To get you thinking about how you could change how you deliver your grants, here are a few unexpected learnings from our experience as for-purpose strategy consultants…

Lesson 1: Evaluating the social impact of low value grants may not be worth it.

It seems counter intuitive on one hand to argue there isn’t enough evidence, and on the hand not to bother, but in practice for any grant worth less than $10,000 it is often not the best use of time or money to formally evaluate the grant. Our findings from grants reviews found that:

Lower value grants (i.e. <$10,000) do not justify the time to invest in building and collecting data as grant recipients want to maximise their time in delivering on their commitment with the money;
Often those grant recipients receiving lower value grants tend to be smaller community organisations or individuals, with less capacity and often, less experience in assessing and communicating the impact of the grant; and finally,
What frequently comes back from grant recipients is of mixed quality and is often not used in any meaningful way by the grant maker.

In practice, if the grant program has a clear set of outcomes, then the application and the assessment of it, should talk to how impact would be created and, if, the money is acquitted appropriately then there are some reasonable assumptions that impact has been created. It is about trust in alignment, value, and the grant assessment process. There is a need for grant makers to be genuine about what they are using to assess and talk to impact. A better way may be for grant recipients to provide something much lighter touch such as a case study, some pictures, or even a short video.

Lesson 2: A written application is not the only way.

Technology has changed the way grants processes are run. Software, such as SmartyGrants, has made the workflow of the grants process simpler, it has also opened the door to different ways to capture applications. Today, most grants applications are still based solely on a written submission or sometimes there may be a video to accompany it. This process, while important, has and will continue to favour the professional grant writers, the organisations with the capability and capacity to write grants applications to a high level of proficiency. Our work in reviewing grants processes has shown, the ability to narrate and articulate what you would do with the grant is key, but writing it down is not the only or sometimes the best way to capture it. A number of grants programs are starting to embed alternative application options such as full video or audio applications or an interview-based application (where interpreters or culturally appropriate representatives can be part of the process to support the applicant). These alternative approaches open the door to engaging more diverse applicants, with different stories and experiences, but the same potential to deliver meaningful outcomes. Technology is no longer a barrier, so it shouldn’t be unexpected to hear that a written only application is not enough anymore.

Lesson 3: Be more flexible in your grant program structure and budgets to better listen to your stakeholders.

Grants programs do need boundaries, whether that be having a clear set of outcomes being sought, target applicant groups, budgets, timeframes, etc. That is all well and good, what we are getting to here is the need to not think about each grants program or stream in isolation. For those organisations who run multiple grant programs or streams i.e., philanthropy and government, the idea that there is a fixed total budget for each stream, or that each grant has a strict cap should be challenged. All too often, grants programs run year after year, without asking the strategic questions on who they are trying to reach? is it what your target beneficiary wants or needs? does the grant enable action and outcomes to happen?

The reality is that grant applicants themselves often know better, they are often more connected to the communities you are trying to reach, they often have delivered that type of activity or outcome before, so have learnt a bit about what does and doesn’t work. Therefore, create greater freedom by increasing the funding bands of your grant (you can still fund proportions of any proposal), think about a total grants budget so if one program or stream is undersubscribed you can use some of the money in another grant that may be oversubscribed. Basically, open-up a little. Listen to the ideas of your applicants and remove as much of the bureaucracy around budget allocation as you can to target where value can be created.

If you would like to learn more about our work and how we can support you in thinking more strategically and creatively about your grants process, please don’t hesitate to get in touch at hello@ensemblestrategy.com.