GIVING
Bay Area Grantees Learn What It’s Like to Be Grant Makers for a Day
By Caroline Preston
THE SEVEN PEOPLE who filed into the offices of RSF Social Finance, a San Francisco nonprofit, one
weekday morning last year spent much
of their time on a single task: fundrais
ing.
But on that winter day, the nonprof
it officials, all leaders of charities that
work in food and agriculture, were gath
ered to learn what it was like to be on
the other side of “the ask.”
The occasion was the group’s first ex
perience in turning grantees into grant
makers and competitors into collabora
tors—at least for a day.
Kelley Buhles, who manages the non
profit’s philanthropicservices program,
says that grant making is typically
shrouded in secrecy.
“We wanted to bring those grantmak
ing decisions to the community that’s be
ing affected by them,” she says.
where students volunteer with patients.
But the money came with a catch: Ms.
Henderson asked that the Waldorf staff
member share lessons from the class
with People’s Grocery so the charity
could put them to use in a garden it
runs in a housing development.
Pie Ranch, an educational farm in
San Mateo County, got some money
to bring all the participants together
again, six months after their first meet
ing, for a discussion and barn dance.
Peer Exchange
Ms. Buhles and her colleagues got the
idea from a similar program for teach
ers at private Waldorf Schools. The
schools, like RSF (previously the Ru
dolf Steiner Foundation), were inspired
by the thinking of the Austrian philoso
pher. As part of the program, teachers
decide how to split up money among
their schools.
RSF staff members decided to put up
$50,000 of the fund’s money and try the
experiment with their grantees. Sev
en groups were selected to participate
from 17 who applied. “Any fundraiser
knows about the difficulty and frustra
tion at times of working in the current
paradigm of foundations and nonprof
its,” says Nikki Henderson, executive di
rector of People’s Grocery, which helps
West Oakland residents advocate for
healthier food. “A model where the pow
RSF SOCIAL FINANCE
Participants in the RSF Social Finance day of grant making gathered for
a discussion and barn dance six months after their initial meeting.
er dynamic was flipped on its head was
very intriguing to me.”
Ms. Henderson and the other nonprof
it leaders spent the morning learning
about their peers’ work. They reviewed
one another’s grant proposals and ex
plained their organizations’ history and
missions. After lunch, they answered
questions about their work and how
they would use the cash. Then came the
toughest part: dividing up the money.
Each participant got $7,000: $3,000 to
keep and $4,000 to give away.
Decision Time
Some nonprofit officials took the path
of least resistance: They split the mon
ey equally. Others followed a different
logic, favoring the needier among them:
They gave more to groups in lessafflu
ent neighborhoods and those that would
seem to have a harder time winning gov
ernment grants.
Fostering Collaboration
RSF has raised $14,795 to try to do
another day of reversing the tables for
grant makers and grant seekers. Even
tually, says Ms. Buhles, the organiza
tion would like to host one for every
cause it supports.
She would consider making changes
in how the day works, however. Bring
ing together groups that work in the
same neighborhood, or on the same nar
row cause, might foster more chances
for collaboration, she says. Opportuni
ties could include sharing backoffice
space or a parttime fundraiser.
Of course, a bigger pot of money to di
vide up couldn’t hurt, either, she says.
Participants like Jered Lawson, ex
ecutive director of Pie Ranch, and Ms.
Henderson said they hoped to have an
other chance to moonlight as grant mak
ers in the nottoodistant future. Ms.
Henderson said she hopes that more
foundations choose to give nonprofits
a louder voice in the grantmaking
process.
“Groups will not turn rabid and start
foaming at the mouth if you give us a
sum of money to distribute,” she says.
“A lot of nonprofits feel that if we were
more in partnership with those that
have the funds, we’d be able to be more
effective in our work.”
Philanthropy Advisory Group Merges With the Boston Foundation
By Ben Gose
WHEN Peter Karoff founded the Philanthropic Initiative in 1989, he knew of only two
small competitors in the emerging field
of philanthropic advising. Eleven years
later, in 2000, he told The Chronicle
that his nonprofit organization was op
erating in “a cottage industry that’s try
ing to meet a huge demand that’s great
er than anything we’ve seen before.”
Others paid attention—and began
to move into the game. Today, several
large consulting firms, including Ara
bella Philanthropic Investment Advi
sors, the Bridgespan Group, McKinsey
& Company, and Rockefeller Philan
thropy Advisors, are bigger and per
haps better known for philanthropic
consulting than Mr. Karoff’s pioneer
ing effort.
Last month, the Philanthropy Ini
tiative announced that it was merging
with the Boston Foundation. Paul Gro
gan, the Boston Foundation’s president,
describes the Philanthropic Initiative
as a “terrific brand,” and says the new
unit will allow the community founda
tion to provide thorough philanthropic
advice to its donors in a way that it nev
er has before. “We hope that we can re
ally grow this enterprise significantly
in the years ahead,” Mr. Grogan says.
Mutual Benefits
Joel Fleishman, a professor at Duke
University and an expert on philanthro
py, says the merger will allow the Bos
ton Foundation to offer better advice
to some clients who maintain donor
advised funds at the community foun
dation. The merger may also give the
Boston Foundation a chance to attract
assets from wealthy local residents who
have worked with the Philanthropic Ini
tiative, which is also based in Boston.
The Philanthropic Initiative, he says,
will benefit from the Boston Founda
tion’s financial security—its endowment
has about $290million in unrestricted
funds—and its aggressive marketing
team. “This is an absolute gangbusters
strategic partnership,” Mr. Fleishman
says.
Broader Services
The Philanthropic Initiative provides
customized advice to individuals, com
munity foundations, and private foun
dations. Services include strategic plan
ning, transition planning after a death,
and the creation of new philanthropic
programs. Very few community founda
tions offer such indepth advice to their
donors, Mr. Fleishman says. One that
offers some specialized consulting is
the Community Foundation for Greater
Atlanta, which has a Center for Family
Philanthropy.
Mr. Grogan says the Boston Founda
tion will keep all 12 of the Philanthrop
ic Initiative’s fulltime staff members
and 10 parttime consultants.
