Are funders part of the problem?
Grantees sometimes spend more time reporting to a funder than doing their work. What we see, and what we do differently together with funders.
For foundations, charities and non-profitsAccountabilityImprovementBelongs to
- For
- Foundations, Charities and non-profits
- Perspective
- Accountability, Improvement
- Phase
- Intelligence design, Engagement & communication
- Keywords
- Impact report
A charity funded by five funders often writes five reports about the same work. Each funder has its own format, with its own indicators, deadlines and templates. In the weeks those reports are written, less happens with participants.
At the funder all those reports come in, each in a different form. Someone has to put them side by side, often by hand. What the funder learns from them then easily stays in a few heads.
Funders want to know whether their money changes something. That is a good question. What goes wrong is the way it is asked. It costs grantees a lot of time and gives the funder less than it could.
When we work with a funder, we first look at which questions it really uses. The rest can often go. Then we look at what grantees already have, such as their own evaluations, an annual report or stories from participants. That can often replace a new form. We design and test a new report with a few grantees, before it applies to thirty grants. And we show grantees what the funder did with their data, in a short picture of the whole programme.
The funder’s board then gets a better picture of what it achieves. Grantees have more time left for their work. To us, trust-based funding does not mean a funder asks nothing. It means it asks for what is needed to learn together.
