Newsletter Hip

2006 Nonprofit Survey Results

Last month we shared the results of the 2006 member survey. This month we are pleased to share the results of the survey we sent to the 131 nonprofit organizations that submitted proposals for our 2006 grants. Of the 131 initial Letters of Inquiry, 22 nonprofits were invited to complete a full grant application, ten of these received a site visit, and five finalists were chosen. Our members voted and three non-profit organizations – Children’s Wellness Center, EmanciPet, and Literacy Austin – each received grants of $108,000.

Here’s a summary of what we learned:

Barry Silverberg’s ACC Listserv continues to be the top source for information about the grant opportunity. The second most common source was the media, an Impact Austin member, or another nonprofit. The internet was cited as the primary channel through which nonprofits learn about grant opportunities in general.
97% of the respondents said they had enough information to understand Impact Austin’s grant process. The most common request for more information was regarding additional insight into our evaluation and decision-making criteria.
92% of the nonprofits who did not receive a site visit and 100% of the nonprofits who did receive a site visit felt our overall process to be reasonable. The areas of concern were: the challenge of competing between focus areas until such time as Impact Austin can fund grants in all five categories; the complexity of the process, in particular for smaller nonprofits; and the organization’s willingness to fund a grass roots nonprofit. (Editorial comment: Impact Austin will consider any program or project from any size organization as long as it meets our guidelines).
93% of the applicants preferred the online LOI submission process. We plan to use this process again in 2007 with some additional constraints on the amount of information requested and submitted.
Based on written comments, the organizations receiving site visits felt the Impact Austin teams were well-prepared and efficient, and characterized their experience as a good one. One of the participants again asked for feedback on how the committee ultimately made the decision between them and the other candidate.
70% of the respondents had no suggestions for improving the grant process. Of those who provided a written suggestion, the most common were: increase interaction/feedback through the process and after finalists are chosen; simplify the applications and make sure all information requested is necessary for decision-making; give more advance notice on deadlines, and give more time to prepare submissions. (Editorial comment: Impact Austin will continue to seek ways to streamline and simplify our application while retaining our focus on educating women in philanthropy. We are also evaluating several requests to provide feedback to those organizations whose applications are declined).
61% of the respondents will apply again if they have a program or project that fits within our guidelines. The most common feedback from those who are unsure was whether the odds of receiving the grant justified the effort required.

Impact Austin values learning in all facets of our organization. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts so that we can continue to grow in a way that benefits all parties.

Representative Quotes

"I feel like Impact Austin does a great job educating and training its members. Your grant process is definitely comprehensive but a gift of $100K+ certainly warrants that. Your diligence shows the community that the project is worthwhile and significant."
"Impact Austin is an organization that continues to learn and improve. Perhaps your greatest contribution will be in educating another generation in the art of philanthropy."
"I was cautious at first about the motives of the members. I am happy to say that everyone I have dealt with has been personable, professional and “real”. It’s a pleasure to be associated with such a passionate group."