Be careful what you ask for

In my previous blog, I shared some tips for fundraisers writing grant applications. Quite rightly, there were a few comments on how funders could also improve: - such as using plain English in their guidance. So in the interest of balance, this blog has a suggestion that all funders should follow:

only ever ask for information that you will read and use

This applies to all stages of the application process. It is also true for reporting, which is my focus here.

Why is this important to state?

First of all, gathering information that is not read, is a waste of the grant recipient’s precious time. But it also holds costs for those requesting the reports. Funders still have to handle and store the information received, even if they don’t read it. And requiring the grant recipient to provide more information than is needed, could be counterproductive: diverting their resources from delivering the work that you are funding. In her book, It Ain’t What You Give It’s The Way That You Give It, Caroline Fiennes has a calculation you can use to see if the costs of applying for and reporting on your grant outweigh its value. She recommends reducing the post-grant costs to organisations by accepting reports already being produced for other donors or liaising with them to accept one report between you.

Secondly, not reading the reports that are prepared is a missed opportunity for learning. Treating the reporting stage as an administrative compliance tick box, misses the chance to reflect on what went well and what didn’t, and how this might inform future decisions. You can learn about the context the grantee is working in and get their feedback on your process and priorities. Most businesses would be incredibly jealous of getting this sort of feedback from ‘customers’ in a document which is compulsory for them to complete.

And lastly, the quality of the whole reporting process is greatly enhanced when you read and use the information. I know of one funder who noticed that grantees were copying and pasting their answers from one year to the next. When challenged they said that they did not think anybody read the reports. When funders demonstrate that they read the reports – by acknowledging and commenting on them, and even better, use them e.g. to agree to changes in the project being funded or in their policy influencing work or case studies – then those completing them spend more time providing useful information.

By respecting the grantees and their time, funders end up gaining more. So let’s all look to move from reporting as a tickbox exercise to making use of its full potential as a more open and honest transfer of valuable information.

Emma Beeston Consultancy advises funders and philanthropists on giving strategies and processes; researching and scoping options; selecting causes and charities; assessments and impact monitoring. www.emmabeeston.co.uk ; emma@emmabeeston.co.uk; @emmabeeston01