African grantees tell it like it is…

How can grantmakers learn how best they can enable their grantees to succeed?

A good start is to listen to what grantees say about their experience of the funding relationship.

This report presents the findings of the first comparative grantee feedback survey conducted outside of the USA. It presents, anonymously, the perspectives of 305 grantees of 8 East African grantmakers on key aspects of grantmaker performance.

The clarity of the findings show that that systematic feedback from those most affected, at least in this case, adds valuable new evidence to traditional practices of monitoring performance, while simultaneously giving voice to those who traditionally have least power in development relationships.

The primary purpose of the survey was to provide new information to stimulate learning and improvement. That purpose has been achieved. Each participating grantmaker received a confidential report with valuable data that can inform improvements. It is now up to the grantmakers to reflect on the feedback and engage with their grantees to discuss how they can each contribute more effectively to the goals that they share.

Key findings

Taken collectively, this report provides a snapshot of the state of grantmaking in East Africa in 2009 from the perspective of grantees.

Across the field, grantee perceptions were most positive in three areas:
 

1. Grantees generally have a high regard for the quality of their relationships with their grantmakers. They feel listened to and treated with respect.
2. Grantees generally have a healthy respect for grantmakers’ knowledge of the context and field in which they work, and their levels of expertise and influence.
3. Grantees are fairly satisfied with their grantmaker application and approval processes, but they also feel grantmakers across the field could make real improvements in this area.

Across the field, grantee responses were generally less positive in two areas:

4.   Grantees do not find the monitoring and evaluation requirements
       and processes of their funders very useful – and often find them
       find them burdensome.

5.   The performance area that scored the lowest satisfaction ratings
       was the quality of non-financial support offered by grantmakers
       (e.g. ,technical assistance, capacity building or advice).

63% of the projects being funded have been running for less than two years. This suggests that grantmakers and grantees are caught in a short term and fragmented approach to tackling social change.

Click here to download the report.

This is a work in progress.

Keystone welcomes critical feedback on this report. We would love to hear from others who have experimented with similar applications of constituency feedback. And we would welcome the opportunity to work with anyone who sees the potential value of applying this approach to learning and improvement in their context.

Please submit any feedback or enquiries to:
info [at] keystoneaccountability.org

More news