Grant Makers Must Beware of Easy Fixes

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

To the Editor:

I want to add my resounding “yes” to Mark Kramer’s opinion piece (“Grant Makers Must Stop Looking for an ‘Exit Strategy’,” August 4). I am grateful to Mr. Kramer for putting in print what so many of us think — and I include not just the grantees, but also foundation staff who see the reality before us each day.

Foundations often want to start things, but I wonder how much time we give to thinking seriously about how these initiatives are to continue once we apply our “exit strategy”?

On the other hand, foundations have a responsibility to use their assets in a manner that does “make a difference.” I particularly like Mr. Kramer’s approach of relating “sustainability” and “enduring impact” to the continuation of the grantee as a well-functioning organization that continues to meet social needs. Surely we of the foundation world don’t really think that our three- or five-year grant is going to make some huge “systemic change” in a persistent and complex social ill. I have a mantra that says “if it were easy to fix, it would have been done.”

Jane Harrington
Executive Director
Sisters of St. Joseph Charitable Fund
Parkersburg, W.Va.

To the Editor:

Mark Kramer’s article deftly nailed the issue.

Donors and grant makers often despair over the relentless nonprofit need for an infusion of grants and donations. However, the very nature of many nonprofit services as public and charitable goods makes it impossible for a one-time grant to turn a needy nonprofit into a self-sustaining powerhouse.

Truly inspirational are the grant makers who carefully research the market, finding exemplars of nonprofit excellence and rewarding them generously with grants for operating support.

Renee Irvin
Assistant Professor
Director of the Graduate Certificate in Not-for-Profit Management
University of Oregon
Eugene, Ore.