Chipping Away at Trust-Based Org Change

Suzanne Geary, Executive Director, Healy Foundation

The bulk of my career has been in nonprofits, and this is my first role on the funder side, and my hiring as Executive Director of the Healy Foundation was timed with a planned influx of funding. The founder – who built the endowment from the proceeds of several businesses he built such as Kettle Chips, Kona Brewing Company and Sequential Biofuels – leaned into his entrepreneurial mindset and drive for innovation when he gave me my first task: “Rip it up.”  

For years as a nonprofit team member I experienced how secretive, complicated and unnecessarily restrictive seeking funding is. Being offered the opportunity to rip that process up was very appealing. In practice it was more nuanced. On one hand I wanted to tread carefully out of respect for the decades-long history of the board and team at the foundation. They were, and continue to be, a truly heart-based group who care deeply about others. Yet, on the other hand, I believe philanthropy is in many ways broken and despite good intentions of those in seats of power, the sector is at a transition point that requires each one of us to examine our practices and evolve. I firmly believe foundations exist to support nonprofits, to follow their lead, not the other way around. As such, it felt like the clear first step – or tear – was to shift our funding, 100% of it, to unrestricted grants. From both extensive industry research on what aids nonprofit sustainability and personal experience with numerous tales of cartoon checks, promotion demands of funders and incredibly long applications for modest grants, I knew the best action we could take was the shift to unrestricted dollars.   

As with all change, there was some resistance from the board initially. They had a history and traditions around grant making that deepened their relationship to one another. No one wanted to lessen that experience. They also voiced concerns about what nonprofits, particularly the smaller nonprofits in the rural parts of the states where we work need. They felt connected to grant applications for reading mentors, court advocates and school gardens. Understandable. Each were components of good projects, and I believe it’s possible to have both: deep connection to giving while releasing control of the funds. I told them: “If we go in this direction, you will feel more connected to our partners and the impact of their missions. Removing restrictions will validate their expertise, and It will be a first step in strengthening trust.” Once the board approved the shift, I waited. Thankfully, the evidence came quickly – not only has every single board member felt more connected to our partners, they have also gained an understanding of why this philosophy is important for the sector overall. As for our partners, the response has been overwhelming. The thank yous, conversations, questions, and stories that people share have been so much richer than they were when we were funding one-off projects.

With the trust-based principles as our roadmap, we’ve made a lot of other changes: overhauling the application process, improving our response time, reducing reporting to annual reports already created or asking the nonprofit to share three things they want to tell us about at the end of the grant period. We have also begun some multi-year grants, but our internal team is still working with the board to have much more of our granting be multi-year. I’ve been clear that the single biggest step we can take to assist nonprofit sustainability is to give unrestricted, multi-year grants, but it is also true that there’s a pacing to change. We made a big shift to our practices, and I’m optimistic that we will be able to implement another significant trust-based shift in the near-term. 

 In fact, I’m already seeing eagerness from the board to learn more and go deeper into this work. I’m really appreciative that THF is engaged and saying yes to change, even when it’s messy and uncertain. It also helps fuel momentum as trust builds between the board and our partners. Every single nonprofit and funding recipient I’ve talked to has said a version of, “thank god, finally!” or “I wish there were more like you!” I want The Healy Foundation to be a test case for the larger movement, for when other funders have negative reactions or shoot things down. I want to tell my peers who resist trust-based shifts: the field is evolving, we need to stop talking about risk and start listening to what our nonprofit partners want and need. There’s sector change happening, and it’s both past-due and important work.

Previous
Previous

Community Knows What They Need

Next
Next

When We Relinquish Power, Communities Are Better Off