[Imc-finance] A network wide grantmaking proposal

[k.skvorak]

-- 
A 'macro' concept proposal for short and long term IMC foundation 
fundraising. - Prioritizing'Project based' funding  and creating a 
coherent and "centralized" way to get  diverse proposals to a 
selection of smaller foundations-


Greetings  all finance thinkers out there=8A

I just wanted to float out an idea, for people to consider for a 
(potentially) network wide mutually supportive and (somewhat) 
coherent foundation fundraising strategy.

There is little doubt that the IMC network is 'maturing' in a lot of 
ways, and that there are opportunities for fundraising all over the 
established foundation world.

  While there are indeed a few big funders that are willing to respond 
to big, more 'open ended' or network wide proposals like that that 
came from Ford,  they are a small number relative to all of the 
foundations out there.

Many other smaller foundations often prefer a more specific, smaller 
and targeted proposal to give money to=8A.something that I will call 
for these purposes "project based" funding proposals, and these 
small funders can not even afford to look at a proposal the size of 
=46ords grant=8A.remember the vast majority of 'progressive'  grants are 
under $5000=8Aand many much smaller than that.

Right now there are certainly some IMC collectives and even working 
groups that are 'tapped' in to these funding opportunities, and are 
already succesfully getting the funds on their own.  That is a good 
thing, as far as it goes.

At the same time some of  these few 'usual suspect'  funders are 
receiving proposals from different IMC's apparently unconnected to 
each other=8Aand some IMC's are indeed getting needed 
funds=8Aautonomously and without any connection to other IMC 
proposals=8A.and these funders are 'dealing' with this seeming 
contradiction=8Aor perhaps they understand that there is no 
contradiction here at all.  In fact there are local  geographically 
selective foundations for which this local autonomous approach is the 
only possible one.

Of course for other national or international funders this is very 
confusing =8A.and to be honest with ourselves, this approach is not the 
optimal way to do network wide mutual aid=8Aas each IMC has differing 
abilities to write, and most importantly,  to research and submit 
grant proposals.


So I am suggesting trying a different approach.

If the IMC network as a whole, from a 'centralized' location - for 
instance UCIMC or someplace else, were sending out a diverse proposal 
package each funding cycle to a growing selection of friendly funders 
it would give the appearance of 'central' coherence to the IMC 
network that is not apparent otherwise.   Yet this 'centralized' 
appearance would not be as complicated for our own internal workings 
as when we seek or accept  large 'network wide' grants=8Athat then 
require disbursement and the risk of  creating,  at the very least, 
'apparent' internal heirarchies.

In this 'project based' approach, there is no 'internal vetting' of 
the proposals,=8A.only perhaps mutual aid and support in making the 
proposals look good.   It will be up to the funders to choose which 
IMC project best suits their needs for that cycle.

Of course this approach does not (necessarily) exclude independent 
IMC's from submitting their own proposals if that is what they are 
committed to=8A.so I am not (necessarily) suggesting any coercion of 
already self funded IMC's.

One way it could work is as follows:

If IMC Nigeria, or Peru, or Palestine or New York or any other IMC 
collective or workgroup needs funds, they are probably pretty 
specific as to what those needs are.   They need equipment, travel 
funds, funds to support a community education and media center etc 
etc=8A. there are so many good ideas out there- specific local project 
ideas.

And while these local collectives have really clear ideas about their 
local needs and ambitions, they may or may not have clear ideas how 
to approach funders for that=8Aespecially the rich foundations in the 
'North' that I am talking about here=8A so they often 'ask' IMC at 
large for funding.  This is perhaps an acceptable model,  but we have 
seen some of the difficulties with this- unwieldy process etc=8Aand 
again the inherent problems with internal disbersment

Instead  I am proposing is that local collectives  create their local 
project proposals for their own IMC collectives, then these proposals 
can be sent to this list, or some new list for collection and at the 
same time  some mutual aid if the local group wants help in 'touching 
up' the proposal.- On this list we can also perhaps ask ourselves 
some of the pertinent questions that funders like to ask:

"what is the track record of this group if any?"  "what are their 
connections to, and how do they serve the local community"?  " what 
kind of commitments to follow thru with the goals of the proposal, 
and how will those goals be reported, in time, to the foundation?" 
(not every goal is met by every 'grantee'=8A.and foundation boards are 
used to this=8Aso we don't have to overly stress about this...)

Then comes the good part.   -  Each quarter these proposals can go 
out in a package to a variety of foundations.  This would of course 
be set up in advance, and these funders would be looking forward to, 
and expecting each cycle of diverse local proposals from the IMC 
network.  These funders can then choose themselves which of these 
projects their foundation would like to support=8Ait is left up the the 
funders to make this determination, and not any internal 'vetting' 
process of our own.  I suspect that their are plenty of progressive 
funders that would prefer and welcome this approach, and look fwd 
each cycle to see "what the IMC network is up to"

This also provides valuable mutual aid and equalization for those 
local proposals that are very good, but whose members may not have 
foundation connections or skills yet.  It also provides the 
invaluable service of getting these proposals into tha nads of likely 
funders that is the biggest obstacle for many local IMC's.

This does not preclude  any global fund,  internal disbersement 
etc=8Aor network wide grants if that serves other needs like emergency 
funding, network wide infrastructure etc.

I would certainly be willing to spend at least a little time 
contacting different funders and sorting out which ones would like to 
receive regular IMC proposals, and to help create this friendly 
foundation 'database'=8Awhich is really not that daunting a task  and 
is as easy as making phone calls to them.

  This is not at all an odd concept, because many groups and funders 
have longstanding relationships, and foundations support the same 
groups year after year=8A.and we can follow that same example and not 
force local IMC volunteers to rediscover the wheel year after year =8A

And this could all be easier to implement than  it sounds as many 
funders even accept email or electronic proposals these days,=8A.so 
there may not even be a lot of 'paperwork' to do=8A.

Just an idea.

If anyone thinks this is an important enough idea to comment on, 
translate, or redistribute,=8Aplease feel free.

Kevin S

NYC IMC