Modernizing Grant Management

Organizations that distribute grants face a common challenge: balancing the modernization of their grantmaking programs while ensuring fairness, efficiency, and compliance. As we move further into the digital era, modernizing grantmaking is more than just using online tools—it’s about creating an interconnected, efficient, and fair system. Here’s a step-by-step guide to building a modern, non-biased grantmaking process.

Challenges of Traditional Grantmaking

In the past, grantmaking was a manual, paper-heavy process. Volunteers on grant review committees would often receive binders filled with hundreds of applications, manually writing notes and scores. These would then be physically returned to the grantmaking organization, often resulting in disorganized feedback and delayed decision-making. This process, while common, was far from efficient.

When organizations moved to digital tools, many adopted systems like forms, spreadsheets, email attachments, and other online tools. While these methods created some efficiencies, they introduced new challenges:

• Data loss and mismanagement: Documents would be lost in spam filters or mismanaged when manually compiled from various sources.
• Compliance risks: Emailing sensitive applicant data, such as tax documents, created potential compliance and privacy issues.
• Bias in review processes: Without redacting personal information, committee members were influenced by factors outside of the applicants’ merits, leading to biased decisions.

These pain points became evident as organizations attempted to modernize their grantmaking processes.

Core Elements of a Modern Grantmaking Program

To fully modernize grantmaking, organizations must focus on several key elements:

1. Applicant Experience
   • Profile-Centric Submissions: Modern grantmaking relies on a profile-centric approach, where applicants create a profile, upload their documents, and track their submissions. This allows applicants to submit required materials over time and reduces administrative burdens for both parties.
   • Simplified Submission Process: Grant applications should lower the barrier for applicants. Rather than having applicants manually email documents or convert PDFs, a centralized submission hub should be used where all materials are stored and accessible for review teams.
   • Grant Recommendation Tool: Applicants can answer a series of eligibility questions, and the system will recommend which grant opportunities best fit their profile. This helps avoid wasted time on ineligible applications and streamlines the selection process for the grantmaking organization.
2. Operational Efficiency
   • Centralized Data Hub: All documents, forms, and communications should be housed in one system. A central hub ensures nothing is lost and provides full visibility for both applicants and review teams.
   • Automated References: Grantmakers should avoid traditional reference letters and instead opt for reference templates that are automatically collected and attached to applicant profiles. Automated reminders should be sent if references are not submitted by the deadline.
   • Ongoing Data Collection: After a grant is awarded, applicants often need to submit additional data such as grant reports. This ongoing data collection should also be centralized in the profile hub, ensuring consistency from application to post-grant reporting.
3. Fair and Non-Biased Review Process
   • Data Redaction: To avoid bias, personal identifying information should be redacted during the review process. Reviewers should focus on the applicant’s merits rather than personal details.
   • Randomized Application Review: Instead of assigning all applications to a single review team, applications should be distributed randomly. Research shows that reviewers can fairly assess up to 15 applications at a time before experiencing review fatigue.
   • Quantitative Scorecards: Reviewers should use scorecards to assign points to specific categories such as project alignment with the mission, budget, and success metrics. This provides structure and ensures consistent evaluations.
   • Review Buckets: Organizations should use review buckets to distribute applications among different committees. For example, one committee may handle preliminary reviews, while another handles final selections.

Grant Reporting and Ongoing Data Collection

Ensuring Compliance and Security

Security and compliance are critical in grantmaking, particularly when dealing with sensitive applicant data.

• Secure Communication: All communication between grantmakers and applicants should occur within the secure platform, rather than through email, which can lead to data breaches.
• Data Privacy: Personal identifying information (PII), such as tax documents, should never be emailed or shared via unsecured channels. A modern platform allows reviewers to view files within the system without downloading them, reducing the risk of leaks.
• Access Control: Reviewers should only have access to the applications they are assigned, and the platform should be able to restrict which files are visible based on the reviewer’s role.

Leveraging Data and AI for Informed Decisions

Once applications have been reviewed, organizations must be able to analyze the results and make informed decisions.

• Leaderboards: After scorecards are completed, the system automatically ranks applicants, providing a clear view of top performers. This helps during deliberation meetings where review teams can discuss the highest-ranked applicants.
• Evaluator Bias Analysis: Reviewers may have different scoring tendencies. By analyzing data, organizations can identify strict or lenient reviewers and adjust scores accordingly, ensuring that applicants are not unfairly penalized or advantaged based on reviewer tendencies.

The Path to a  Modern Grantmaking Program

To build a truly modern grantmaking program, organizations must adopt an interconnected platform that centralizes submissions, reviews, and ongoing data collection. By addressing challenges such as data loss, compliance risks, and reviewer bias, organizations can ensure that their grant programs are efficient, secure, and fair. Modern tools not only create efficiencies but also help protect applicants and grantmakers by streamlining the entire process—from submission to final reporting