NPQ often hosts contentious conversations about points of practice. In this case these three articles were published in direct response to one another over the past month. The article by Cynthia Gibson essentially asserted that feedback and input were insufficient mechanism by themselves to answer the call for more participation from communities in philanthropy. She was answered by Melinda Tuan of the Fund for Shared Insight and that elicited a response from a number of foundations that are involved in the on the ground practice of participatory grantmaking.
This dialogue is a good example of NPQ’s hosting of contentious conversations. That hosting is a way to get the various points of view clearly laid out to help move “stuck” practices forward. Please feel free to chime in with your own opinions under Gibson’s article as a comment.
Sponsored Content
“Are you ready for remediation?” Are you aware of a new IRS document requirement for 403(b) retirement plans? Don’t miss this opportunity to learn what’s at stake. Kevin Kidwell of OneAmerica explains.
The Elephant in the Nonprofit Boardroom Nonprofit finance and development teams each bring a unique perspective to an organization’s finances. This can lead to mismatched reporting. Download this white paper to look into how technology can bridge the gap to support transparency, impact and stewardship.
An NPQ article on participatory grantmaking made important distinctions between feedback and two-way communication that shifts power relationships. The director of the Fund for Shared Insight responds.
Get The Complete Guide to Digital Fundraising Digital fundraising is the primary driver of new generosity, but the landscape has been evolving. Find out how the right digital fundraising strategy can help.
Philanthropy, driven by people with wealth, has a hard time addressing problems wealth created. Participatory grantmaking, by empowering communities to make grant decisions, can help change that.
