Grantee support

Should we help?

• Every chapter makes their own choices
• Balance between no strings and helping people out
  • Don't want to build expectations
• It builds more structures, how does it look and how do you execute on that is a concern
• In the long view you can create a portal where people (media, for example) will know to go look to for information
• Sometimes the bar for choosing an application is set very high
  • The $1000 can act as a catalyst, take care of phase 1, but project might require more after that
  • Grantees often seem to need access to more people, more resources, people turn to Kickstarter and Indiegogo
  • Keep in mind that $1000 is a catalyst
• It goes on a chapter by chapter basis
• Erhardt: I keep thinking of this as a data problem, if we could expose the data about the projects other people could go through and look at the ideas, create a resource of awesome ideas
• We already blog and talk about them, publish information on them - maybe we could set up aggregation of that to spread the good projects

• If we signal that we are becoming an incubator, is that going to crowd out things that are one-time events
  • Keep it optional
  • Yes, but we have to walk that line gently
• Keep it simple, "we're not the f*cking Ford Foundation"
  • If people don't want or need to be incubated, don't do that

Things we do already

• Using trustees and past winners as a resource for grantees
  • Grantee-alumni relationships and mentoring
  • People are always super excited to do that, past grantees have always opted-in
• AF NY has had people opt-in to stay connected, but other people just disappear

• A lot of grantees aren't as tech-savvy as trustees, just telling them about Kickstarter and such is useful

• Is it a good idea to say up front what resources are available? Could it become an obligation?
  • Not in SF, "they drive the show", "we're here to help" but they are under no obligation

• Difference between local support and global support
  • Adopting ideas from other chapters, if it's easy to re-create or share (so re-creating the results of a past project from another chapter)

• Toronto does a lot of networking and peer-to-peer connections

• Managing our involvement
  • Toronto, for example, doesn't want to overburden themselves
  • Seattle does it on an opt-in, one trustee does it for each grant, basis to provide support that is tailored to the project while keeping the burden on trustees low

Alternative practices

• Does anyone do a thing where they select a runner-up and work with them in some way?
  • In Boston, there is a shortlist every month and often times there is a person who just needs a connection or a Kickstarter or something
  • SF does the same
• Give them feedback, advice, connections

• Spreading ideas from other places, looking at other chapters
  • SF finds inspiring projects from the general world and passes them around the list

• Does anyone give advice or guidance/feedback to ideas?
  • Is it right to tell them how to change their ideas?
  • Difference between manipulating projects and trying to give useful feedback
  • Does that make people feel obligated to do things?
• Difference between doing this with grantees vs. people who don't get funded
• The feedback can be really helpful to people
• There is a big difference between sharing the opinions of an individual vs. sharing opinions as a chapter

Things grantees might need

• Timing is an issue too - support/engagement during project vs. help afterwards
• Coaching on ideas/communication
• Connecting people to a network
• Global network of recipients, could make it an even bigger opportunity than $1000
• Initially in NY, just helped by throwing a big party and trying to get press for people with good ideas
  • $1000 is great, but trustees' connections can be a much bigger contribution
• Pittsburgh added a question asking if it would be ok to promote a project, even if not funded, or refer to other organizations
  • So far everyone says yes

Ideas

• An aggregation of "projects we love" a la Kickstarter
  • Boston has a tumblr of awesome projects, could become a collaborative project between chapters
  • People like this
  • Erhardt will own looking into this
• What if trustees could "like" projects on the AF site and go through periodically and highlight the top choices?

• Sending out a template to winner and runners up with information and resources and connections to network
  • If we take it upon ourselves, we may lapse

• International office hours
• Facebook group for grantees

Awesome Hours

• Not everyone is tech-savvy, we should think more about how to support people especially with more chapters starting in developing areas
• Awesome Hours might be a really good solution to this
  • Boston has these, just gets together and helps people workshop ideas
  • Past winners have come as well, which is nice
  • Seattle wants to start doing these
  • Important to keep a friendly, open environment
• Overall people think Office Hours has the potential to grow into something really big
• This is community and helps ideas grow and spread, then we just have to be catalysts