This (obviously biased) survey is an opportunity to give your feedback on the ideas connected with an (obviously biased) article at: https://brookfieldgroup.wordpress.com/2015/04/22/not-fit-for-purpose-why-im-done-with-the-foundation-world/

Thanks for giving your views!

* 1. I am a... (can be more than one)

* 2. How much do you agree that these things happen (regardless of whether they should or should not happen)?

  Strongly Agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know/you write so inarticulately I can't judge
Hoard power within a group of people who don’t give enough time (and don’t always have the expertise) to be effective
Only care about ‘their’ money
Base grant-making processes around their own convenience with little respect for social need or the organisations they are funding
Embrace a ‘ticking’ culture
Set up funding in a way that encourages charities to compete rather than collaborate
Procure programmes rather than fund innovation
Procure everything through applications, leaving grantees continually guessing what a foundation might want, rather than just stating what they want to achieve and proactively going out to find partners
Distrust charities with money rather than empower them with it
Build decision making committees out of people without expertise to make decisions
Make charities jump rather than seek them out and support them long term
Turn innovators into operators
Turn social leaders into perpetual beggars
Rely on grantees to do all the work
Think in binary - 'yes's or 'no's as judgments rather than conversations
Fail to share insight
Define sustainability as the growth of an organisation through revenue rather than the dissemination of an idea, concept or approach into the mainstream beyond the organisation
(Try to) make loads of money out of porn, arms, tobacco, gambling and killing the environment via their endowments when they shouldn't
Hire conservative lawyers and financial managers in order to excuse risk aversion
Exclude service users and front-line workers
Never set out to really achieve something as organisations themselves

* 3. How much do you agree/disagree that these are bad things if they do happen (regardless of whether or not they happen)?

  Strongly Agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know/you write so inarticulately that I can't judge
Hoard power within a group of people who don’t give enough time (and don’t always have the expertise) to be effective
Only care about ‘their’ money
Base grant-making processes around their own convenience with little respect for social need or the organisations they are funding
Embrace a ‘ticking’ culture
Set up funding in a way that encourages charities to compete rather than collaborate
Procure programmes rather than fund innovation
Procure everything through applications, leaving grantees continually guessing what a foundation might want, rather than just stating what they want to achieve and proactively going out to find partners
Distrust charities with money rather than empower them with it
Build decision making committees out of people without expertise to make decisions
Make charities jump rather than seek them out and support them long term
Turn innovators into operators
Turn social leaders into perpetual beggars
Rely on grantees to do all the work
Think in binary - 'yes's or 'no's as judgments rather than conversations
Fail to share insight
Define sustainability as the growth of an organisation through revenue rather than the dissemination of an idea, concept or approach into the mainstream beyond the organisation
(Try to) make loads of money out of porn, arms, tobacco, gambling and killing the environment via their endowments when they shouldn't
Hire conservative lawyers and financial managers in order to excuse risk aversion
Exclude service users and front-line workers
Never set out to really achieve something as organisations themselves

* 4. Anything you want to add?

Report a problem

T