Accountability, continual learning and respect for our community partners have always been among our core values. That’s why, over the past 25 years, we’ve regularly used surveys to ask our grantees for candid, anonymous feedback about our work.
We’re excited to share the results of our most recent surveys, conducted for the first time in partnership with the Center for Effective Philanthropy. In spring of 2017, we surveyed two groups of our community partners: our grantees and our declined applicants. We worked with CEP because it designs best-in-class surveys that provide funders with actionable results. Working with CEP also gave us the opportunity to benchmark our results against 250 other funders.
CEP’s analysis of the survey results provided us with insights that will ultimately help us better define, assess and improve our effectiveness as a funder. A total of 202 grantee organizations and 272 declined applicant organizations participated in the surveys. The response rates exceededour goals, giving us high confidence in the data.
We highly value our grantees and those who wish to partner with us and have always aimed to adapt and improve as best as we can in response to what we learn from them.
We're proud to report that survey respondents believe we’ve excelled in many aspects of our work. We received high marks for our impact on, and knowledge of our grantees’ fields; our transparency and openness as a funder and a partner; and our understanding of the sociocultural and socioeconomic factors impacting nonprofits.
In particular, our grantees and applicants say that we treat them fairly and understand their work and their challenges. Our grantees appreciate our consistent support for their organizational sustainability, our visionary investments in public policy, our investments in an electronic grant application system, and our efforts to streamline our processes. Even when declined, applicants reported appreciation for our staff’s feedback and advice for strengthening future proposals.
Cal Wellness has had a significant impact on our field and the community we serve. It has demonstrated a commitment to building safe, healthy communities.
Our grantees and declined applicants flagged a few areas as needing improvement. Their feedback was invaluable and timely. After all, the needs of our grantees and of our communities are constantly changing, and we must change with them to remain effective.
I feel a clear explanation should be given as to why the LOI was declined and perhaps some guidance for a successful outcome to help the organization, should they decide to apply in future.
We’ve been working diligently to address the key areas of improvement our community partners pointed out. Below are just some examples of that work, which is ongoing.
Impact beyond grants
We are committed to improving our processes and practices and are grateful to everyone who participated in the survey. We look forward to many more productive conversations with our community partners as we continue to build on strengths, and learn and improve as a result of constructive feedback.
The California Wellness Foundation commissioned outside consultants, Julia Pennbridge, Ph.D., and the National Health Foundation, to conduct the Grants Program Survey in 2014. The survey was distributed to organizations that included: grantees during 2013, organizations that applied for funding in 2013 and organizations that were denied funding in 2013. The evaluators’ report, survey results and the survey questionnaire can be accessed above.
The survey is part of the Foundation's commitment to our organizational values, in particular, learning, accountability and excellence. These regular surveys have been instrumental in our efforts to improve customer service and our approach to grantmaking.
This questionnaire is for informational purposes only. Please do not complete and mail it to the Foundation. Feedback and comments may be sent through to our general email address: email@example.com.
|Previous Surveys (This archival content is presented in its original format.)|
|2010||Grants Program Survey (PDF)||Grants Program Questionnaire (PDF)|
|2006||Grants Program Survey (PDF)||Grants Program Questionnaire (PDF)|
|2003||Grants Program Survey (PDF)||Grants Program Questionnaire (PDF)|
|2000||Grants Program Survey (PDF)||Grants Program Questionnaire (PDF)|
|1997||Grants Program Survey (PDF)||Grants Program Questionnaire (PDF)|