I don't usually wade into opinion pieces but I loved this one and it brought so many issues to light that have been on my mind for years (the issues that inspired us to create Capably!) Firstly, I want to make it clear that would never argue that the incredible donation of unrestricted funds MacKenzie Scott made is unhelpful, it was an awesome generous move, that's going to help 361 nonprofits do exactly what they need to do to further their mission. Wow!
BUT.
Setting the requirements for receiving the grant around a 1 million dollar or more annual budget means you're leaving out a LOT of organizations, 92% of nonprofit orgs in the US operate with an annual budget of under a million dollars and that is not an indicator of the impact they are making in their communities! Annual budget is just one small indicator of how an organization operates and considering that the bulk of the sector falls on one side of that line, I don't think I'm off base with saying it's not a particularly important one!
I think a lot of folks would say that the requirement comes from a place of wanting to ensure sustainability: a one time gift of 1 million dollars will wreak havoc in an org operating with $100,000 a year. But I think this way of thinking about capacity building, that it is a one and done process, is so unhelpful. Capacity building should be an ongoing process, it should be focusing on collaboration and healthy growth, reinforcing a strong foundation, not funding for a project that then becomes a problem to be solved every year. Change your thinking about how we fund nonprofits and you'll change the world for the better! Unrestricted funds are such an incredible gift..let's get them in the hands of the small orgs who need them most!