Enough to Go Around
Now that most of the smoke has cleared, I can look back at the Gates/Buffett partnership. The press reports are helpful as a way of getting behind the scenes of the personalities involved, at least as much as their respective handlers will allow. I can assume that each of them has a public personality they want to cultivate, just like politicians and entertainment personalities. Buffett comes across as avuncular, solid, huge integrity, and honest beyond reproach. Likewise Gates&Gates. Although one hears rumors about the old Bill and his proclivities twenty years ago, all that is gone now, sacrificed for fatherhood and married bliss. Melinda, although in the background, is known for intelligence, warmth and caring, and leading her husband to hug AIDS babies in Africa. Without her urging, Bill would not do this. No divorces on the horizon, no damaged kids or wives, fortunes intact.
And what fortunes they are! The analogies fly. The new Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation will be as rich as a small nation, will possess more wealth than the GDP of Iceland, will feed the world’s hungry for a year, cure aids and malaises of every incurable sort, and improve the education system of the United States so more kids can go to college and be happier. These three incomprehensibly wealthy people are stepping up to the plate of noblesse oblige and knocking a home run for mankind. They are examples for us all.
The question is: how do I as a grantseeker get some of this money?
Are there good ways to approach them, and are there really stupid ways of approaching them?
Please tell me, http://www.gatesfoundation.org/ When grantwriters read a web site, they want to understand the goals of the institution. Reading the words on face value can be misleading. After all, everybody wants to eliminate illiteracy. But does everybody want to do it by building better city parks so kids will have some place nice to go after school so they won't be tempted to waste their lives with drugs and early pregnancy? In fact it requires considerable skill to go into grantmakers’ web sites looking for a grant without wasting a considerable amount of time rooting around in the wrong place for the wrong cause and for the wrong amount of money.
Money is the factor that must never be forgotten.
The cause is important because it may inspire and the method is important because it will directly bring about the objectives, which are based on the community’s need for the services of the grantseeking organization, etc. and etc.
But it’s the money, stupid, as ever.
How do you determine the amount of money you can expect to get from the process of going to the organization – say the Bill&Melinda Gates Foundation (GF) now that they have “merged” their money with the Warren Buffett money (WBM)? Are all of us going to get millions? Don’t forget: the WBM must be spent down by $3 billion annually, or it’s not going to stay with the GF - that's the deal.
At $33 billion, I calculate eleven years of spending at three-thousand-million-dollars per year.
Surely some of all of that money can be spread around to many, many causes. But will that happen? Even if, as has been reported, the GF will hire 600 more people to fill its Seattle offices, one has to ask what they will be doing. Fighting disease? Shaking up high school slackers? Supporting modern dance? Maybe these 600 new hires will each be assigned to a pixel in a hi-res map of non-profit assistance and virtually every cause with a 501(c)(3) will get its share.
Maybe GF will place on each desk a portfolio of causes they will support and each of those causes will receive a phone call out of the blue from the GF offering them money if they will obey the following rules: submit a needs statement, draw up a budget and keep to it, report quarterly and don’t come back for more until you’ve spent everything. And let us know the outcome.
Experienced grantees will point out that this contrasts with the way things are run now at the GF, where a banker’s scrutiny is applied to every grant awarded. GF program managers scrupulously administer the grants and demand that the grantee do the same. It is like Bill has invested in your company, and you only have so much wiggle room before he comes down on you like a ton of bricks. At least there won’t be any buyouts or predatory investments.
No, it’s possible to dream of the day when there’s so much money that has to be spent, even your cause will get some.
And what fortunes they are! The analogies fly. The new Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation will be as rich as a small nation, will possess more wealth than the GDP of Iceland, will feed the world’s hungry for a year, cure aids and malaises of every incurable sort, and improve the education system of the United States so more kids can go to college and be happier. These three incomprehensibly wealthy people are stepping up to the plate of noblesse oblige and knocking a home run for mankind. They are examples for us all.
The question is: how do I as a grantseeker get some of this money?
Are there good ways to approach them, and are there really stupid ways of approaching them?
Please tell me, http://www.gatesfoundation.org/ When grantwriters read a web site, they want to understand the goals of the institution. Reading the words on face value can be misleading. After all, everybody wants to eliminate illiteracy. But does everybody want to do it by building better city parks so kids will have some place nice to go after school so they won't be tempted to waste their lives with drugs and early pregnancy? In fact it requires considerable skill to go into grantmakers’ web sites looking for a grant without wasting a considerable amount of time rooting around in the wrong place for the wrong cause and for the wrong amount of money.
Money is the factor that must never be forgotten.
The cause is important because it may inspire and the method is important because it will directly bring about the objectives, which are based on the community’s need for the services of the grantseeking organization, etc. and etc.
But it’s the money, stupid, as ever.
How do you determine the amount of money you can expect to get from the process of going to the organization – say the Bill&Melinda Gates Foundation (GF) now that they have “merged” their money with the Warren Buffett money (WBM)? Are all of us going to get millions? Don’t forget: the WBM must be spent down by $3 billion annually, or it’s not going to stay with the GF - that's the deal.
At $33 billion, I calculate eleven years of spending at three-thousand-million-dollars per year.
Surely some of all of that money can be spread around to many, many causes. But will that happen? Even if, as has been reported, the GF will hire 600 more people to fill its Seattle offices, one has to ask what they will be doing. Fighting disease? Shaking up high school slackers? Supporting modern dance? Maybe these 600 new hires will each be assigned to a pixel in a hi-res map of non-profit assistance and virtually every cause with a 501(c)(3) will get its share.
Maybe GF will place on each desk a portfolio of causes they will support and each of those causes will receive a phone call out of the blue from the GF offering them money if they will obey the following rules: submit a needs statement, draw up a budget and keep to it, report quarterly and don’t come back for more until you’ve spent everything. And let us know the outcome.
Experienced grantees will point out that this contrasts with the way things are run now at the GF, where a banker’s scrutiny is applied to every grant awarded. GF program managers scrupulously administer the grants and demand that the grantee do the same. It is like Bill has invested in your company, and you only have so much wiggle room before he comes down on you like a ton of bricks. At least there won’t be any buyouts or predatory investments.
No, it’s possible to dream of the day when there’s so much money that has to be spent, even your cause will get some.
posted by Schultz and Company | 1:52 PM
|
0 comments
