Mind the gap (in power): notes from the funding floor

The them–us dynamic turns up everywhere, and it’s especially loud in funder–grantee relationships. Plenty try to transcend it with participatory budgeting and trust-based philanthropy. But when money changes hands, roles are obvious. That moment won’t disappear.

We can, however, shape the roles and the process before that moment. Here’s some of what I was involved in trying – in a previous role and am still trying within TILT, Cultivating Leadership’s foundation. Pinch anything useful – even better, go even further.

Accept the mess

No perfect balance is coming. Money is still a taboo; lots plays out around it. Here are some ways I was involved in trying to shift roles and sit in the mess together. This focuses on outward-facing grantmaking.

Even the odds at application

Applications reward people who know the rules. Sometimes it’s warm introductions; sometimes it’s arm’s‑length. Often it’s those who write beautifully, have a track record, and warm introductions who get funded.

· Video applications. Writing favours the fluent; short videos opened the door for others.

· We wrote with applicants. If an application was necessary, we co‑wrote applications — not to steer the work, but to translate into our internal decision format. Our burden, not theirs.

· Mutual due diligence. We used DD to spot where support might help — not to catch people out — and invited partners to assess us: wealth sources, ways of working, safeguards. Lawyers and auditors helped us right-size the legal asks.

· Have no application process. Our open call soaked up time and mostly funded people we’d met already; people with lived experience were filtered out. We closed it and did direct outreach to overlooked groups. Within another foundation – we had limited time, we knew the grantees would also so we took a seemingly bold move of having no application process and just handing over the money. We asked ourselves – what more would an application process tell us when we had already decided we wanted to fund them. The answer was – not much!

· Ask those groups to recommend others. Knowing that we don’t have much capacity, one approach we experimented with was to ask those we’re funding, who they would recommend us to also fund.

· Others make the decision. In some areas, it was partners who made the decisions on who to fund. They were closest to the issue.

Keep negotiating the role we play

A funder’s role needs constant negotiation. Here are three ways that I was involved in:

· Close working & learning partner. We trained in coaching, asked better questions, co‑designed where useful (e.g., place‑based work), and stepped back when a collective bid made that cleaner.

· Fund & step back. Sometimes the best move was writing the grant and getting out of the way. I took being asked not to get overly involved as a good sign that I’d built an honest relationship.

· Lead (for a season). Occasionally we initiated research or convened a network when there was a clear gap — with the intention to hand leadership on.

Host better, not bigger

Convenings can flatten hierarchy — or entrench it. Over time, work I was involved showed that there were moves we could make to aim for the former by:

· Co‑deciding who’s in the room. Planning with people with lived experience (not just orgs speaking “for”) changed dress codes, signage, a trauma‑informed walk‑through, and added childcare.

· Rotating who hosts. Learning retreats rotated between partners, with a budget. Goodbye funder‑owned agenda.

· Passing the mic. At a parliamentary event, we declined the keynote and asked participants to choose the opener. Panels too: if it was possible, I passed the invitation over to partners.

· Paying people to write on our site. We used the funder cover to lift partners’ ideas — and paid for the writing.

· Social takeovers. We handed our Twitter/X account to partners for takeovers. Internal worries stayed hypothetical; trust worked.

Lend legitimacy, on purpose

Being a funder with money, can be a powerful tool. Here are some ways I was involved in using it with partners:

· Back undervalued roles. We funded work that helped legitimise roles the formal system ignored.

· Negotiate better terms. With co‑funders (e.g., local government) we pushed for learning‑led approaches over rigid outcomes.

· Share the badge. Our logo on partner materials opened doors — they could use it at their discretion or in conversation with us.

· Change how research lands. Early on, we made the recommendations (unhelpful). Later, people with lived experience co‑designed the research, and instead of a big “launch” we funded others to host conversations on what should happen next.

Put weight on the chassis: bear the risk

In a car, the weight goes on the strongest part – not the weakest. Funders aren’t the strongest part of the ecosystem, but they do have the steadiest income — so can, and I believe, should hold more risk. Too often, risk slides to partners (silence during bad press, funding pulled when things wobble). Ways we bore risk, by agreement:

· Own it explicitly. In work bringing senior officials together with people with lived experience, we agreed the foundation would be accountable if things went sideways — and kept revisiting how to de‑risk.

· Underwrite when it matters. We underwrote legal costs for a partner’s challenge, alongside other foundations.

· Show up in choppy water. In politically tense areas, things happened — arrests, accusations, media backlash. We offered practical support (e.g., governance guidance), not distance.

Lead with warmth and respect

“Professional” can turn remote and cold, especially when saying no. I, with others, chose warmth, even with non‑partners. That looked like thoughtful retreats, Christmas cards, shared office space, and a wellbeing grant during the pandemic for staff support. A partner told others, “Expect hugs — lots of them.” I’ll take that.

What have you seen that works (and doesn’t)?

This isn’t exhaustive, and context matters. If something here grates — brilliant: what would you do instead? If something lands — where wouldn’t it?

· One application tweak that opened the door for you?

· Where would “mutual DD” cross a line?

· If you handed your social account to partners for a week, what’s the worst — and the best — that could happen?