10
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned Cargill and The Cargill Foundation Online Grantmaking – Lessons Learned Stacey Smida Grants Manager
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
Cargill and The Cargill Foundation
Online Grantmaking – Lessons Learned
Stacey Smida
Grants Manager
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
Who We Are
As a Company:
• Cargill is the largest privately-head company in the US. It has operations in
66 countries and has 142,000 employees.
• We are in 4 major business segments – Agriculture, Food, Financial and
Industrial.
• Cargill is not a commonly known name, but we are the: Eggs you eat at
McDonalds, sweeteners in most soda’s, Malt in some known beers, Truvia the
first natural zero-calorie sweetener the Honeysuckle White Turkey and
Diamond Crystal Salt.
As a Department:
• We are embedded within Corporate Affairs. The Corporate Responsibility
team has 6 Program Staff and 2 Grants Staff.
• Oversee two separate giving entities – the Corporate Contributions
Committee (Corporate) and the Foundation.
• We work internally with nearly 300 Global Cargill Cares Councils (Cargill
locations around the world)!
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
How We Give
Business Unit $26.0m
• Contributing to Local Community Needs
• Alignment with Business Objectives
• Community Fundraising – United Way campaigns etc.
Corporate $25.1m
1300 grants
• Focus Areas: Nutrition/Health, Education, Environment
• Global and National Partnerships serving Cargill communities
• Internal Program (Global Partnership Fund), matching BU contributions in communities where we have a presences and are in the 3 focus areas
Foundation $10.0m
80 grants
• Giving only in the Headquarters/Minneapolis Area
• Focus Area are Education and Eliminating Barriers to Educational Success; small % allocated to Arts/Culture/Civic
• Outcome and Logic Model driven
In FY’11 Cargill contributed $61.1m in 51 countries
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
Explore Develop Plan Implement Evaluate
Decision and Movement to go Online
Needed to STREAMLINE the application and review process.
We have 13 “types” of applications/programs, of which 60% are driven by internal programs,
supporting BU efforts. Average # of grants per month is 75-100.
EXPLORE: Approx. 6-12 months
Did online grantmaking demo’s with other vendors.
Worked with IT to ensure there was compatibility between the systems.
DEVELOP: Approx. 6-12 months
Created a Team Charter that reviewed the Applications, Grant Decision process and the
Reporting.
Did an internal work flow to look at the review and approval process. Lead to conducting an
assessment to do a phased effect on moving to online applications.
PLAN: 1 month – Impressive!
Presented the findings to the team and received approval.
IMPLEMENT: Approx. 3-6 months – Aggressive!
Worked with external consultant who had experience with implementing online grantmaking
Created online forms, did internal database customization and conducted training for internal
staff.
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
Things to Consider
Investment of Money and
Time
Changes in Systems and Processes
Streamlined Process for
Staff
Return on New
Allocation of Time
Receiving buy-in and
agreement from Staff that
going online was right for us.
Internal procedures were
modified to compliment the new
online application and systems.
Changes in Behavior of Staff.
Reviewing process is done
through the database and write
up documents rather than paper.
The time savings has been
unbelievable and the
willingness by grantees to
change is terrific!
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
How it Looks & What it Does
Sample Application:
• Customization
• Navigation
• Able to implement
Required Fields.
• Spell check!
• Able to set word
limits!
• Help
• Required documents
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
How it Looks & What it Does
Submitted
Applications:
• Centralized pending
area.
• Quick view of basic
application content.
• Viewing applications
& requirements.
• Link the application to
existing organization in
database (GIFTS).
• Ability to decline right
from here and no need
to bring into database.
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
Impact to the Process
PRO’s
• No data entry – only updating of
customized internal coding.
• Responses in the application merge into
the database…Easy to manipulate.
• Required Documents are attached
within the database.
• Applicant has access to account to
review past submission.
• The actual application setup is user
friendly and can be done as needed.
• Eligibility Quiz!
• Stage 2 options for applications
• Allowing grants coordinator to be
more focuses and not so processed
orientated.
Con’s
• Training internal staff to use a new
review process, a behavioral change.
• There are work-a-rounds…Ex. Entering
“See Attached” as a question response.
• Once the application is submitted,
changes can not be made by applicant.
• Applicants need to “log-in” to an
account to access submitted and
pending applications. One person per
organization, unless they share account
information has this access.
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
Evaluate Improve
Again…Improving Processes
• Now, almost two years later we are evaluating the process and are
looking to make improvements to improve efficiencies and again
streamline the application and reporting process.
• The Grants Process Improvement Plan (GPip) is reviewing the overall
grants area – from how the system is currently being used, roles &
responsibilities of staff, consistent standards in the area, the
application process training of staff and consistent messaging.
• Looking at other features of MicroEdge to compliment our processes.
• Been tasked to create an long-term IT plan.
Online Grantmaking – Lessons learned
Stacey Smida
Grants Manager
Cargill and The Cargill Foundation
952.743.4311
