Inclusive Grantmaking Toolkit

We know that your organization values grant selection processes that are fair and inclusive. With the goal of fulfilling our own mission more effectively, we sought out ways to ensure our review process was as insulated as possible from bias. Now we’re sharing with fellow grantmakers our Inclusive Grantmaking Toolkit, a collection of resources developed to foster and advance fair funding throughout the grantmaking community. This toolkit features a variety of in-depth and actionable materials to inspire and support your efforts.

One of the most effective ways to ensure grant selection processes are fair and inclusive for all applicants is to insulate the review process from bias as much as possible. Start with recruiting a diverse reviewer cohort using these 4 steps:

1. Define the reviewer cohort
2. Consider where candidates might be found
3. Identify tools and methods for outreach
4. Evaluate interested candidates

We unpack each step in our PDF tip sheet. Download it here:

Grant reviewers are charged with making objective decisions about applicants based on a set of criteria. In this process, they must avoid both real conflict of interest and the appearance of a conflict of interest in order to preserve fairness, integrity, and credibility. A grantmaking organization facilitates this by establishing a Conflict of Interest Policy which:

• Defines the categories of conflict
• Identifies where potential conflicts exist
• Prepares response actions

We take a closer look at each of these areas in our PDF tip sheet. Download it here:

Bias can significantly impact the fairness and effectiveness of research funding, influencing which projects receive support. In this video*, Beckman Foundation’s Executive Director, Dr. Anne Hultgren, explores the impact of bias in peer review and grant funding, sharing research findings and evidence-based mitigation strategies to ensure a more level playing field for all applicants.

*This video is a re-recording of a webinar presentation originally hosted by Altum on June 25, 2024 titled, “Unmasking Bias in Peer Review and Grant Funding.” The webinar included presentations from two additional speakers: Jenna Hicks, PhD (Assistant Director at the Health Research Alliance) and Alison J. Hatt, PhD (Independent Consultant for the Advanced Light Source).

Read the transcript of this video presentation:

This article was first published on Candid insights, the blog of Candid.org*, under tips & training on June 10, 2024. In this article, Beckman Foundation’s Curator and Communications Officer Kaerie Ray outlines five grant application and review best practices that grantmakers can implement for bias mitigation and more equitable and inclusive funding.

*Candid.org is a resource website for "the big picture of the social sector, backed by data and expertise."

Read:

Grant application and review practices for more equitable and inclusive funding

Why use a multifaceted evaluation for grant reviews? This approach can help reviewers better understand what they are scoring and provide them with a common scale that enables greater consistency. A multifaceted evaluation includes:

• Evaluation questions
• A numerical scale with labels and descriptions
• Unique ranking
• Comments/feedback

Get started using our PDF tip sheet. Download it here:

The key to successfully enacting change is to make it as easy as possible for those impacted by the change. The key to successfully communicating change is to share specific ideas focused through a benefits lens that clearly states the difference that will be made.

For example, if your organization is making a programmatic change that involves anonymization of applicants’ letters of intent, your communication would include announcing the anonymization requirement as a single process improvement change (specific idea) that makes applications easier to prepare and review (benefits lens).

Check out the next steps using our PDF tip sheet. Download it here:

Keywords: Inclusive, grantmaking, toolkit, resources, fair, funding, grants, guidance, diversity, reviews, reviewers, cohort, process improvements, tools, methods, evaluation, materials, conflict mitigation, response actions, tip sheet, bias mitigation, multifaceted evaluation, rubric, instructions, communication, Beckman, best practices