Investing in-individuals 0

Introduction

Why support leadershipdevelopment?

Basic components of aleadership developmentprogram

Management issues toconsider

How to recruit andselect participants?

Research and evaluation issues:What do you want tolearn?

Additional ways tosupport leaders

www.grantcra f t .o rg

No.8 IN ASERIES

2

6

9

16

21

24

25

LEADERSHIPDEVELOPMENT

PROGRAMSINVESTING IN

INDIVIDUALS

grantcraftP R A C T I C A L W I S D O M F O R G R A N T M A K E R S

leadershipdevelopment

programsinvesting in

individuals

P A G E 1 6Managementissues toconsiderAs with any new area ofgrant making, leadershipdevelopment requires timeand planning to explore thefield, build support withinyour grant-making organiza-tion, and decide on who willcarry out the program activi-ties? Beyond that, it’s usefulto look ahead, to determinehow long the program shouldcontinue, with what long-term benefits.

P A G E 2 1How to yourecruit andselect partici-pantsThe way participants aresought and chosen will play abig role in determining thenature of the program and, tosome degree, its outcome.Grant makers sometimes seekparticipants themselves andsometimes use outside nomi-nators and reviewers. Someuse formal recruitment andnominating processes. Othersprefer to work more informally.In many cases, an importantchallenge is seeking partici-pants from outside the grantmaker’s familiar circle.

P A G E 2Introduction

P A G E 6Why supportleadershipdevelopment?Leadership is valuable in itsown right, but for grant makersit may serve other goals, likebuilding stronger, better-ledorganizations; enriching asocial-change agenda withdiverse voices; and evenimproving one’s own grantmaking by bringing you closerto innovators and effectiveagents of change.

P A G E 9Basic compo-nents of a leadershipdevelopmentprogram Leadership development grantmaking can take many forms,depending on the goals it’smeant to serve. But a few ele-ments are common to mostprograms: a clear set of skillsor qualities the program willcultivate, some amount offinancial support, mentoringby seasoned leaders, network-ing among participants, andprojects for the participants towork on. Other elements, liketechnology, research, evalua-tion, and communication arealso common.

P A G E 2 4Research andevaluationissues:What doyou want tolearn?Building a research componentor an evaluation into a leader-ship program is not only agood way of learning whetherthe program is effectivelydesigned and implementedand whether it achieves itsdesired effects. Research canalso be a way of learningmore about leadership gener-ally — what makes it effective,and what effective leadersneed to excel.

P A G E 2 5Additional waysto support lead-ersA formal program isn’t theonly way to support leadershipin areas of interest to a grantmaker. There are also manyways to build it into otheractivities and grants:supporting and recognizingoutstanding leaders of granteeorganizations, bringing leaderstogether for discussion andmutual support, and raisingleadership issues in theannual report and othercommunications.

This guide was written byDeborah Meehan, with assis-tance from Ellen Arrick. It is partof the GrantCraft series, spon-sored by the Ford Foundation.

Publications and videos in this seriesinvite foundation practitioners to joinconversations with their peers aboutstrategic and tactical issues in phi-lanthropy. They are meant not to giveinstructions or prescribe solutions,but to spark ideas, stimulate discus-sion, and suggest possibilities.Comments about this guide, or otherGrantCraft materials, may be sent toJan Jaffe, project leader, at:[email protected]

You can download .pdf versions ofGrantCraft publications from theproject’s Web site at:http://www.grantcraft.org

You are welcome to excerpt, copy, orquote from GrantCraft material, withattribution to the foundation andinclusion of the copyright.

© Copyright 2003 The Ford Foundation.

Share what youhave learnedabout leadership.

contents

LE ADE RSH I P DEVE LOPM E NT PRO G RAMS: I NVE ST I NG I N I N DIVI DUALS 1

Throughout this guide, in boxes like this

one, we will highlight issue areas for which

we think further input would be particularly help-

ful. We hope you won’t limit your contributions

only to these topics. But please take these boxes

as a particular invitation to share your thoughts

and ideas by sending us a note through our Web

site (www.grantcraft.org/contact.html). We will

offer excerpts from these comments in future

updates.

SPECIAL FEATURES25 KKeeyy LLeessssoonnss FFrroomm GGrraanntt MMaakkeerrss

26 OOtthheerr WWaayyss ttoo UUssee TThhiiss GGuuiiddee

2 LE ADE RSH I P DEVE LOPM E NT PRO G RAMS: I NVE ST I NG I N I N DIVI DUALS

Introduction

“The leaders of the future are not likely to come riding out of the

sunset on white chargers — heroes without heroism. Many will

instead be ordinary people with extraordinary commitment. Their

styles will be different. Their accents will be different and so will

their color and complexion. What most will have in common, how-

ever, is an understanding that what makes one an American is

neither genetics nor geography, neither ideology nor theology,

but the commitment to a set of values described in the preamble

to the Constitution as forming a more perfect union.”

— From “Globalization and Civil Society: The Implication for Leaders in the Nonprofit Sector,” presented by Ambassador James A. Joseph,

International Project on Nonprofit Leadership, University of New Orleans, December 14, 2001

Many grant-making organizations focustheir resources on the programs thatdeliver a needed service or work forsocial change in their communities. Butwhat about the individual or group ofindividuals who run the program orlead the change effort?

Some grant makers recognize thatthere are times when they can helppeople to become stronger leaders orhelp build a field or a community byfocusing their grant making directly on leadership. Sometimes these effortsfocus on organizations, as part of alarger “nonprofit capacity-building”strategy where leadership is one ofseveral organizational issues beingaddressed. In other cases they may bedesigned to support leadership withina particular program or field of work.

Sometimes these grants supportexisting leadership developmentprograms; sometimes they involve thecreation of an entirely new program.As this guide will explore, grant mak-ers have varied reasons for engagingin leadership development work —ranging from a desire to moveresources closer to the communitylevel to a goal of bringing people fromdiverse sectors together to createsocial change. However grant makersdescribe the reasons for supporting it,leadership development can representa useful way to help accomplishgrant-making goals.

What is your view of leadership? Share other perspectives on what constitutes

leadership — either definitions from the leadership literature, and/or examples

drawn from leadership programs you are familiar with. To share your thoughts, send

us a note through our Web site: www.grantcraft.org/contact.html

■ Fosters collaboration“There is a growing understandingthat patterns of hierarchical leader-ship that served us in the past arenot well suited to the global com-plexity, rapid change, interdepen-dency, and multifacetedchallenges of the next century.”

Leadership in the 21st CenturyRethinking Leadership: Working Papers, the Kellogg

Leadership Studies ProjectKathleen E. Allen, Juana Bordas, Gill Robinson

Hickman, Larraine R. Matusak, Georgia J. Sorenson,and Kathryn J. Whitmire

Academy of Leadership Press, 1998

■ Rooted in public values“The stronger the value systems,the more strongly leaders can beempowered and the more deeplyleaders can empower followers.The transformational dynamic thatmutually empowers leaders andfollowers involves … the wantsand needs [of people], motivationand creativity, conflict and power.But at its heart lie values.”

Transforming Leadership: The Pursuit of HappinessJames MacGregor BurnsAtlantic Monthly Press, 2003

■ Creating community drivensolutions“The crisis in our communities isnot the result of a lack of servicesbut rather a lack of democracy.Stronger democracy relies on theparticipation of individuals who,while they may face problems,feel they have power over theirown lives — and a responsibilityto contribute to the lives of others.Self-determination is the essence

of democracy and the commerceof civil society.”

The Quickening of America: Rebuilding Our Nation,Remaking Our Lives

Francis Moore Lappe and Paul DuBoisJossey-Bass Publishers, 1994

■ Crosses boundaries “The key is people talking andworking together across theboundary lines that traditionallydivide and diminish a community— people from government, corpo-rations, social agencies, ethnicgroups, unions, neighborhoodsand so on. Relationship building isthe key to breaking political grid-lock and being able to take actionin the public interest.”

Boundary Crossers: Community Leadership for aGlobal Age

Neal Peirce and Curtis Johnson, foreword by John W. Gardner

Academy of Leadership Press, 1997

■ Promotes systems change“An important challenge of build-ing community capacity is to focuson moving leaders from an iso-lated, special interest or problemfocused approaches to communityissues to an approach thatembraces the community’s over-arching and interconnectedconcerns in order to achievesystem-wide change.”

Lessons Learned About Grassroots LeadersAn Analysis of the Kellogg Foundation’s Grassroots

Leaders InitiativeCampbell & Associates, St. Paul., Sept. 1997

■ Engages in peer exchange andlearning communities“Individuals and organizations mustfunction in a mode of inquiry,

knowing that nobody knows andeverybody can learn continually… this requires communities ofcommitment where people arecontinually learning how to learntogether.”

The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of theLearning Organization

Peter M. SengeDoubleday/Currency, 1990

■ Integrates opportunities forreflection and renewal“We need to break from the actionon a regular basis to consider if ouractions are congruent with ourvalues and vision. We also need toidentify behaviors, rituals, or peoplethat inspire us to reconfirm ourcommitment to our values andvision.”

Ethical Leadership: In Pursuit of the Common GoodBill GraceThe Center for Ethical Leadership, Seattle, 1999

■ Encourages new leadership “A new type of leadership isneeded. New leaders buildbridges, establish free spaceswhere citizens can be supportedas community change agents andproblem solvers, and continuouslyfoster the emergence and growthof new leaders.”

Practicing What We Preach: Creating TransformingOrganizations

Paul Schmitz and Lisa SullivanThe Johnson Foundation, The Wingspread Journal

(Vol. 19, No. 4), 1997

For some additional definitions ofleadership go to:http://www.grantcraft.org/catalog/leadership/links.html

What do you mean by leadership? What qualities are you looking for?When asked to define the kind of leadership they wanted to support, the grant makers who contributed to thisguide often referred to books or articles about leadership that reinforced their thinking. Here are the leadershipqualities our contributors emphasized, along with some of the writings that inspired them:


STRONGER AND MORE EFFECTIVELEADERS AND ORGANIZATIONS

Grant makers acknowledge that thesuccess of many grants and organiza-tions ultimately depends on thestrengths and skills of individuals.Many contributors see leadershipdevelopment as a way to support spe-cific individuals and provide them withskills, experiences, and resources thatwill make them and their organizationsmore effective. Leadership developmentcan, for example:

■ Impart specific skills and providelearning experiences — for exam-ple, communication, management,and organizational skills that helpnonprofit leaders manage their orga-nizations better, improve relation-ships with staff, and be moreeffective advocates for their vision.

■ Provide opportunities for respitethat help keep nonprofit leaders from“burning out” and either leavingtheir work or becoming stale.

■ Encourage leaders to reflect onpractice — a national grant makernoted that involving leaders in co-producing knowledge was a goodway to encourage reflection:

“Reflection is a learning tool. And alot of leadership programs try tofind ways to do it, asking partici-pants to keep journals, for example.And I think the challenge is todesign reflective opportunities thathave real coinage, that are reallyembedded in programs and don’tseem sort of peripheral to the work.And one of the advantages of ourresearch effort is that it is that kindof reflective tool.”

■ Give nonprofit leaders visibilityand prestige, thus enhancing theirstanding (and by implication, theireffectiveness) in their own communi-ties. Some grant makers emphasizethe importance of recognition as away to sustain leaders working inadverse conditions and help themattract new resources for their work.As one grantee put it:

“The increased recognition andactivity made possible by my awardhelped me to get additional moneyand resources. I was able to put ondances, organize youth conferences,and initiate a Cesar Chavez day. Itbrought new attention.”

■ Create a network of contacts thatreduces the isolation nonprofit lead-ers often experience, by introducingthem to other like-minded leaderswho can offer support, advice, skills,and resources. Sometimes the net-work can be useful in unexpectedways. For example, one leadershipprogram alumna used her networkto recruit someone to succeed her ona nonprofit board. The experience ofhaving been in an intense programtogether was a good way to seehow the prospective board memberwould work in a group. Anotherparticipant observed the programshe attended gave her a new set ofcontacts:

“Now I know people who arelawyers, accountants, who work forthe police department, in govern-ment, at the university. I view themas resources I can call up. I can sitnext to them on boards and knowthey bring an entirely differentexpertise than I do.”

6 I NVE ST I NG I N I N DIVI DUALS: S UPPO RT I NG LE ADE RSH I P DEVE LOPM E NT PRO G RAMS

Why support leadership development?

Grant makers invest in leadership

development for many different rea-

sons. There are three broad cat-

egories of goals and benefits that

grant makers are interested in when

they support this work:

■ Stronger and more effective leaders

and organizations

■ Social change in a community,

region, or field

■ Benefits for the grant maker’s own

organization

SOCIAL CHANGE IN A COMMUNITY,REGION, OR FIELD

Many contributors view leadershipdevelopment as a way to change whatis happening in a particular communityor in a field (like human rights, educa-tion, or health care) by increasing skills,role models, credentials, resources, andopportunities for people who work inthe community or field, and by bringingthem into contact with new perspec-tives or approaches to social change.For example a Midwestern foundationthat wants to improve communityhealth care supports a leadership devel-opment program that helps physicianslearn how to tackle policy and systemichealth care issues in their institutionsand communities.

Leadership development can also be auseful strategy to increase the visibilityof people of color, women, young peo-ple, or others who have been underrep-resented in leadership roles in acommunity or a field. Many of thesebenefits also accrue at the organiza-tional level as well — organizationswith diverse leadership and withaccess to other perspectives on socialchange are also likely to be more effec-tive in their work.

Contributors to this guide observed thatleadership development can help:

■ Identify new voices from communi-ties or groups that are not well rep-resented in their localities or in theirfield — such as people of color,women, young people, or rural peo-ple — and help them become morevisible and powerful. For example, agrant maker in a mid-sized familyfoundation working in the Southcommented, “We worked with an

affordable housing coalition.Through the [leadership develop-ment] process they figured out thatthey could not deal with racism andadvocate for people they did notknow. The organization has beenredesigned and is now membershipand constituency driven. The staffhas almost completely changed. Theorganization is led by people trainedfrom the community.”

■ Encourage collaboration acrosssectors or fields. Some leadershipdevelopment programs bring non-profit leaders into contact with lead-ers from business or government, sothey can build partnerships acrosssectors or at least get a different per-spective on their own work. Grantmakers have begun to experimentwith leadership development pro-grams as a way to connect individu-als from the service and advocacyfields, as well as to connect leadersacross fields and issues.

One nonprofit leader who joinedsuch a collaboration reported:

“I did feel odd in the mix becausemost people were from health andhuman services, family programs,and direct services, and I was thefirst program in environmental jus-tice to come in. I was afraid at firstthat I wouldn’t be able to connectto their work. But my being hereallowed me to connect our commu-nity to environmental justice issuesand now they are learning howenvironmental justice affects theirwork and their clients. Take gangsand violence in their schools — wewere able to show them how leadpoison is related to aggressive

NEW CONNECTIONS FORSOCIAL CHANGE

Sometimes important connections

get made after the formal program

has ended. A leadership program

graduate who worked in the field of

employment and disability rights

organized a pot luck dinner in order

to meet the 45 other alumni of her

program who lived in her region.

Among the people she met were an

officer at the Federal Reserve Bank

and a vice president from a local

college.

These were, she said, “people with

whom I would never have had con-

tact except that I accessed this net-

work. But the three of us

collaborated on a project to create

microenterprise opportunities for

people who were disabled. And in six

months, we changed the language of

the National Rehabilitation Act, and

locally we changed the statewide

use of Department of Rehab funds —

which was responsible for dispens-

ing $6 million of federal and state

funding — as opposed to creating

another 501(c)3 that is fighting to

get $100, 000. And it was only

because of that leverage of these

three odd people working together—

the unusual suspects.”


behavior and violence. We wereable to bridge the gap about anelement that was affecting theirwork.”

■ Broaden the perspective of non-profit leaders. By exposing partici-pants to leaders who work on otheraspects of a social problem or whouse different strategies for socialchange, leadership programs canhelp participants see beyond theneeds of their own organization andlearn how they might work for sys-temic or policy change.

For example, a grant makerdescribed the experience of a partici-pant who conducted litigation for achildren’s rights organization:

“His job was to sue state and cityservices programs for not doingtheir job well. After going throughthe program, he had new respectfor people who worked for changeinside the system, and he saw thatthis would make his work moresustainable. As a result, he decidedhe wanted to change the systemfrom the inside, and is now adeputy chancellor for education in alarge city.”

■ Support the start-up of new orga-nizations or fresh approaches tosolving social problems. Leadershipdevelopment programs can be anopportunity to support innovatorswith passion for a new idea by pro-viding them with start-up costs andtechnical assistance to develop theiridea. Some leadership programsfocus exclusively on identifying andsupporting new social entrepreneurs.

BENEFITS FOR THE GRANT MAKER’SOWN ORGANIZATION

Working with leadership developmentcan help grant makers:

■ Identify resources, information,and human capital. When leaderscome into direct contact with grantmakers, they can function as asource of fresh ideas and informationabout the fields and communitiesthey work in. Leadership programalumni can also become new staff,board members, or consultants forgrant makers. A grant maker inhealth care described some of thereturns that leadership programs hadfor his foundation:

“We invite [program alumni] in forour proposal reviews and for ourmedical fellowship’s program devel-opment. Several of our fellows weuse as evaluators of our program. Allthe fellows programs give our foun-dation access to a group of peoplewho are a locator service for goodadvice … It’s a networking opportu-nity in the fields we fund.”

■ Get directly involved in socialchange. Because the focus of leader-ship development is on the individ-ual or on groups of individuals,rather than on institutions, this kindof work can also bring grant makersinto contact with a tier of smallerorganizations that might not havebeen eligible for routine grants.Grant makers often feel that support-ing leaders is a more direct way tosupport community change at thegrassroots level.

•••••


Contributors to this guide have sup-

ported leadership development for a

broad range of purposes, among

them:

■ Encouraging new voices and inno-

vation in criminal justice work

■ Developing indigenous leadership

in a rural Native American commu-

nity in the mid-west United States

■ Increasing the diversity of leader-

ship in the substance-abuse field

■ Engaging non-profit organizations

in building coalitions across racial

and ethnic groups

■ Building a critical mass of leader-

ship in the violence-prevention

field

■ Increasing the tenure of executive

directors of community-based

organizations by connecting them

with peers who serve as a source

of learning, support and collabo-

ration.

Basic components of a leadershipdevelopment program


While leadership programs can varywidely, they tend to share some com-mon elements. Whether you choose tosupport an existing program or developa new one, the program’s componentsshould support the particular leadersyou are targeting and the purposes forwhich you set up the program.

For example, is the focus on the indi-vidual or the organization? On experi-enced people or individuals new to afield? Is the focus on creating a lead-ership corps across organizationswithin a field? On building new cross-sector partnerships within a commu-nity? It might be helpful to keepquestions such as these in mind whileconsidering which elements to supportand in what way you want to incorpo-rate them. These questions are alsoclosely connected to the selection andrecruitment process, which we’llexplore in the next section of thisguide.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES & CURRICULUM

While leadership development pro-grams all share a commitment toincreasing the skills and effectivenessof the participants, according to ourcontributors, programs vary in

■ the types of skills and experiencesthat they convey to participants,

■ whether there is a fixed “curriculum”,or

■ whether individual participants, or thecohort, create a “learning plan” outlin-ing their own learning objectives.

Types of skills and experiences

Leadership development programs varyin their curriculum and methodology,

but there are some skills that the pro-grams commonly try to help their par-ticipants achieve. These include:

■ Learning to work with diversity.Leadership development programstypically try to help participantsappreciate differences in race, cul-ture, gender, and class, and developan ability to work with and onbehalf of people different from them-selves. Our contributors identifysome of the ways in which leadersengage with issues of diversity,including:

■ strengthening personal identityand cultural esteem,

■ learning about and appreciatingother cultures,

■ understanding issues of power andaccess to resources, and

■ developing the capacity to workacross divisions of race, class, gen-der, region and sector.

■ Understanding group dynamics.Leadership program participantsoften learn how to work with groups— in teams, as collaborators, facilita-tors, and negotiators — and learn dif-ferent ways of communicating. Forexample, one leader learned tochange his communication style tomake his work environment lessconfrontational: “Rather than say,‘This would be better for the pro-gram,’ I learned to say, ‘I feel thismight be beneficial,’ or ‘How wouldyou feel about this idea I have?’”

■ Relating policy and practice.Leaders who have been working inorganizations that deliver services oroperate programs may not alwayssee how their work connects to a

TYPICAL COMPONENTS OFLEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENTPROGRAMS

■ Learning objectives and curriculum

■ Financial support

■ Learning from peers

■ Mentoring and coaching, both

during and after

■ Action projects

■ Technology support

In addition, grant makers who sup-

port leadership development pro-

grams sometimes build in

opportunities for:

■ Research and evaluation

■ Activities to communicate with the

broader public about the leaders’

work

larger system. As a participantobserved, “When I became a fellow,some of us were working on policyand others, like me, were runningprograms. We used to argue a lot atfirst about whose work was mostimportant, and then we began tosee how important we all were tochanging the system. I still run aprogram, but I also help mobilizeour folks to advocate for policychanges.”

■ Developing reflective and contem-plative practices. Leadership pro-grams can provide an opportunityfor leaders to understand their ownleadership practices and thinkabout whether their work is goingin the direction they want it to go.A leadership participant observedhow important it is to “make thetime to reflect on what you learnedthe day before. That should be thefirst priority. It improves our abilityto do the work we do.”

Curriculum

The components of a leadershipdevelopment curriculum may bedetermined by the grant maker, per-haps with help from advisers, or by agrantee partner who operates theprogram, or by the participantsthemselves.

Programs that offer a curriculum use a variety of approaches that mayinclude seminars, workshops,residency programs, internships,community service learning, fieldstudy trips, coaching, or technicalassistance.

Whether a curriculum is designed bythe grant maker, a grantee organiza-tion, or the participants themselves,one of the most important componentsfor many programs is the opportunityfor peers to learn from one another.

A grant maker supporting a nationalleadership program describes this kindof learning:

“One of our best sessions was aboutbuilding coalitions when the partnersare of unequal power, for example,small organizations wanting to allywith unions around day-labor orga-nizing. What are the successfuldynamics that help you form thosealliances? And how do you keep youragenda from being hijacked by acoalition partner that has a moreextensive focus than you? That was avery interesting conversation ...because there were lots of peoplewho were engaged in those kinds ofcoalition building [strategies] andbecause the leaders had enough timeto have an in-depth conversationabout them.”


A health care funder described her program’s curriculum:

“With our partner, we designed a program for experienced mid-career managers,

twelve days over eight months. It begins with a four day retreat, and then there are

four two-day retreats. Topics include negotiation, situational leadership, spirituality,

diversity, networking, team development, communications, and a small management

piece. They work on group projects that they can propose or select from. We recruit

projects with the help of an outside advisory committee. The class of twenty-five sub-

divides into groups of six to eight. We have hired a coach to work with the teams on

their projects. We debated the project piece and the pros and cons of one larger pro-

ject and decided one project could not accommodate everyone’s interests. Smaller

projects can be based in the participants’ organizations and bring an immediate

return back to the organization. The group project develops the team’s capacity to

identify, analyze, and develop solutions to problems.”

HOW THEY DID IT/WHAT THEY DID

A GROUP LEARNING AGENDA

Group learning agendas or individuallearning plans?

Many contributors describe a core cur-riculum around skills they want todevelop in all participants, yet theyalso recognize that participants havespecific individual needs. Some grantmakers provide a fund for individuallearning. In addition, coaching/mentor-ing, internships, and field study tripscan provide a way to tailor the experi-ence to participants’ particular needs.

Many leadership programs use assess-ment tools, including feedback aboutthe leaders from the organizations orcommunities they serve, as an initialstep in developing a learning plan.Assessment tools help program partici-pants assess their strengths and iden-tify the areas that need work.

A sampling of learning plan activitiesdescribed by contributors included:

■ Nonprofit management classes —e.g., fund and board development

■ Systems change seminars

■ Media and public speakingopportunities

■ Travel study trips to learn aboutinnovative programs

■ Personal leadership coaching ormentoring

■ Second language classes or tutorials

■ Retreats for reflection, renewal andrespite


†A grant maker who developed an individually-focused leadership program found that

it took some time to get the program off the ground:

“We formed a leadership pilot program and invited a small number of grantees who

had expressed interest. We made available to them a coach who could make them

aware of resources and different approaches to leadership, and who could help them

think through what they needed. A fund was set aside to support their learning activ-

ities. But we were really disappointed that it did not take off very quickly.”

At the suggestion of the coach, the foundation convened the group to talk about what

was holding them back.

“The convening was really important to give them permission to get away from the

day-to-day, and still it took some time to get plans from grantees and requests for

financial support. We identified a common area of interest and put together a one-

day training on collaborative leadership for the group.”

As a result of this experience the foundation decided to customize its approach

through a mini-grants program:

“We invited a diverse group of 40 of our grantees who fit with our focus on community

building. We held a 2-day retreat that was professionally facilitated. We had a lead-

ership development expert and coach on hand to help grantees with their plans. All

participants were invited to submit mini-grant applications. In the two years we have

made 24 mini-grants that have supported participation in leadership development

programs, specific training areas, coaching, and a sabbatical leave. We are getting

ready for a second convening to deepen our learning.”


AN INDIVIDUAL LEARNING PLANWhat is your experience with

curriculum? What is the right balance

of grant maker versus leadership

participant involvement in curricu-

lum design? GrantCraft is interested

in examples of curriculum “models”

that have worked for you.

To share your thoughts, send us a

note through our Web site at:

http://www.grantcraft.org/

contact.html

FINANCIAL SUPPORT

Leadership development programs typ-ically provide some form of directfinancial support to the participants,their organizations, or the projects theydevelop. Contributors to this guidedescribed several types of financialsupport that leadership programs canprovide:

■ Travel and training subsidies forleaders to participate in groupactivities. These costs may varygreatly based on the geographicrange of the program — whether thenecessary travel is local, regional, orinternational. “We invest $10,000per participant,” one funder said, “to cover the costs of the trainingsessions, coaching, and travel toregional meetings.” This did notinclude staffing or the costs ofprogram administration.

■ Support for individual learningplans. Grant makers described sup-port ranging from $5,000 to $35,000for such things as seminars, coach-ing, retreats, skills-based workshops,travel study, trips, language study,field studies, and classes. One grantmaker provides each leader with anIndependent Learning Account of$30,000 to pay for the recipient’sown choice of learning activities.

■ Stipends. Some leadership programsprovide the equivalent of a salary orstipend for participants whileengaged in field study, communityservice placements, and internships.Other grant makers provide a grantto the organization to compensate forlost work time of program partici-pants. Said one grant maker: “Ourprogram provides $15,000 stipends

to participants, medical and healthcoverage, and an additional $10,000is invested in the costs of programactivities and related travel.”

A grant maker for a national founda-tion working in health care added,“We have augmented the leadershipprogram with sabbatical funds bud-geted for up to three months. Theyare available along with organiza-tional grants we make to ourawardees.”

■ Organizational or new project sup-port. Some leadership programs offertheir participants seed money for anew project or program, or providesupport to help the leaders’ existingorganizations develop needed infras-tructure: “We now have organiza-tional development grants (small andlarge) that all of our leadership pro-gram participants can apply for.These capacity-building mini-grantshave been put into place as a resultof our learning that this is one of thebiggest needs of these leaders.”

One grant maker provides both orga-nizational and individual support:“We make an award of $105,000 tothe organization and $15,000 to theindividual leader. They can choosewhat to do with the award. It ispartly used for coming to meetingsand personal and professionaldevelopment. Some gets used fortheir [core] work. They have to pro-vide a plan for how they will spendthe money.”

■ Support for a learning or collabo-rative project. Some leadership pro-grams try to encourage ongoingcollaboration among alumni byestablishing a fund for collaborative


TAX IMPLICATIONS OFFINANCIAL AWARDS

Financial awards are considered tax-

able income. Several grant makers

described the importance of counsel-

ing award recipients about setting

aside funds to cover estimated tax

payments.

This advice was particularly impor-

tant for awards in support of start-

ups. If awards are not made through

a fiscal sponsor or to a 501(c)3 orga-

nization, the IRS considers the award

to be income and the individual

recipient becomes responsible for

taxes on it.

projects. In other cases, programparticipants have pooled their indi-vidual project awards in order topursue joint projects. “We began byproviding $10,000 to fund a projectby each of the participants on ourarea of focus. This is not a lot ofmoney. So we changed it to a pot of$240,000 and asked the cohortswhat types of projects they wouldlike to collaborate on.”

■ Recognition awards. Some leader-ship programs provide awards withno strings attached, as a way of rec-ognizing the recipients’ accomplish-ments. Grant makers made theseawards either directly to an individ-ual or to their organizations as anacknowledgement of their work.

LEARNING FROM PEERS

Building a group relationship encour-ages participants to learn from eachother and helps leaders develop groupprocess skills and the ability to workacross traditional boundaries of race,issue, or sector. Some leadership pro-grams use group decision-making exer-cises as a way to help leaders developwork more effectively in groups.Otherleadership programs look for ways thatthe cohort group can serve as animmediate and long-term source ofnew ideas, learning, and resources toall participants.

For example, some programs createopportunities for the leadership partic-ipants to visit each other’s work sites.In one instance, a leader working inthe field of employee rights invitedthe group to participate in a demon-stration that occurred weekly in frontof a restaurant that used unfair

employment practices. Describing thegroup session that followed, the grantmaker said, “It was clear that the peo-ple who participated [in the demon-stration] had gained an insight intothe work of [the leader] in a way thatthey never could have if he had justdescribed it himself in a meeting. Andit triggered ideas about collaborationthat they would not have had if theyhadn’t seen what was happening in[that neighborhood].”

Contributors to this guide note thateven as early as the design stage of aleadership development program, it


WORKING WITH DIVERSITY WITHIN THE GROUP

Grant makers observe that when they assemble diverse groups in leadership develop-

ment programs, a certain amount of conflict may arise, even if only below the surface.

As a seasoned grant maker observed, “Fellows come with very different backgrounds

in class, education, and experience. We encourage the group to appreciate the

strengths that each person has to contribute to the project.”

Our contributors warn that it is a mistake to assume that the program can deal with

diversity in one session. (To read about one grant maker’s experience, go to:

http://www.grantcraft.org/catalog/guides/leadership/links.html). Even the best

training will only lay some framework for issues that must be addressed in all

aspects of the program design.

For example, language can divide or unite participants:

“One of our recipients spoke Spanish as a primary language. We found a translating

group that appreciates the significance of the group process and uses technology

that is not too invasive. We vary which language weaves the session. It is not

always in English. The importance of translation processes conveys all sorts of

larger messages about who you value.”

Another grant maker understood that participants had cultural differences in the

way they related to issues of money. His program hired a consultant to work individ-

ually with participants on their financial award budgets. Yet another leadership pro-

gram director learned that the young participants in the program were asking the

staff to help them deal with serious personal issues. The program recognized this

challenge and trained its staff to use external support services when appropriate.

Working with a diverse group.

Please let us know about

approaches you have used to ensure

that diverse perspectives and experi-

ences are valued within the leader-

ship group. What other strategies

have you used to encourage

dialogue across difference? To share

your thoughts, send us a note

through our Web site at:

www.grantcraft.org/contact.html

is not too soon to begin thinkingabout how to keep alumni involved.As one experienced grant makerobserved: “Leadership developmentdoesn’t happen in a few days over oneor two years. Alumni are critical.”

In addition to helping other alumni withongoing advice, support, and connec-tions, program alumni can be an impor-tant resource to the leadership program.They may continue to be engaged withthe leadership program as:

■ Nominators

■ Readers on a selection panel

■ Mentors and trainers, or

■ Knowledgeable sources of informa-tion and ideas for grant makers andtheir partners.

The creation of a formal mechanism ornetwork to connect alumni mayincrease the likelihood of a continuingexchange of resources and collabora-tion among former program partici-pants.

Some programs have encouraged theiralumni to stay connected by providingseed money for alumni projects andcollaboration, hosting regional gather-ings for active fellows and alumni, cre-ating a “senior fellow” status for thoseasked to serve as mentors to new fel-lows, and offering continued financialsupport for conferences and learningseminars.

Many programs describe those whoparticipate in this continuing relation-ship as “fellows” rather than “alumni,”to encourage participants to think of itas a lifelong service.

MENTORING AND COACHING

Coaching is an important way torespond to the individual needs of par-ticipants, provide leadership skills tothem in the context of their work, andaugment staff resources.

One grant maker committed to workingwith individuals in the community con-text invests heavily in coaching.Participants attend learning instituteswith members of their organization andother community leaders, they partici-pate in grassroots leadership commu-nity learning clusters, and their coachvisits them on site to provide leader-


SHADOWING: AN ALTERNATIVE MENTORING TOOL

A nonprofit leader working in the environmental justice field in the Midwest took part

in a leadership development program that allowed her to “shadow” the leaders of a

similar organization in New York City. Her organization was about to enter a commu-

nity-based research project with a university.

She observes, “The group I went to visit had many more years of experience than we

did. They had partnerships with a university. After my visit, my organization was able

to negotiate our role with a university, including getting some staff positions for our

project. When I started out, we had a $70,000 budget. We learned from the organiza-

tion [we visited] that we could raise money in different ways — it raised our sights.

Now our budget is a half a million.”

THE POWER OF PEER LEARNING

A leadership program participant describes how a group exercise changed her deci-

sion-making approach:

“[The exercise] was a simulation that we were all stranded on a river. Our canoes had

tipped. We each had to make choices about our survival. I made a choice and I was so

adamant, the group went with me. Well, I picked the wrong choice. So, I got lost and the

whole group got lost. They said: ‘You are powerful. If you have that much influence as a

leader you have to be careful.’ It had a big impact on me. I’m slower now to select what I

think is the right choice. Is my information accurate? If I’m wrong, I want to be wrong with

good evidence. I don’t want to make mistakes based on false assumptions.”

MINI-CASES

ship coaching in the context of thework or community environment.

Mentors may be either paid or unpaid,and are typically more experiencedpractitioners working in a similarleadership program provides stipendsfor young environmental leaders towork on a full-time project under theguidance of a project advisor who alsoserves as a mentor. This programoffers orientation sessions for projectadvisors to help them become moreeffective mentors.

ACTION PROJECTS

Many leadership development pro-grams include having participants workon a project, either individually or aspart of a group, as a way for them totest their ideas and apply their newskills in a real-life setting.

In some cases, participants apply to theprogram and are accepted based onthe merits of a project they’ve alreadyidentified and will implement duringthe program. In other cases, partici-pants may develop a project proposalin collaboration with other members oftheir group.

Grant makers describe two types ofprojects that participants may pursue,either individually or in groups:

■ Projects in which participants aremeant to apply new skills or towork collaboratively with oneanother or with a community.These projects engage leadershipprogram participants in researchingan issue, building a new network, orcreating a new community agenda.In one case, a group of young lead-ership participants found they

needed to listen closely when theypresented their ideas about socialchange to community residents:

“You are supposed to get ideas ofwhat they, the community members,want. I had my own ideas, like let’sdo tutoring, have a youth group, andlet’s promote higher education. Thecommunity members wanted jobtraining, more civil services broughtinto the community, gang preven-tion, and issues involving policebrutality. It reminded me of ourPower and Privilege workshop.They taught us not to assume weknow anything and to instead go offwhat people tell us. I went in therewith my own ideas, because that iswhat my community (where I amfrom) wanted. But that is not neces-sarily what this neighborhoodwanted.”

■ Projects meant to create a newprogram or organization, or to test


Pros and cons of action

projects. Please share your

thoughts about the issues that

grant makers face with regard to:

■ Supervision/mentoring of action

projects

■ The cost of carrying out action

projects

■ Expectations from leaders about

future financial support from grant

maker for these projects

■ Integration of what is learned

from the action projects with the

rest of the leadership program

Send us a note through our Web site

at: www.grantcraft.org/contact.html

ACTION PROJECTS: ISSUES TO CONSIDER

The design of a project component should fit the grant makers’ overall goals and

level of resources for the leadership program. Experienced grant makers suggest

thinking about the following issues:

■ Is the project meant primarily to increase the participants’ own learning, or to pro-

mote change in a community or specific field?

■ Does the project benefit an existing organization or create a new one?

■ Is the project designed to increase individual skills or the collaborative problem-

solving skills of a group of participants?

■ What financial resources does the grant maker have available to support the

project?

■ What kinds of skills and technical support do participants need to implement the

project?


a new approach to solving a prob-lem. Some leadership programs aredesigned specifically to support“social entrepreneurs” to start a newproject or organization. In others, theproject may focus on developing thecapacity of an existing organizationto try a new approach. Experiencedgrant makers warn that some typesof projects will require a greaterinvestment of funds. Socialentrepreneurs generally receive$35,000 to $75,000 for individualstart-up efforts, and larger grantsmay be needed to help existingorganizations expand their opera-tions.

Some grant makers provide socialentrepreneurs with other resourcesbeyond financial support:

“We support 10 fellowships to createa social justice project. Some have ahosting organization for the project,and some incorporate as nonprofits.We provide financial support andtechnical assistance. All fellowsreceive monthly e-notes [electronicnewsletters] with articles, and theyget connected to a broader range offunding.”

Participants who are starting a neworganization need information andtechnical assistance related to orga-nizational start-up issues. As onegrant maker observed, “Start-upsneed a great deal of technical sup-port. Instead of buying support, wehave dealt with this by networkingthe new fellows to the existingresource of former fellows.”

TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT

While a ListServe® or electronic bul-letin board holds great potential as atool to link leadership program partici-pants to one another during and aftertheir participation in a program, con-tributors to this guide observed thatelectronic communication works bestafter face-to-face relationships havebeen established. As one programoperator notes, “You can say all thethings that you want about high tech,but it never beats high touch. We needto be in a room with other people todiscuss these issues.”

Many leadership programs aim toincrease participants’ ability to usetechnology and their understanding ofhow to use it in their work.

A leadership program participant whostarted a new organization to helpNative Americans gain access to highquality health care described the roleof technology in this work:

“Our mission is to advance cancer careand services. Our Web site serves as avirtual social worker — diagnosis,treatment, how do I pay for this,sources, and links to other organiza-tions that can provide advocacy. Thereare fellows who are information tech-nology experts. We’ve been able topick their brains and learn how theyhave used the Web to get their mes-sages out, to gain funding, and to linkwith others.”

•••••


This guide is the result of a collaborative effort between

GrantCraft and the Leadership Learning Community (LLC).

Deborah Meehan, the guide’s author and a former Kellogg

Foundation Leadership Fellow, is the community’s founder and

director. GrantCraft’s editors asked Deborah to answer some

basic questions about the community and its resources:

Q. What is the Leadership Learning Community, and who can

join it?

A. It’s a community of practitioners –– those who run leadership

development programs, grant makers who fund leadership

development, scholars who conduct research about how to

develop leaders, and of course individuals and organizations

who provide leadership development services. This commu-

nity of 450 individuals and 150 organizations shares a com-

mitment to connecting our learning, our practice, and our

resources to strengthen the leadership development efforts

in which we’re involved. All who support these values are wel-

come to join the community. A membership application is

available on our Web site (www.leadershiplearning.org).

Q. What resources are available through this community and

how might they be useful to grant makers?

A. The community’s resources are meant to be helpful to grant

makers new to this field, as well as experienced leadership

grant makers who want to deepen their understanding of

leadership or are looking to share what they’re learning with

others. These resources include:

■ A web-based directory and profiles of specific leadership

development programs. For example, let’s say you’re a

grant maker thinking about leadership. You’re going to

have questions of how and why, but also of who. Who are

other funders who have done this work? Who’s doing it in

my region? How might I contact them? The directory

allows you to search leadership programs by the target

population they serve, by the type of program model, by

the region the program is in, by the type of financial sup-

port they offer.

■ Links to resources on specific topics. Most grant makers

entering this field of work do a scan of the field. What we’ve

been trying to do is build a central repository of this experi-

ence – so that each funder doesn’t have to redo that work.

Then, if they want to go deeper, they can build on the

research that has already been done. You can tap into this

knowledge base of the learning community on our Web site.

It’s organized around themes such as evaluation, curricu-

lum, diversity, or alumni development.

In addition to these scans conducted by foundations,

there’s a resource guide on evaluation. We also post mate-

rial that goes beyond the experiences of individual partici-

pants, for example, summary notes from focus groups with

youth on interethnic leadership.

Q. How can grant makers build connections to other people

working on leadership?

A. Members can join virtual learning communities on topics

such as technology or evaluation, and they can participate in

face-to-face conversations with other grant makers, practi-

tioners, and scholars working on leadership in their regions.

(There’s a list of these regional learning circles on our Web

site.) One of the really compelling things that led to our creat-

ing this community is that there don’t seem to be nearly

enough forums where grant makers can sit down in partner-

ship with practitioners — not necessarily their own grantees,

but people working in a common interest area or a field — and

be partners in problem solving.

THE LEADERSHIP LEARNING COMMUNITY: A RESOURCE FOR GRANT MAKERS AND PRACTITIONERS

You may already have begun a processof exploration to determine whetherleadership development is an appropri-ate path for your organization. Our con-tributors encourage you to be clearabout why you want to fund leadershipdevelopment and what you hope toachieve through this work. They sug-gest having internal conversations withstaff, senior management, and trusteesas well as focus groups with granteesto explore questions such as:

■ How can support for leadershipdevelopment contribute to thechange you want to promote?

■ What leadership practices do youvalue most and want to support?

■ What type of support would makethe greatest difference?

■ How close do you want your organi-zation to be to the leadership pro-

gram? How involved do you want tobe in recruitment, selection, andoperation of the program?

■ Are there existing leadership devel-opment programs that can serve theneed you have identified, or do youneed to create a new program?

BUILDING INTERNAL SUPPORT FORLEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENTLeadership development is a departurefrom the traditional culture of grantmaking, which works through organi-zations. A leadership development pro-gram may require a different level ofadministrative support to handle thefrequent contacts with individuals. Ifthere is not strong endorsement fromsenior levels of management, grantmakers involved in leadership develop-ment sometimes feel isolated withintheir own organizations.

Comparing outcomes associated withleadership development programs andthose attached to other kinds of grantprojects can be like comparing applesand oranges. The results of leadershipdevelopment will be revealed over amuch longer time span, and may notlend themselves to quantifiable mea-surement. These differences can makeit difficult for grant makers to make thecase for leadership developmentinvestments within their organization.

It can also be a challenge to build con-nections between the leadership par-ticipants and other program areas ofyour foundation. As one grant makerobserved:

“We have tried to build connections,but it is difficult. Our commitment is tofind new leaders as well as peoplealready identified by the foundation.


What are the management issues to consider?

A grant maker described the process one foundation used to develop a regional lead-

ership program for health care managers:

“We started with focus groups around the region, asking people from our communi-

ties what they would want. We hired two contractors, one in health to survey the

health field, and one who conducted a national search of executive leadership pro-

grams. After a full survey, we took our findings into a focus group again to look at

what was out there and to begin identifying common aspects of these programs.”

“After more sustained learning, we did a comprehensive RFP to coordinating agencies

in the western United States. We had for-profit, not-for-profit and academic institu-

tions. We selected one that had run programs and had lots of experience. They were

part of a health policy center and connected with a business school that had done

lots of research on leadership. They had some evidence about what works because

of their research around the world. We wanted to be confident that we were select-

ing someone with content background and also, as a new program, we wanted some-

one with credibility and the perception of quality.”


EXPLORING THE FIELD

Most of the folks are not our grantees,so it’s a double-edged sword. If theyare not already grantees, it’s hard toconvince [our colleagues] that peopleoutside their own selection processwarrant support.”

On the other hand, some contributorsto this guide received strong supportfor leadership development within theirfoundations, including from foundationpresidents and board members whohad had personal experience withleadership development programs.Another contributor observed thatbecause his trustees were from a cor-porate background, they were verycomfortable with the concept of invest-ing in individuals.

Grant makers with experience in lead-ership development advise that thereare a number of ways you can engageothers in your organization andincrease internal support for leadershipdevelopment:

■ Create opportunities for senior man-agers and trustees to interact withprogram participants at receptions,site visits, and project presentations.

■ Invite program officers from yourorganization to participate in keytraining opportunities.

■ Develop a mentoring programmatching participants with programstaff in your organization.

■ Align focus areas of your leadershipprogram with grant making programareas of your organization, so therewill be increased benefits from theintelligence brought by participants.

■ Structure program staff interests intothe program in the beginning, withan explicit expectation about their

portfolios helping to underwrite the program.

MANAGING AND FUNDINGLEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

Our contributors describe three basicapproaches to managing and fundingleadership development:

■ Supporting existing nonprofit leader-ship programs with a proven trackrecord is a valuable option.

■ Working with intermediaries todevelop and run a program isanother option for many grant mak-ers who do not have the internalcapacity to address a specific leader-ship niche but want to work with apartner on the design and operationof a program.

■ Finally, some foundations developand run leadership programs them-selves.

Each approach has advantages anddisadvantages that need to be consid-ered in light of the goals of the leader-ship program and your organization’soverall values.

When does it make sense to supportexisting leadership developmentprograms? Many existing programsprovide opportunities for grant makersentering the field to accomplish theirleadership objectives. You can findshort profiles and links to a number ofexisting leadership programs throughthe directory at www.leadershiplearn-ing.org. Some of the advantages ofsupporting existing programs include:

■ You can build on a known trackrecord. Existing leadership develop-ment programs have a record ofaccomplishment and established


alumni networks. As one grantmaker suggested, “Look at programsthat are out there that could bring alot of added value because theyalready have national networks.Even if a program does not exist toaddress a specific focus, maybe itcould be developed as part of anexisting program that already under-stands leadership development.”

■ Working with established organi-zations can be efficient. It may costless to support an existing programthat already has infrastructure, sys-tems, and connections to communi-ties or fields you want to supportthan to start a new one.

■ Good programs need support.Funding existing programs or work-ing with established programs toadapt their work to your needs willhelp strengthen the field of leader-ship development. The manager ofone such program observed: “Weface significant funding challenges,

because typically foundations investin and brand their own leadershipprograms and then don’t invest inexisting programs, because theyalready do leadership development.”

When is it helpful to work with aleadership development intermediary?Contributors chose to work with inter-mediaries for several reasons:

■ It can reduce the administrativeburden. Running a leadership pro-gram is time-consuming and can becomplex. Administering programs isnot part of the experience or cultureof many foundations, but an interme-diary may already have the staff andsystems in place to do it.

■ Partners can add value. In additionto administrative capacity, an inter-mediary can bring program develop-ment experience, a leadershipcurriculum, training resources, and adiverse staff. Intermediaries canoften develop a more candid rela-tionship with participants and canbe more available to them for adviceand technical assistance.

■ Distance can be helpful.Establishing an intermediary as abridge between the funder and theleadership program can help to cre-ate a “safe space” for program par-ticipants. This is especially helpfulwhen the funder is located in thesame community as the leadershipparticipants.

One grant maker describes the benefitsand challenges of working with a part-ner this way:

“If you are really going to hand it over,you have to trust the coordinatingagency. We don’t have much time for


SELECTING INTERMEDIARIES

Most grant makers use a competitive RFP process to find and identify partners.

Common values are very important among the selection criteria. Grant makers also

consistently stress the importance of selecting a partner with the ability to recruit

and work with diverse groups. As one grant maker described the decision, “We

picked our partner because they were very diverse and close to the ground, with the

ability to generate a pool of candidates who were not the usual suspects.”

Another concern is the extent to which leadership development is central to the inter-

mediary’s mission. One grant maker observed, “We wanted to make sure that this

program was at the core of their interest and not an ‘add on’ that would take them in

an entirely new direction. We developed a list of 23 potential partners and invited this

group to apply. We got 19 proposals and went through a selection process. We

selected four and looked for those who also brought resources to the table,

especially with regard to outreach.”

Working with intermediaries.

What has been your experience with

different types of intermediaries —

nonprofit support centers, universi-

ties/academic centers, etc.? What are

the pros and cons of each as an

intermediary? To share your

thoughts, send us a note through our

Web site at: www.grantcraft.org/

contact.html

day-to-day design work, so our func-tion is to brainstorm and to act ascheckpoints. We meet every threemonths on the latest design work. It isdifficult to find the right people to doit in the way that you, the grantmaker, think it needs to be done,because any institution that is stronghas its own culture and experiences. It takes real stretching to find thecommon ground.”

But working with an intermediary canalso reduce opportunities for the grantmaker’s own firsthand learning.Observed one grant maker,

“The biggest downside to working withan intermediary is that it creates aunique and ambiguous relationship,because the person directing the pro-gram is not a foundation employee.”

Should you run a leadership develop-ment program as an operating pro-gram of your own organization?Although operating a program within agrant-making organization is laborintensive, a number of contributors tothis guide have chosen this route anddescribe some of the advantages:

■ Building connections is easier. Theleadership program participants andgrant makers develop a much closerrelationship and a greater under-standing of each other’s interests.

■ The leadership program can be asource of human capital. It can be agreat training field for potential foun-dation consultants, staff, and boardmembers. Over half of the membersof one foundation board were gradu-ates of leadership programs spon-sored by the foundation. Theprogram can also provide staff devel-opment opportunities for those clos-

est to the program and foundation-wide, and an opportunity for first-hand learning about issues on theground.

■ Operating it yourself gives greatercontrol and more opportunities forlearning. By keeping the programclose, especially during the develop-ment stages, the grant maker hasmore control over the extent towhich the program design and deliv-ery will reflect the funder’s values,principles, and desired results. Amore hands-on relationship alsogives the grant maker more opportu-nities for firsthand learning fromprogram participants.

They can be eyes and ears for thegrant maker in identifying importanttrends, innovations, models, andpotential grantees. This closer con-nection can be helpful to leaders aswell, potentially giving them greateraccess to the foundation’s financialresources and contacts.

■ There may not be other options.There may be no other organizationsin a specific region or field that canprovide the needed level of leader-ship development support.

One grant maker shares advice aboutdeciding on the right approach:

“Distinguishing work that is ’missioncritical’ or not may determine howclose you want your leadership pro-gram to be and how much input youwant to have over it. Our program isseen as signature work of the founda-tion. If you give it to a grantee, itbecomes their program funded by you.You need to decide early on: How doyou want it to be known? How muchinfluence do you want to have?”


COST AND TIME INVOLVED

How much time and money is it goingto take? Several contributors felt it wasimportant to emphasize the founda-tion’s values when assessing the effortand costs of investing in leadershipdevelopment.

The amount of grant-making resourcesthat leadership development programsdemand — that is, the amount of pro-gram staff time and money — willdepend on a number of factors. Thesefactors include:

■ Operating structure. Running a pro-gram in-house will be more laborintensive than making a grant to anexisting program or contracting withan intermediary. But a number ofcontributors caution against trying toreduce costs and time by under-funding intermediaries or existingleadership programs. They note thatif it is labor intensive and costly for afoundation to run a leadership devel-opment program, it will also be

costly for their partners. Contributorsconsistently underscored the impor-tance of investing for the long haul.

■ Level of interaction with programparticipants. Even when usingintermediaries, many grant makersmaintain a high level of interactionwith the program because the per-sonal contact with recipients isrewarding. The design and selectionperiods may be the most intensiveperiods of involvement, but coaching,training, and alumni relations mayalso require staff or volunteer time.

■ The financial awards offered. Theawards to the individual participantsand/or their organizations are poten-tially one of the most costly compo-nents of a leadership developmentprogram. Programs that provide thefunds to help participants to imple-ment a new program or service, or tocreate a new organization, requiresignificant resources.

■ Geographic focus. Decisions aboutwhether to draw leaders locally,regionally, or nationally have costimplications for travel and lodgingexpenses, as well as for the recruit-ing and selection process.

■ Scale of the program. The numberof participants, the number of timesparticipants are convened, and theduration of the program are otherfactors with cost implications.

•••••

Planning for the future. In

addition to charging fees to partici-

pants, are there other methods grant

makers or program operators have

used to sustain leadership programs

beyond the initial funding period? To

share your thoughts, send us a note

through our Web site at:


SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES

Experienced grant makers advise that you should begin thinking early about how

and whether a leadership program will continue to operate over time. Many grant

makers make a long-term commitment to support the work of the intermediaries

that operate their leadership programs. Others encourage the intermediaries to

diversify their funding base. This can be difficult if a leadership program is already

seen as the signature program of a single foundation

When the plan for the program is ultimately to be funded by diverse sources, it may

be helpful to approach other potential funders at the very beginning. This will

broaden the ownership of the program and enable funding partners to help design a

program that meets their needs and program interests. Before launching a new pro-

gram, one grant maker investing in regional community leadership initiatives asked

local community foundations if they would consider supporting the intermediaries if

the program was achieving its objectives.


Whether you are planning to create aleadership program yourself or to workwith an existing program, recruitmentand selection of participants areimportant variables with the power toshape the outcomes of a leadershipdevelopment program. The pool ofapplicants and the choices you (andyour partner) make among themshould reflect your specific goals forthe leadership development program,as well as the overall goals and oper-ating style of your organization.

■ For example, if your goal is toenhance the skills, status, or effec-tiveness of leaders and their orga-nizations, you may want to recruitparticipants from among your ownorganization’s grantees as a way tonarrow the field of potential candi-dates.

■ If the focus of your leadership pro-gram is to provide leaders withopportunities for renewal andreflection, you may want to targetexperienced rather than emergingleaders.

■ Grant makers for whom leadershipdevelopment programming is anopportunity to support grassrootswork will need to adopt, or encour-age their partner to adopt, recruit-ment and selection strategies thatidentify community leaders who maybe unknown to them.

■ Similarly, if your goal is toincrease the diversity of leadershipin a field, you or a grantee partnerwill need to find recruitment andselection strategies that reachbeyond the usual circles. (SeeLooking for Applicants Outside theUsual Circles on page 22.)

■ If you want to encourage interdis-ciplinary approaches to solvingsocial problems, your recruitmentand selection process would bedesigned to yield a cohort of leadersfrom diverse disciplines and settings.

While most contributors agree that astrong pool of applicants is desirable,experienced grant makers warn thatreviewing every application you receivecan be slow and costly. One contributordescribed her surprise when therecruitment process generated morethan 3,000 applicants for 20 places inher foundation’s leadership program.Before opening up the recruitment pro-cess, it is a good idea to think aboutand plan for how you will manage theresponse to the applications you get. Toreduce the burden on both applicantsand reviewers, some leadership pro-grams use a two-tiered approach, witha short initial application form at first,and then a more extensive applicationfor a smaller pool.

RECRUITMENT STRATEGIES

These are some of the strategies forrecruitment and outreach that our con-tributors recommend:

■ Use nominators with expertise ina particular field. For programs tar-geting a specific population or set ofissues, the use of nominators withexpertise or contacts in that com-munity or field can help narrow thesearch for appropriate candidates. Anumber of grant makers rely ontheir own grantees, programalumni, and well-known commu-nity-based organizations to gener-ate nominees. A nominationsprocess has the advantage of being


How to recruit and select participants

THINKING ABOUT THECOHORT AS A WHOLE

As you design a recruitment strategy,

it’s important to think about the fac-

tors that contribute to a cohesive

group, including some common level

of experience. One participant,

reflecting on a recent leadership pro-

gram experience, observed that “the

level of experience of the participants

was too diverse. All were executive

directors, but some were new and

had no previous experience. I felt

more like a mentor, and that I was

contributing to others, rather than

getting something out of it. It was a

big investment of time compared to

what I got out of it.”

a way to control the number ofapplicants. It also is a mechanism toidentify people who would notlearn about the program throughtypical outreach avenues and whomight not see themselves as lead-ers, or who might need additionalencouragement to apply. Many ofthe grant makers who used nomi-nators also publicized their pro-grams and encouragedself-nomination. One contributoridentified an additional benefit tousing nominators:

“Then participants are nominated bysomeone who knows their work, wehave someone we can go back tolater for their feedback. We can askthem about changes in the partici-pant’s organization and leadership.”

■ Conduct an outreach campaign:A number of contributors use anopen recruitment campaign and dis-tribute applications through commu-nity-based organizations, otherfoundations, nonprofit managementcenters, universities, Web sites, lead-ership development networks, andformer program graduates.

■ Target your recruitment to increasethe diversity of your pool. Manycontributors described the need torecruit a diverse pool of participantsas core to their values and to theaccomplishment of their programgoals. They underscored the needto create new pipelines as part oftheir recruitment campaigns. As onegrant maker explained, “To developa deep understanding of whatdivides communities and come upwith innovative ways of solvingproblems, you have to include folks

that are legitimate representativesof their communities.”

Another grant maker described howprogram participants applied theirunderstanding of diversity to benefitthe leadership program:

“We did not get the diversity wewanted in our first applicant pool,so we asked one of the teams totake this on as their project. Theychanged the materials to includephotos of who we wanted to recruit,they looked at outreach and devel-oped new mailing lists, and theylooked at our language.”

■ Make the application process “userfriendly” and accessible. Considermaking the initial inquiry very short,with an expanded application issuedto a smaller number of candidates,and consider translating the applica-tion for people whose first languageis not English.

SELECTION PROCESS

Grant makers or their grantee part-ners typically use teams of advisersor readers to help them choose amongapplicants. Readers may include theirown program staff, field experts, pro-gram alumni, community representa-tives, academics, and representatives ofintermediaries and of other founda-tions. Advisers may be paid as consul-tants or serve as volunteers. They maymeet as a group or provide feedbackindividually. Sometimes it is helpful touse a score sheet or other methods,such as having more than one readerfor the same application, to make surethe review is evenhanded. (See theGrantCraft guide Using Competitionsand RFPs — page 11, Working with


LOOKING FOR APPLICANTSOUTSIDE THE USUAL CIRCLES

Contributors to this guide suggest

some of the following techniques to

recruit outside the usual circles:

■ Expand your search to include

community colleges and commu-

nity bulletin boards.

■ Recognize that not every good

candidate has the skills to produce

a good proposal or application.

Hold technical assistance semi-

nars to help them with the applica-

tion process.

■ Personalize your recruitment by

visiting with organizations doing

good community work and asking

them for recommendations.

■ Ask for help from a diverse pool of

grantees.

■ Be sure that your partners, appli-

cation readers, nominators, and

selection committee reflect the

diversity you want to achieve.

Open application or nomina-

tions? GrantCraft is interested

in your experiences with using open

applications versus nominations. Let

us know how each of these two

strategies met your program goals.




Advisers — for a discussion aboutadvisers and their roles.)

How will you handle interviews?Contributors commonly used advisers toconduct interviews of individual appli-cants, and some look for additionalinformation about how candidates willbehave within their cohort.

For example, some grant makers use agroup problem-solving exercise in theselection process. It can show whoworks well in a group, who is inclu-sive, and who leaves people out. Thebenefit of this exercise, according toone grant maker, is that, “there aresome folks who are used to takingcharge and others who will follow. Itshows who works well together, whohas the potential to work well together,and who leaves who out.”

The interview process itself can be ofbenefit to the applicants. For example,one program conducts interviews overa two-day period. When not beinginterviewed, applicants spend timewith each other and hear from expertspeakers.


SHOULD YOU RECRUIT INDIVIDUALS OR TEAMS?

There has been some debate among leadership development practitioners about

whether the practice of selecting individuals for leadership development programs is

divisive to communities because it may be perceived as anointing leaders and recog-

nizing a few individuals for the collective contributions of many. Some contributors

also expressed concern about the potential loss to organizations if leadership

program participants use their new skills and networks to leave their organizations

and advance their careers. Others view the transition of leaders to new roles as a sign

of their increased influence and leadership success.

Grant makers have responded to this debate about the dangers of uprooting or

singling out leaders by adopting a variety of strategies:

■ Looking at leadership as a collective effort within a community. Leadership pro-

grams that acknowledge the community context for leadership reflect the reality of

how work actually gets done. As one grant maker observed, providing learning

opportunities to individuals may allow them to apply their new skills on behalf of

social change, but “some participants also report their frustrations as the lone

voice for change in resistant organizations.” By selecting teams in communities

where there is already broader support and readiness for change, this grant maker

hopes give participants a greater chance of achieving their goals.

■ Focusing on systemwide leadership. One grant maker described a program that

provides leadership development for teams of people engaged in key systems

within a community, like education or health care. This approach enables partici-

pants to see themselves as working for change within a larger field.

■ Locating opportunities to support shared leadership. There may be other ways to

broaden the reach of a leadership program. “Even where individuals are chosen,”

said one grant maker, “we decided to have them invite two additional people from

their programs to attend the four meetings.”

On the other hand, there are times when bringing people together from the same

organization can make it difficult to have a candid discussion because of power

dynamics among trustees, executive directors, and staff. One grant maker held a

focus group to decide whether to support an individual or team approach, observing

“we thought you might need a few people to implement change.” Based on the dis-

cussion, this grant maker decided to support an individual model, because “people

speak more freely than they would with colleagues present.”

What about those not selected?

The application process is likely

to generate many more strong appli-

cations than you can support. Are

there other ways to work with appli-

cants who aren’t chosen for the lead-

ership program?




Research and evaluation can help grantmakers to understand whether leader-ship development programs are effec-tively designed and implemented, andwhether they are having the desiredeffects. As a grant maker in youthdevelopment put it, “The big questionis how do you know what works. Inthe long run how will we know if ourwork with fellows has had an impacton the kids and families? It is importantto figure out how you would definesuccess, what would be some of theproxy indicators that you would use sothat you know whether what you aredoing is making the kind of differenceyou want to make.”

Research and evaluation also help inpinpointing what factors contribute tosuccessful leadership, and what leadersneed in order to function effectively. Inthis regard, useful research may takethe form not just of scholarly inquiry,but reflection on practical learning aswell. For example, one contributordescribed drawing from the work ofleadership program participants todevelop learning in the field: “A majorelement of our program is the researchpiece. Our decisions about how to do it,and insistence that it be practitionerinformed, came from concern that liter-ature [about leadership] is not alwaysuseful because it is not grounded inpractice and does not reflect the com-plexity of practice.”

As you think through what kind oflearning about leadership developmentyou want to accomplish, experiencedgrant makers recommend that you con-sider such questions as:

■ What are you trying to achievethrough your leadership invest-ment? Deciding up front what kindsof results you want (for example,individual, organizational, commu-nity, or field impacts) will help toframe the evaluation questions andsuggest indicators of success. Onegrant maker framed these questionsthis way:

“Making an investment in individualsmeans we are not making programservice grants. So the litmus test is,how do you show results? This isn’tlike making a service grant whereyou show the number of peopleserved and the board thinks it’sswell. How do you show thatinvesting in people for $200,000 isas valuable as the services youcould have bought?”

■ Who is the audience for the learn-ing or evaluation? Is it the partici-pants themselves, the staffimplementing the program, the grantmaker’s board of trustees, or abroader audience outside your orga-nization? Different audiences mayhave different needs for information.

■ What approaches, methods, andsources of information are mostsuited to the type of learning youneed to do? An evaluation thatseeks to document the program’simpact on social change in the largercommunity will ask different ques-tions and use different approachesthan one that tries to document per-sonal change experienced byindividual leaders.

Research and evaluation issues:What do you want to learn?

WORKING WITH PRACTITIONERS TO CO-PRODUCE KNOWLEDGE

“Our focus is to understand the work

that leaders do rather than try to

understand the characteristics that

leaders have.”

Sonia Ospina, Associate Professor of PublicManagement and Policy

Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Policy, New York University

Bringing scholars and practitioners

together to co-prodcuce knowledge is

a new approach to bridging the gap

between leadership theory and prac-

tice. To learn more about this

approach and an example of how it

has been implemented by Ospina

and colleagues, go to:

http://www.grantcraft.org/catalog/

guides/leadership/links.html


EVALUATING IMPACT:APPROACHES, METHODS ANDSOURCES OF INFORMATION

The W.K. Kellogg Foundation commis-

sioned a review of the evaluation

experiences of 55 leadership devel-

opment programs, and identified

some of the ways that these pro-

grams evaluated the outcomes and

impact of their work with leaders.1

For excerpts from this report, as well

as a link to the complete text, go to:

http://www.grantcraft.org/catalog/

guides/leadership/links.html

1 Evaluating Outcomes and Impacts: A Scan of 55Evaluations. By Claire Reinelt, DevelopmentGuide/DDI, August 2002.


■ Include funds in program grant bud-gets for leadership seminars, confer-ence attendance, individual retreats,staff retreats, staff development,leadership coaching, field study trips,and travel costs associated withthese types of activities.

■ Make technical assistance and lead-ership development support, such ascoaching, available to executivedirectors, staff, board members, andconstituents.

■ Review grants for their attention toindividual and team development,and emphasize the importance ofsuch issues in grant guidelines andin counseling applicants.

■ Support organizations that payattention to developing the leader-

ship of their constituents and thatpromote them to significant board orstaff positions.

■ Recognize the work of exceptionalgrantees — for instance, through anaward ceremony, newsletter, letterfrom the foundation president,breakfasts, etc.

■ Support efforts to convene leadersacross organizations by introducinggrantee leaders to one another, bybuilding opportunities for conveningthem into grant budgets, and byoffering them foundation meetingspace.

■ Include a discussion of leadership inyour organization’s annual reportsand program publications and onyour Web site.

Additional ways to support leaders

Communications strategies.

Do you have examples of effec-

tive ways that grant makers and pro-

gram operators communicate with

the broader public about leaders and

leadership? To share your thoughts,

send us a note through our Web site


There are many ways to support grantees’ leadership devel-

opment needs, both on the individual and organizational level.

Some of the ideas shared by our contributors about leadership

development can also be incorporated into other parts of an

organization’s grant making programs and strategies, either

instead of or in addition to more traditional leadership pro-

grams. Here are a few suggestions:

■ Be really clear about what you wantto accomplish. Before launching aleadership development program, it isimportant to identify what kinds ofoutcomes you hope to achieve, and atwhat level — individual, organiza-tional, community, or field?

■ Consider working with an existingprogram. It is important to thinkabout how much ownership of theleadership program your organiza-tion wants or needs to have.Contributors to this guide consis-tently emphasize the importance oflooking at what is out there and sup-porting it when possible. As onegrant maker urged, “The field hasreally exploded in terms of numbers.Now we can’t name the programs.Don’t be territorial but collaborative.See what else is being done.”

■ Build internal support for your lead-ership development program. Grantmakers emphasize that it is importantto build relationships between thestaff and trustees of your organizationand the leadership development pro-gram and its participants.

■ Pay attention to diversity instaffing, partnering, selection, andcurriculum. “Look at the various lev-

els at which leadership happens.Think about the limitations of the’best and brightest’ approach.Without a new funding pipeline youwon’t advance the community.” Addsanother grant maker: “Diversify yourstaffing. It is of the utmost impor-tance. You have to be the changeyou want.”

■ Invest in the alumni component ofyour leadership development pro-gram. “There is an almost criminalunder-use of the graduates of theseprograms as resources for socialchange. God forbid anyone shouldsay there are 3,000 people inAmerica, passionate around someeducation reform possibility, and thatone could identify, communicatewith, and mobilize them aroundsome specific change opportunity!What a waste of a precious resourcein the one society most organizedaround advocacy!”

■ Be prepared to make a long-terminvestment. “Anyone who supportsleadership development throughfunding needs to commit to a long-term experience to see the conse-quences, learn the lessons, and buildcritical mass.”

26 I NVE ST I NG I N I N DIVI DUALS: S UPPO RT I NG LE ADE RSH I P DEVE LOPM E NT PRO G RAMS

Key lessons from grant makers

WHERE THE EXAMPLES COME FROMThis guide explores the experiences of grant makers and others who have supported leadership development in a vari-

ety of settings and reflect the practical wisdom they have acquired. More than 50 grant makers and leadership devel-

opment program directors, intermediaries, and consultants generously and candidly shared their time, experiences, and

learning about funding leadership development. Grant makers contributing to this guide came from large and small

foundations and national, regional and community foundations. The ideas and suggestions they shared represent a

broad range of leadership development program models in education, health, children and families, racial justice, youth

and many other fields.

This guide was written not only forgrant makers who may be consideringgrants in the field of leadership devel-opment, but for anyone interested inleadership and in ways of cultivating,improving, and promoting it.

Most efforts in philanthropy (maybe all)depend to some extent on the energy,vision, and skill of the people who leadthem. So even if leadership develop-ment isn’t a central objective of yourgrant making, this guide may be help-ful as a lens though which to look atother fields of interest and to considerhow your grants affect leaders andleadership in that field.

The guide could then serve as a spring-board for conversations on that topicwith other people who are important toyour work (including the people youlook to for leadership). For instance:

■ With your board: The people wholead your organization may have adistinctive perspective on the leader-ship of the causes they care mostabout, how effective that leadershipis, and how your organization cancontribute to making it better. Theguide could help draw board mem-bers’ attention to the possibilities ofleadership development and raisequestions for board and staff mem-bers to explore together.

■ With grantees: All grants affectleadership, though not all grant mak-ing is designed with that fact inmind. This guide could provide back-ground for a discussion withgrantees on how the grants theyreceive contribute to their own lead-ership, and how other grants supportthe people and organizations on

whose leadership they depend. Theguide might even help grant makerssolicit ideas and proposals for futuregrant making in this area.

■ With colleagues, advisers, and out-side experts: If you are seekingadvice on aspects of leadership, orlooking for consultants, intermedi-aries, or others to help in shaping aleadership program, this guide mighthelp you and them outline someissues to explore and begin formulat-ing ideas.


How did you use this guide?

Please let us know if this guide has

been helpful to you, and if so, how

you used it, with whom, and with

what result. To share your thoughts,

send us a note through our Web site


Anna Alves Carl AnthonyJohn Archabal Joe Bookmyer Brandi Brimmer Rich Callahan Connie Robinson Chan Cynthia Chavez Elora Chowdhury Dayna CunninghamLinetta Gilbert Karen Hansen Ilene Harris Julie Holdaway Alan Jenkins Zahra Kassam Felicia Khan Peter Kim Marian Krauskopf Jim Krile Stewart Kwoh Khari La Marca Michelle Larkin Janet Maughan Heather McCloud

Maureen McNulty Dorothy Meehan Barbara Miller Joyce Moock Jacob Moody Sonia Ospina Connie Pechura Kris Putnam Yvette Pye Cheryl Rogers Lynn Rothstein Hector Salgado Surita Sandosham Paul Schmidt Robert Sherman Donna Stark Alvin Starks Kathy Stevens Frank Taylor Sue Vandiver Scott Velders Michael Wald Gladys Washington Donele Wilkins Odin Zackman

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

Babcock Foundation Blandin Foundation Bush Foundation The California Endowment The California Wellness Foundation Annie E. Casey Foundation Community Technology Foundation Community-University Health Care Center Coro Northern California S.H. Cowell Foundation Detroiters Working for Environmental Justice Echoing Green Foundation Environmental Careers Organization Eureka Communities Ford Foundation Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund Hewlett Foundation Robert Wood Johnson Foundation W.K. Kellogg Foundation Leadership Learning Community Open Society Institute Public Allies Putnam and Associates Rockefeller Foundation

Saga Leadership Foundation San Diego Grantmakers Sierra Health Foundation Southern California Association for Philanthropy Surdna Foundation Trustee Leadership Development The Unbroken Circle Wagner Graduate School of Public Service

- New York UniversityWomen's Health Leadership Women's Resource Agency, Inc.

PROJECT CONSULTANTS Tony Proscio, Editor Erika Shatz, AdviserKen Casey,

Creative Direction Dillon/Thompson, Design

We wish to thank the grant makers and grantees who generously shared their experiences and insights, as well as those whose contributions of time, talent,and perspective have helped to make this guide possible.

Other ways to use this guide

grantcraftP R A C T I C A L W I S D O M F O R G R A N T M A K E R S

w w w. g r a n t c r a f t . o r gA P R O J E C T O F T H E F O R D F O U N D AT I O N

R e c y c l e d P a p e r

Investing in-individuals 0

Business

Transcript of Investing in-individuals 0