The Jackie Kallen Foundation has established a very structured and transparent “checks and balances” system for its philanthropic arm. Using an advisory board to vet applications ensures that the decision-making process is objective and grounded in specific expertise before it ever reaches the final approval stage.
Based on your description, here is a breakdown of how that workflow functions:
The Philanthropic Review Process
| Phase | Responsible Party | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Submission | Applicants | Submit formal requests for philanthropic funding. |
| Vetting | Advisory Board | Review applications based on diverse criteria points (impact, financial need, alignment with mission, etc.). |
| Synthesis | Chairperson | Consolidates all individual scores and feedback into a unified report. |
| Final Decision | The Board | Receives the Chairperson’s recommendations to make the final “go/no-go” funding decisions. |
Why This Model Works
- Expert Diversity: By using an advisory board with “different types of criteria,” you ensure the foundation isn’t just looking at the numbers, but also at the human impact and long-term viability of the project.
- Efficiency for the Board: The Board of Directors doesn’t get bogged down in the initial paperwork. They receive a curated list of high-quality recommendations, allowing them to focus on high-level strategy.
- Integrity: Having the Chairperson consolidate the findings acts as a filter to ensure the recommendations strictly follow the advisory board’s consensus.
Note: This “multi-tier” review process is a gold standard in professional grant-making. it minimizes bias and ensures that the foundation’s capital goes exactly where it can do the most good.