Podcast Summary: The Smart Communications Podcast
Episode 196 – How can you engage in participatory grantmaking?
Release Date: October 1, 2025
Host: Farah Trim Peter (Big Duck)
Guests: Cynthia Gibson, Ph.D. (Principal, Synthesis Consulting), Kelly Buhls (Consultant and Participatory Grantmaking Practitioner)
Overview
This episode explores participatory grantmaking (PGM)—a model shifting philanthropic power by centering decision-making with communities affected by issues, rather than with foundations or donors. Farah Trim Peter leads a deep-dive conversation with two experts: Cynthia Gibson, co-editor of the recent book Participatory Grant Making in Philanthropy, and seasoned practitioner Kelly Buhls. Together, they discuss what PGM means in practice, its relationship to trust-based philanthropy, how PGM addresses systemic inequity and crisis, and practical ways for nonprofits and funders to advance PGM in their work—especially in times of urgency and uncertainty.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. Defining Participatory Grantmaking
[03:25—05:00]
- PGM shifts power: Communities traditionally impacted by issues are given real decision-making authority over grants, including priorities, criteria, and strategy.
- Difference from traditional models: Not just about giving feedback or input, but sharing or ceding genuine decision-making power.
- Ethos, not just tactic: PGM should shape not only funding decisions but also the internal culture of foundations and their organizational structures.
“Decision making is the key word here and suggests what we’re calling authentic participation, which goes beyond people giving just input or feedback. Those are necessary but insufficient if you really want to get to power sharing.”
— Cynthia Gibson [04:26]
2. PGM and Trust-Based Philanthropy: Differences and Overlaps
[05:47—09:06]
- Origins and skepticism: Current reporting and oversight standards in philanthropy emerged from “strategic philanthropy,” a paradigm that emphasizes control and measurement.
- PGM as systemic response: By ceding ownership of the process to affected communities, philanthropy becomes more democratic and just; unrestricted and multi-year grants often result organically.
- Overlap with trust-based philanthropy: Both champion trust and lower barriers, but PGM uniquely puts final decision-making in community hands.
“When you cede decision making to communities, they choose to make unrestricted grants, they choose to make multi year grants.”
— Kelly Buhls [07:26]
- Cynthia offers a matrix from her book comparing trust-based philanthropy, giving circles, crowdfunding, etc., based on how and where decision-making power is distributed.
3. Communicating the Deeper Purpose of PGM
[09:47—12:17]
- PGM addresses root causes, not just symptoms: Recognizing lived experience as expertise; “participants as equal partners” leads to fundamentally better solutions.
- Democracy in action: Relates to broader “deliberative democracy” and participatory budgeting, with research showing stronger outcomes when communities make decisions.
- Philanthropy’s origins and reparative nature: Recognizing PGM as repair for the “broken economic system,” returning resources to those from whom they were extracted.
“How does the program officer sitting behind a desk know more than the person who's living with the issues they're wanting to fund?”
— Cynthia Gibson [10:27]
4. Beyond Funding: Human Connection and Peer Solidarity
[12:34—14:25]
- PGM facilitates deep relationships: Examples of Palestinian fund RAWA offering emotional support alongside funds; Global Resilience Fund’s collaborations enabled quicker crisis response.
- Peer community: PGM communities provide a support network especially valuable for funders navigating their own power and responsibility.
“Just those human connections was really valuable.”
— Kelly Buhls [13:29]
5. Tips for Nonprofit Staff: Advocating for PGM with Funders
[15:06—20:28]
- Start small and experiment: Suggest piloting PGM with specific programs or budget lines; try integrating non-funders into boards or committees.
- No single right way: Each foundation and community is unique—customize PGM approaches accordingly.
- Evidence-based advocacy: Present studies and examples to skeptical funders; focus on process as well as outcomes.
- Relational change: Leverage relationships with open-minded staff; start with individual motivations and concerns.
“There is no right way to do this. Every relationship is different. It’s an iterative process.”
— Cynthia Gibson [18:46]
“If you’ve met one foundation, you’ve met one foundation.”
— Kelly Buhls [19:46]
6. Process Versus Product: Reframing Evaluation
[20:59—22:11]
- Value in the process: Traditional philanthropy emphasizes measurable outcomes, but PGM’s process itself builds capacity, agency, networks, and leadership—a form of movement-building.
- Measurement challenges: These “relational outcomes” are difficult and messy to assess, but crucial.
7. PGM in Times of Crisis and Scarcity
[23:06—26:42]
- PGM is more relevant than ever: Despite urgency (e.g., budget cuts and crises), PGM challenges the status quo that creates these crises in the first place.
- Faster PGM models exist: There are efficient, “ready-made” intermediaries (e.g. Brooklyn.org, Bush Foundation) who can rapidly deploy participatory processes.
- Both/and approach: Balance urgent funding needs with long-term commitment to democratizing philanthropy—don’t abandon values under pressure.
“If we’re fighting for democratic values, shouldn’t we be doing more PGM rather than less?”
— Cynthia Gibson [25:12]
8. Parting Thoughts and Calls to Action
[27:30—28:58]
- Join the PGM community: Resources and peer groups are available at participatorygrantmaking.org.
- Final “mic drop”: Staying committed to PGM reveals true values; wavering when things get tough shows performative rather than principled action.
“The real question is, will those with money, power and privilege stand strong?... This is not the time for savior design, for stepping back under the guise of ‘it’s too hard for marginalized communities.’ What’s really happening is people trying to save themselves from discomfort and from the challenge.”
— Quoted by Cynthia Gibson [28:13]
Notable Quotes
| Time | Quote | Speaker | |-----------|-------|---------| | 04:26 | “Decision making is the key word here and suggests what we’re calling authentic participation…” | Cynthia Gibson | | 07:26 | “When you cede decision making to communities, they choose to make unrestricted grants…” | Kelly Buhls | | 10:27 | “How does the program officer sitting behind a desk know more than the person who’s living with the issues they’re wanting to fund?” | Cynthia Gibson | | 13:29 | “Just those human connections was really valuable.” | Kelly Buhls | | 18:46 | “There is no right way to do this. Every relationship is different. It’s an iterative process.” | Cynthia Gibson | | 19:46 | “If you’ve met one foundation, you’ve met one foundation.” | Kelly Buhls | | 25:12 | “If we’re fighting for democratic values, shouldn’t we be doing more PGM rather than less?” | Cynthia Gibson | | 28:13 | “The real question is, will those with money, power and privilege stand strong?...” | Cynthia Gibson (quoting practitioner) |
Key Resources Mentioned
- Participatory Grantmaking Community: participatorygrantmaking.org
- Cynthia Gibson’s Publications: synthesisconsulting.com
- Kelly Buhls’s Work: bu hlesconsulting.com
Takeaways for Nonprofits and Funders
- Start where you are: Experiment with small pilots and expand.
- Embrace complexity and relationships: Change happens through authentic, sometimes "messy" relationships—not fixed templates.
- PGM is adaptable: It’s not one-size-fits-all; tailor approaches for your context.
- Don’t let urgency be an excuse: Fast, participatory processes exist and support movement-building even in crisis.
- Stay principled: Don’t abandon participatory approaches when times get tough—this is when they matter most.
For more details and resources, visit the episode transcript and links at bigduck.com/insights.
[End of summary]