Participatory grantmaking guide

Participatory grantmaking enables funders to draw on the insights and expertise of their communities to make more informed funding decisions. This guide provides an introduction for funders to this approach to grantmaking, including five case studies which illustrate how different participatory practices can be incorporated into the funding process.

Download the resource - Participatory Grantmaking: A Guide for Funders to share with your workplace and board of trustees, along with a participatory grantmaking readiness self-assessment matrix.

There is a growing recognition among funders of the need to examine where power lies in philanthropy and how it is used. With a desire to rebalance power between those who give and those who receive funding, many funders are increasingly interested in integrating participatory grantmaking into their practice. This shift challenges traditional funding approaches and aims to create a more equitable and inclusive grantmaking landscape. At the same time, communities are expressing greater expectations for funders to be relational, transparent, and responsive to the voices of lived experience.

One way to achieve this shift is by transferring decision-making power to those directly affected by the inequities that funding seeks to address. Participatory grantmaking offers a range of processes and tools that funders can use, with varying degrees of community involvement in decision-making. This resource provides practical guidance and key considerations for funders looking to begin or refine their approach to participatory grantmaking.

Inclusive: Local and diverse communities are engaged, with insights and expertise for better and more informed decision-making, and fairer and more representative allocation of resources. Lived experience brings understanding and knowledge about complex issues and a deep understanding of context.

Transparent: Open communication about how decisions are made, including criteria and processes for selecting grantees.

Collaborative and community-led: Working in partnership encourages collaboration, relationship building and trust among funders, co-funders, the community, partners, grantees and other stakeholders and supporters.

Values based: Based on values such as respect for community knowledge, trust, transparency and adaptability.

Empowering: Building the capacity and capability of community members to participate effectively in the grantmaking process.

Participatory grant-making exists on a continuum, from funder-led models to fully community-led approaches. Some funders blend traditional funding with participatory elements, creating hybrid models that increase community influence while retaining some funder oversight.

Funders might choose a hybrid funding approach for the following reason:

• Gradual transition: Funders may feel more comfortable using a hybrid model as a stepping stone in their participatory grantmaking journey.
• Capacity and risk management: Funders may want community input but need to meet compliance or fiduciary responsibilities.

This table shows different levels of participation—sharing power and responsibility—and decision-making, ranging from funder-led approaches to fully community-led initiatives. It provides examples from the range of ways that initiatives can integrate participatory grant-making principles, and implementation might involve a selection of actions across the spectrum of participation depending on the context and level of risk tolerance.

Level of participation language adapted from the International Association for Public Participation.

Every funder is at a different place regarding their openness towards devolving power and engaging with communities. The following questions are designed to help funders think about where they are on their journey, their level of readiness for participatory grantmaking, and flag areas to work on internally.

The following questions are also available as a self-assessment matrix that can be downloaded here.

Board commitment and power sharing

• Is the board willing to shift decision-making power to communities, recognising that they are not always the best people to make funding decisions. If not, what’s preventing them?
• Are the board comfortable with uncertainty and change and the challenges of participatory grantmaking compared to traditional governance and risk management approaches?
• Have you considered how to sustain participatory grantmaking beyond changes in leadership or board membership?

Organisational readiness and capacity

• Do your funding mechanisms already include some form of community participation?
• Do you have the resources to invest in building capacity and capability to ensure communities are empowered and equipped to engage in participatory grantmaking?
• Are you committed to valuing and compensating community members for their time and contribution?

Recognising community expertise and impact

• Do you believe that communities and people with lived experience should have greater control over decisions that impact them?
• If so, are you prepared to invest in participatory grantmaking that reflects community priorities and expertise?

Commitment to participation and community orientation

• Is there a strong commitment to participatory grantmaking, letting go of preconceived ideas and working in deep partnership with communities?
• Are staff prepared to listen and take on feedback from communities with lived experience and adapt their approach based on feedback?
• Does the organisation value relationship building, ensuring staff can nurture long-term connections with communities and co-funders?

Adaptability and learning mindset

• Can staff work in an emergent way? Will they be able to change parts of the process to ensure ongoing adaption and fit between practise and vision?
• Are staff supported to take risks, learn from failure, and refine approaches based on real-time insights?

Flexibility in process and timeframes

• Participatory grantmaking can take longer than expected and may evolve as it gets underway. Can the organisation accommodate shifting timeframes and evolving deliverables?
• Are you willing to work in a collaborative, iterative and process-orientated way with communities and co-funders?

Resourcing and capacity building

• Do you have the resources and time to build internal capacity for participatory grantmaking?
• Is there flexibility to integrate new approaches that may emerge?
• Are there clear roles and expectations when working with co-funders, and is the organisation prepared to support them if necessary?

Every participatory grantmaking process is different – depending on the desired level of community participation, staff experience, knowledge and skills, and organisational appetite to cede decision making power. Deciding what approach is best suited to your organisation and Board takes careful consideration, and commitment once the decision is made.

Steps you might take in a participatory grantmaking project: An example

One form of participatory grantmaking often used by funders involves recruiting a panel of community members with lived experience to design and implement the funding strategy. This includes promotion of the fund, reviewing applications and making funding decisions. The following table indicates some of the steps that might be involved in this process. However, it is not prescriptive and should be adapted to what works for your community and your context.
Note that these steps would be different for other participatory grantmaking approaches such as participatory budgeting which involves the community voting on grant allocation.

Some key considerations for setting up a community panel:

If you were considering setting up a community panel of decision makers, here are some points to think about:

• Who will the decision makers be?
• How will they be recruited?
  • Will you recruit or a community partner who is closer to those with lived experience?
  • How will you ensure the process is inclusive of those with lived experience?
  • What channels will be used to advertise for panellists?
• How will panellists be trained and supported to design the fund? For example, how funding works, how to set funding criteria, decision making processes, etc. Will you do this or a community partner who understands the process and is close to the community?
• How will panellists be supported to make decisions?
  • What will they need?
  • How can they be supported to turn down an application?
  • Do they need to be briefed on how to declare and manage a conflict of interest?
• How will panellists be compensated for their time and knowledge?
• Have they been told realistically how long it will take and what it will involve?
• Will you have a relationship with the panellists once they’ve finished? What will this involve?
• What are you doing to safeguard the panellists? (See resource on safeguarding, section 10 of this guide).

In addition to the fund to be dispersed to grantees, an operating budget needs to be allocated to cover things like:

• Paying panellists or community members in recognition of their knowledge and experience (including time contributed, mileage, covering food, etc).
• A fee for a community partner if they are engaged to support panellists to deliver the fund.
• Modifications to funding portals to make it easy for panellists to access, particularly when reviewing applications.
• Additional staff time to recruit, train, support panellists, be responsive and available to engage with community members.

Funders may ask whether there is evidence that PGM is more effective than other ways of distributing funds and is more likely to deliver innovative solutions. A traditional approach to evaluating outcomes and impacts of PGM initiatives may inadvertently reinforce existing power dynamics, overlook the importance of process and community involvement, and fail to capture the qualitative and iterative nature of participatory practices.

The effectiveness of participatory grantmaking should be assessed with evaluation approaches that are inclusive, flexible, and process-oriented, emphasising the meaningful involvement of all stakeholders. This approach helps build trust and ensures that the nuanced and incremental changes brought about by participatory practices are accurately captured and valued.

In 2023 and 2024, the Centre for Social Impact conducted five evaluative case studies on participatory grantmaking projects. These highlight participatory grantmaking in practice, and how different participatory processes can be incorporated. The following table summarises the case studies. Contact Foundation North if you’d like to receive a copy of the case studies. Email: info@foundationnorth.org.nz

Background and purpose: The Asian Artists Fund was established in 2022, co-funded by Foundation North and Creative New Zealand aiming to increase participation and opportunities for Asian artists in Auckland and Northland. Subsequent iterations of the fund in 2023, and again in 2024, enabled evolution of the fund towards greater devolution of power to the Asian artist community.

Design and decision-making: Key stakeholders from the Asian artist community, supported by Foundation North staff, helped shape the fund’s structure. The final funding recommendations were made by Asian artists, with final decisions by the Foundation North CEO.

Promotion and capability building: The fund was introduced through a dedicated landing page on Foundation North’s website, alongside outreach events and content developed by Asian artists to ensure accessibility. Outreach advisors - experienced Asian artists - mentored both new and experienced applicants, significantly improving the quality of applications across various artistic disciplines.

Image: Te Tiriti o Waitangi workshop for AAF 3.0 applicants, image courtesy of Foundation North.

Background and purpose: Kōrero Mai Papakura was a collaborative initiative funded by Foundation North, the Department of Internal Affairs, and the Tindall Foundation. The fund aimed to nurture grassroots community leadership, enable under-represented voices to access funds, and support community-driven innovation.

Design and decision-making: A steering group—including representatives from Kootuitui Ki Papakura, the local MP’s office, and a mana whenua representative from Papakura Marae—designed the fund and employed a local project coordinator. A community panel, representing individuals with lived experience and diverse perspectives, assessed projects during a live pitching event and made final funding decisions at the event.

Promotion and capability building: Promotion activities included social media, posters distributed at marae and community centres, and outreach through local schools and community networks. While structured capability-building was not built into the fund design, two younger community members involved in project delivery found the experience transformative, inspiring them to pursue further community-led initiatives.

Background and purpose: Oranga Decides was developed to enhance equity and support approaches that achieve the aspirations of Māori and Pasifika communities, and place funding decisions directly in the hands of local communities. The project was supported by the Maungakiekie Tāmaki Local Board with co-funding from Foundation North, Auckland Council, and the Department of Internal Affairs.

Design and decision-making: Auckland Council’s Community Innovation Unit and Oranga Community Centre facilitated the initiative. Community members participated in an online decision-making process using the Social Pinpoint platform. This involved three rounds of voting:

1. Identifying two priority funding areas from a shortlist of six.
2. Selecting projects that aligned with local aspirations.
3. Ranking the chosen projects based on impact and importance.

Promotion and capability building: Outreach efforts included Facebook, printed leaflets, posters, and direct engagement with community groups and schools. The delivery team was based at the Oranga Community Centre to provide guidance, clarify the application process, and support potential applicants in developing strong funding proposals.

Background and purpose: Launched in 2021, Pacific Youth Future Makers was initially co-funded by Foundation North and the Ministry for Social Development, and the second iteration in 2023 was co-funded with the Ministry for Pacific Peoples. The fund aimed to enhance leadership confidence and capability among young Pasifika people, support grassroots initiatives in South Auckland, and for the funders to learn skills to work with, and share power with young Pasifika people.

Design and decision-making: A group of 10-15 young Pasifika people, supported by youth facilitators and Foundation North staff, designed and implemented the fund. They made the final recommendation for grant allocation, with final decision by the Foundation North CEO.

Promotion and capability building: In 2023, a subgroup of Future Makers developed a communications campaign using Foundation North’s social media channels to reach their community and invite grant applications. They were effective in developing content that resonated strongly with their audience. To build capability, external facilitators and Foundation North staff guided young leaders through sessions on philanthropy, grantmaking, decision-making, and conflict of interest, equipping them with skills required for funding processes.

Image: Pasifika Waymakers panel, image courtesy of Foundation North.

Background and purpose: Roskill Decides, co-funded by the Puketāpapa Local Board and Roskill Together Trust with support from the Department of Internal Affairs and the Lottery Grants Board, sought to fund groups and initiatives often overlooked by traditional grant-making processes.

Design and decision-making: The Roskill Together Trust, leveraging its local knowledge, oversaw fund administration. Community members directly participated in the decision-making process through a public event where grant applicants showcased and pitched their ideas. Attendees voted on the spot, with results and grant allocations announced at the event.

Promotion and capability building: The fund was widely promoted via Facebook, local board communications, Council magazines, posters, brochures, and in-person community engagement. Roskill Together Trust facilitated three application workshops and provided one-on-one support to applicants as needed.

Image: Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust, image courtesy of Roskill Together

1. 7 best practices in participatory grantmaking This brief blog outlines the common themes about participatory approaches that emerged from a series of interviews. Buhles, K. 2023.
2. Asian Artists Fund case study: This case study outlines Foundation North’s process and learning from the PGM fund designed and delivered with Asian arts practitioners, in partnership with Creative New Zealand. Centre for Social Impact. 2023. Asian Artists fund: A learning case study.  Contact Foundation North if you’d like to receive a copy of the case study. Email: info@foundationnorth.org.nz
3. Candid learning – Participatory grantmaking This website holds a suite of diverse PGM resources including reports, videos and other material. 
4. Foundation North's website showcases case studies on PGM, illustrating community involvement in funding decisions and its more equitable outcomes.
   
5. Getting your board on board with participatory grantmaking This article provides strategies and insights on how to effectively gain the support of board members for PGM initiatives. Paterson, H., 2020.
6. Grantcraft - Deciding Together This comprehensive guide is the bible for PGM. While published in 2018 it is still highly relevant and helpful with insights from a diverse range of grant makers. GrantCraft, 2018.
7. Pacific Future Makers This report outlines early insights and outcomes from FN’s implementation of PGM, focusing on the involvement and impact on young Pacific leaders. Foundation North, 2021. Learnings from participatory grantmaking: The Pacific Future Makers Fund.
8. Pacific Youth Future Makers Fund case study: This case study outlines Foundation North’s process and learning from the PGM fund designed and delivered with a group of young Pacific Leaders. Centre for Social Impact. 2023. Pacific Youth Future Makers (Pasifika Way Makers Fund): A learning case study. Contact Foundation North if you’d like to receive a copy of the case study. Email: info@foundationnorth.org.nz
9. Participatory grantmakers This website offers an extensive collection of resources on PGM from philanthropy and the social sector. 
10. Participatory grantmaking This report investigates the benefits and challenges of PGM, offering recommendations to advance practice and understanding within philanthropy.  Ang, C., Abdo, M. and Rose, V., 2023. Participatory grantmaking: Building the evidence. Centre for Evidence and Implementation.
11. Participatory grantmaking A summary report sharing learnings from Foundation North’s experiences with participatory grantmaking approaches. learnings from their involvement with 5 PGM projects. Centre for Social Impact. 2024.
12. Participatory grantmaking with principals of participatory budgeting: This report shares learning from the delivery of three funds using PB methods to distribute funds within communities. Centre for Social Impact. 2023. Participatory grantmaking with principals of participatory budgeting: Tāmaki Makaurau learning case studies. Contact Foundation North if you’d like to receive a copy of the case study. Email: info@foundationnorth.org.nz
13. Participatory philanthropy This report provides an overview of participatory philanthropy and the importance of involving communities in decision making processes. Evans, L., 2015. Participatory philanthropy: An overview. 
14. Practical ideas for participatory grantmaking A toolkit: This resource aims to address the practicalities of implementing participatory grantmaking with place-based funders
15. Nothing about us without us This article explores the experiences and insights of indigenous communities in Aotearoa regarding PGM, emphasising the importance of culturally responsive funding practices. Ngaroimata Fraser, T., McLachlan, A. and Cone, M., 2022. Navigating participatory grantmaking: Insights from indigenous communities in Aotearoa New Zealand. Third World Quarterly.
16. Safeguarding & participatory grant-making An essential guide for funders: This document includes guidance on how to ensure that community members involved in participatory grant-making processes are kept safe from harm. Burke. T. 2023. 

This is a living resource and we are open to receiving your suggestions or links to useful resources.

Please send us an email to info@csinz.org with "PGM resource" in the subject heading.