Locked / closed the MOHCD grant post

Didn’t want any replies in case they went to the grantor.

im not sure the mechanism, but I don’t think we want external emails and email addresses being posted here.

@tdfischer what do you think? I might be missing something but wanted to be prudent.

1 Like

Quick thought, could post as private message and invite others to it, plus mention it in public thread. No limit on number of people in a private discussion…

Yes let’s not have emails to fundraising@noisebridge.net forward here. I think it should only go to the fundraising team members already recieving email from the alias. I imagine some donors would not appreciate being instantly deanonymized on contact.

1 Like

I forwarded it myself; wasn’t an automatic one. I thought it would’ve shown up as me forwarding a thing, which would prevent e-mails from bouncing back to the staffer, but there must be a setting somewhere to flip that. I’ve forwarded e-mails to the EBFE discourse a few times and it works as expected.


Got the rejection letter today :frowning:
Noisebridge RFP Notification Letter.pdf (60.8 KB)

Booo. Would you like us to seek feedback on the proposal?

It would be awesome if you told us the best way. That’s definitely part of building out our grant capabilities.

@LilyRaabe, can you please share contact information and advise on how NB can reach out for feedback?

1 Like

Hi team! I think I’m using discuss the right way. :slight_smile:

Let’s 100% ask for feedback. The best way forward would be to send something like the following message:

Hi Contact Name:

Thank you so much for letting us know about our application, and for giving us the opportunity to apply and tell you more about Noisebridge. We’d love to get feedback on our application and find out how we can write a stronger grant for future RFP’s with your office. Would you be available to meet with our team either X or X?

Thank you for your time,

Your Name


Great! I’ll reply with that and cc fundraising@. Thanks Lily!

Ooh this feedback is super illuminating!

Hi, Ruth,

Thank you for your inquiry. Our review panel liked your proposal and found that it offered the kind of innovative approach to digital skills development we were seeking (e.g., lots of different modes of learning, broad definition of tech support). However, the proposal did not provide confidence that the program would focus on high need residents in the Mission. There were additional concerns about using Meetup as a primary means of outreach. Reviewers felt that approach would miss the priority populations we seek to serve. Reviewers also noted that they wanted to know more about the background and quality of the volunteer instructors (to have more confidence in the instruction).

Ultimately, we received 27 proposals for two Neighborhood Tech Help and Training Pilot grants, so it was a truly competitive process.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Happy to chat if that would still be useful.


Mike King, M.P.P.

MOHCD Manager of Program Evaluation and Operations


Looks like we need to do better local outreach (reaching out to local schools like John O’Connell and collaborating with local organizations like Mission Techies) and also prep better bios of our instructors.


I must’ve missed the day when Meetup became our primary organizing outlet. That’s weird. When did we claim that?

We didn’t claim that in writing, but I think I linked meetup.com events for the classes, and also nowadays a lot of events are on meetup and not on the wiki anymore. But even if it was just on our website i think it would be insufficient – the point is probably that we need to be doing direct outreach to local groups in the Mission to make sure we’re getting local participants.

edit: interestingly, there’s an appeal process for this grant decision, but I don’t think we should use it this time.

1 Like

Actually i would prefer to still keep using meetup to post events even if we got better outreach in order. It’s a good platform and doesn’t need to be updated after the event like the wiki.

I think @ruthgrace is correct, NB doesn’t do local outreach. I doubt email or any other method would have looked better. After all, even the door is locked. That doesn’t exactly say “welcome”.

Mi Ranchito folks didn’t even know what’s upstairs.

@Bernice did a great job with Sunday Streets but that’s not sustainable without more people

@LilyRaabe Just wanted to make sure you saw this feedback Ruth got (above)

Ruth is right - super illuminating - and probably merits a larger group discussion? Some things we can easily provide - such as instructor bios. This can be a google form that we ask instructors to fill out so we have what we need on file and it can easily be added to?

The larger conversation is outreach, and ensuring the programs are hitting the needs of high-needs Mission folx. Is there any sort of Outreach & Engagement committee at all? Or folks who often head this up? Might be good to loop them in at this point to talk more?

If we’re receiving this feedback now there’s a great chance we’ll receive it again…so some more strategy work will need to be done on this topic. We started this conversation in November when we first addressed equity and demographics onsite as a team at NB. Ruth did amazing work collecting numbers so we knew who was in the building and we talked about some early concepts for ways to do this kind of work. Looks like next steps might be getting that ball rolling again. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Good idea. I think this came in automatically, though, but want to check with Victoria.


On Fri, Apr 26, 2019, 12:53 James via Noisebridge noreply@discuss.noisebridge.info wrote:


    April 26

Quick thought, could post as private message and invite others to it, plus mention it in public thread. No limit on number of people in a private discussion…

Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.

To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.