Giving Stories
Cris Stainbrook: Trustee on a Mission

Cris Stainbrook

Cris Stainbrook has had lots of different titles in the foundation world — program officer, trustee, executive director — but his favorite descriptors are much less formal. Chat with him for just a few minutes, and you'll soon learn that "risk-taker" and "change-maker" suit him just fine.

That appetite for change is evident in his career transitions. Stainbrook currently serves as executive director of the Indian Land Tenure Foundation. He's also a trustee of The Saint Paul Foundation, Minnesota Community Foundation and Grotto Foundation. But he started out his career as a fisheries biologist and small businessman; that led to work in nonprofit tribal business development and later to a program officer position with Northwest Area Foundation.


Representing the Public and Current Needs

Although he claims to have had no idea what a foundation was when he was first joined Northwest Area, Stainbrook has clearly taken to the field of philanthropy. He embraces the essential roles and responsibilities of a trustee, but also challenges his colleagues to "push the envelope" by taking more risks in supporting new program design and development.

"I believe one of the essential roles of every foundation board is to balance the vision of the founders with the current needs and issues of the public," Stainbrook explains. "The way I see my role at Saint Paul and Minnesota is as a representative of the public who helps oversee what is a public trust placed in these institutions. At Grotto, a family foundation, it's basically the same, but I also help bring an outside perspective to the board."


Solving Intractable Issues

While community needs are front and center when establishing priorities, individual trustees may perceive those needs differently. Stainbrook explains that because every trustee wants to solve society's problems — not just put a bandage on them — the diverging opinions about needs, issues and solutions can be a challenge. "I personally think this is what keeps many foundations from taking on some of society's stickiest issues," he says. "The boards can't resolve the differences of opinion or viewpoints about what causes the issue or need."

Another factor is funding ability. Stainbrook comments that some issues seem too big to be taken on with available resources. Conversely, some issues affect too few people or too small of an area and therefore need to be set aside or, if they fit, rolled into a larger funding priority.


Who Really Makes Funding Decisions?

Stainbrook reports that, while trustee and staff relationships and roles vary, some patterns are constant. "The staff is trained to tell prospective grantees that only the board makes the funding decisions," he explains. "But staff makes 90 percent of the decisions by rejecting, for some cause, about that proportion of proposals; perhaps these should be called 'non-funding' decisions. This is okay by me because it is informed by discussions between staff and board," and he says that each foundation has hired very competent staff to understand the grantee programs.

He confesses, though, that he's been known to "have a few opinions" when it comes to proposal review. "I really should apologize to the staffs for trying to do their job every once in a while! As a staff person I intimately know the sensations rising out of these situations," he laughs.


Taking Risks, Following Principles

Stainbrook thinks a basic grounding in the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors is necessary to be an effective trustee. Certain personal characteristics can be an asset, too, such as curiosity. "If you don't try it, how are you ever going to know? Can we change some things and meet some needs and issues out there in the community that haven't been met through traditional means?" he asks.

But taking risks doesn't mean compromising on principles. Stainbrook believes that foundations must subscribe to an even higher ethical standard than the law requires. His current and former employers and the foundations he represents as a trustee are all members of the Minnesota Council on Foundations. As members, these organizations subscribe to the Principles for Grantmakers, one of which is the Ethics and Law Principle. Stainbrook believes that foundations and nonprofits ought to strive to meet a higher ethical standard than the law requires because of the importance of establishing and strengthening public trust.

The Diversity Principle is no less important to Stainbrook. He notes that diversity has been on MCF's agenda for more than 10 years and progress has been made in some, but certainly not all, areas. For instance, some foundations have made a conscious effort to change the composition of their boards. "I guess I'm part of that effort," he says. "In the early 1990s, when The Saint Paul Foundation created the diversity endowment funds, they suddenly had a source of people of color for board members. Grotto Foundation has clearly made an effort to broaden and diversify; not all trustees are family members or long-time family advisors."

Stainbrook concludes by emphasizing that self-policing, good ethics and risk-taking go hand-in-hand. Even if risk-taking doesn't always lead to success, the philanthropic sector will have acted with good intentions and not abrogated the public trust as it tries to solve our communities' most vexing problems.


General Operating: Yea or Nay?

Stainbrook brings a unique perspective to the board room because he has been on both sides of the table for almost 20 years: now as a trustee and executive director, but previously as a program officer. When asked about how foundation staff and trustees make decisions about types of funding — general operating or program support — his description of the process is very direct:

"I think this is a negotiation between foundation staff and the board," he says. "At staffed foundations the board sets the vision, mission, and funding priorities with some staff input. The staff then crafts — with board input — the program design and makes the case for providing different types or combinations of types of funding depending on the issue. The reality of the situation begins to hit home when the proposals come in.

"The savvy prospective grantees will look at the funding types that are available for any given program and make sure that is what their proposal looks like. And depending on how badly the staff and board want to fund the grant because it fits the program work they are looking for, they can overlook all the tell-tale signs that indicate the grantee is looking for a different type of support than professed."

He adds that foundations that support small nonprofits are challenged by the question, too: "At Grotto, because we deal with many very small grantee organizations, we have struggled with what constitutes general operating support versus program support. For an organization that only operates one or two programs, does it matter what we call it? It is always a good discussion."


© Copyright 2008 Minnesota Council on Foundations
Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited.