<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Foundation Feedback</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/06/foundation-feedback/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/06/foundation-feedback</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:28:11 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Trachtenberg</title>
		<link>http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/06/foundation-feedback#comment-342</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Trachtenberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:34:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/06/18/foundation-feedback/#comment-342</guid>
		<description>Obviously any kind of honest feedback is terrific. I also think the nature of the feedback depends on how the grant request was initiated.  If a foundation invites an organization to apply and then declines support, it has an obligation to spend some time helping the organization understand where it fell short and what kinds of things it could do to make itself more competitive in the future.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obviously any kind of honest feedback is terrific. I also think the nature of the feedback depends on how the grant request was initiated.  If a foundation invites an organization to apply and then declines support, it has an obligation to spend some time helping the organization understand where it fell short and what kinds of things it could do to make itself more competitive in the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
