In movement building, like other efforts that require creativity and sustained attention, young people are the future. And though they’ve been handed a divided world wracked by climate change and destructive policies, young people are stepping up to these challenges and working to leave the world better than they found it.

, the Listen Project is a research endeavor created by youth for youth, led by the 

Maine Environmental Education Association (MEEA)

Over the course of more than a year, these researchers gathered insights on the current state of the youth climate movement ecosystem, culminating with an 

 that outlines their key findings. Here’s a close look at the project and the young climate advocates who developed it.

The Listen Project team surveyed 123 young people (defined as 14-30 years old) and interviewed an additional 22 who are involved in the climate movement in Maine. With a second survey and series of interviews specifically with youth leaders of climate nonprofits, the researchers dove deep into organizational practices and challenges. They uncovered key aspects of the youth climate movement, including:

How young people are currently engaging in the movement

The barriers they’re experiencing to getting involved

The news sources they’re using to get information on the movement

The advocacy training opportunities that are available to them

Organizational details, such as budgets and counties served

These key insights from the research offer a broader view of how young activists are shaping the climate movement and, more importantly, what support they need from Maine organizations.

Phoebe Little, Co-Director of Maine Youth for Climate Justice

As a representative for Maine Youth for Climate Justice, Little joined the Listen Project’s working group to help design the survey, synthesize the collected data, and share results.

What were the working group’s primary responsibilities?

We created a plan to circulate the survey to reach young activists across the state. This process included leveraging our personal networks to make sure the survey was able to reach a wide variety of activists involved with a variety of organizations and spanning a large geographic area. Since the publication of the Listen Project’s results and story map, I’ve also worked with members of MEEA’s staff to present our findings at various events and conferences.

How would you describe your experience throughout the project?

It was really interesting to examine quantifiable data against knowledge that I held anecdotally. It was also a great opportunity for young people to design and execute a research project like this. The work strengthened our cross-organizational relationships. One of the main takeaways of the Listen Project was that the youth climate movement needs more collaboration, and our working group felt like a little experiment in what that collaboration might look like.

The results showed that 49% of participants self-identified as queer, 20% identified as coming from a racially diverse background, and 14% as disabled. This is important information that should guide how we engage the Maine youth climate movement.

Young people are growing up in an increasingly changing climate. Our world looks different from that of our parents, let alone our grandparents. We’re more powerful as a wide movement of changemakers rather than working individually in a vacuum. The Listen Project allowed us to see where our movement can be strengthened. Hopefully, good will come out of that data.

Laura Bither, Director of JustME for JustUS

In addition to being interviewed for the project, Bither served on the Listen Project’s advisory committee, a board tasked with providing feedback during the survey creation process.

Why do you feel young people’s perspectives are vital to larger climate and environmental activism efforts?

Young people are closest to both the challenges and the solutions in their communities. Not only do they have the most at stake by decisions being made now, but they’re also deeply underrepresented in decision-making spaces. Young people have the imagination, creativity, and energy to make things happen that older people come to believe are impossible. Young people are leaders of culture change work. We need that desperately when, clearly, what we’ve done up until now has not worked.

Which findings affirmed your understanding of the movement?

That two of the top issues youth experience are burnout and imposter syndrome was affirming, based on our work. We consistently find that advocacy language is exclusionary for young people without some kind of experience or familiarity with it, and, working in rural Maine, we are so intentional about trying to reach people with plain language who aren’t already participating in the climate movement.

What kind of impact do you think research like this has on climate activism?

The youth climate movement should be leading discussions on how to change the systems and structures that have gotten us here. I hope this research establishes how under-resourced yet vibrant our movement is, and how much we could achieve with sufficient resources.

Phoebe Dolan, Co-Director of Maine Youth Power

Dolan is a rural climate activist and committed member of Maine’s climate movement who co-founded 

 in 2020. She served as an interviewee for the Listen Project, providing insights from both her personal and organizational perspectives.

We’re a power-building organization, and our goal is to build power to win human dignity, equity, access, and a livable future across rural Maine. We work in and around elections with young folks to ensure they’re educated and voting. We also have a PAC through which we endorse candidates whose voices we believe will uplift young people’s perspectives and needs. We run radical book clubs, statewide membership meetings, educational opportunities, and communities of practice.

Why do you think it’s important to mobilize young people around climate issues?

So many social movements have been led by young people. We know that is a tried-and-true method. Young people will inherit the state, but they leave Maine more than their peers in other states. There’s an effort — and a necessity — for young people to be studying what would make Maine a good place for all of us to live. Young people feel the incredible weight of climate change and the danger of the rise of fascism, so we have to organize young people in order to set the agenda for Maine.

What role does research like the Listen Project play in mobilization efforts?

This question has really been on our minds recently. In rural Maine, young people have a clear sense of their experience of what is bad — climate issues, public transit, Palestine, housing. Surveys capture those experiences on a granular level, setting the stage for endorsing candidates that align with those perspectives. We listen to the trail of the data, and we understand the relevance of it to the future of Maine. Then the question becomes, how do we show up and highlight these things as priority issues? How can we use our lane to provide solidarity?

We’ve learned that strategic coalitions are how you win. I want everyone to have the data on what works so we can all understand how to move forward together.

Hear from three youth climate activists about their role in the Listen Project's groundbreaking research.

View the Map

The Listen Project: Profiles From the Front Lines of the Youth Climate Movement

As a mission-driven, inclusion-focused arts nonprofit, 

 has championed accessibility in their programs for more than 50 years. Now, with the community it’s assembled and the expertise it’s developed, ODA has embraced a second mission: to train other arts nonprofits to be accessibility champions, too.

“Through programs, partnerships, and training, our team works to ensure that people with disabilities can fully engage as artists, audience members, and cultural leaders,” says Dani Rose, director of cultural access at Open Door Arts.

 is central to its goal of increasing people with disabilities’s access to the arts. The Hub helps cultural institutions “skill up” in accessibility, providing tools and guidance for transforming nonprofit programming into fully integrated, accessible resources for people with disabilities.

Starting in September 2025, ODA shared their expertise and custom tools with 28 

 via a 10-month Cultural Accessibility Peer Learning Cohort. Through a series of professional development sessions and workshops, the organization’s leaders guided participating nonprofits through a self-assessment process aimed at analyzing their current accessibility needs. Organizations gained insight on why accessibility is so critical and how they can move beyond accommodations checklists to infuse accessibility into their organizational culture, operations, and approaches.

And in the past year, the organization has significantly increased the training resources available on its Hub and has recently launched a cultural access certification program — activities that will further empower and prepare nonprofits to turn lessons into action. Here’s a look at the initial peer learning cohort and what’s come out of it thus far.

ODA anchored the cohort in its Accessibility Self-Assessment tool, a self-paced digital evaluation tool comprising 300 multiple-choice questions organized around the nonprofit’s:

Overall approach, including policies, practices, and procedures

 examined their organizations’ current practices, learned about the importance of inclusive programming, and identified gaps they could address to improve the accessibility of their operations, organizational culture, and programs. The range of topics the survey covered meant that cohort participants had to work collaboratively with their staff, board members, and volunteers to complete the self-assessment.

“What makes the tool unique is that it's both an assessment and a learning tool,” explains Rose. “Throughout the process, participants will find glossary terms, legal guidance, examples, and companion resources that explain accessibility concepts and requirements.”

After looking inward and learning core concepts, organizations move from assessment to planning. Upon completion, ODA provides a personalized report of the organization’s self-assessment results with data visualizations, key insights, and an accessibility action plan template, enabling organizations to identify priorities for their future accessibility planning.

In the final months of the peer learning cohort, participants translated their self-evaluation results into action steps, with guidance from ODA on how to prioritize, sustain momentum, and build accountability into their planning. At the end of the cohort, organizations had not only a comprehensive understanding of where their accessibility practices stood, but also a roadmap of where they were going next and what more they needed to learn.

‘You Can’t Grow What You Don’t Know’

The impacts of ODA’s learning communities boil down to one of the organization’s key mottos: You can’t grow what you don’t know. The learning community helped nonprofits build the self-knowledge needed to address critical areas for growth. It also helped:

“Accessibility touches every part of an organization, so the work can feel enormous when you look at it all at once,” says Rose. The self-assessment tool and cohort learning are designed to break this work into smaller pieces, helping organizations move toward more inclusive practices incrementally.

Accessibility is about more than one-off activities or accommodations. According to ODA, true accessibility is a far more involved practice that requires organizations to embed inclusion into their core operations.

This cohort training helped nonprofits better understand the nuances of accessibility: “Accessibility often involves navigating gray areas, balancing organizational realities, and thinking through unique situations,” says Rose. “Those conversations helped participants move beyond checking boxes and toward making thoughtful decisions that fit their organization.”

Turn Accommodations Into Organizational Systems

Throughout the learning community, nonprofits learned about building accessibility best practices into staff training, committee activities, communications, and strategic planning. As Rose explains, “They began to realize where to put their efforts and resources in the immediate present while planning for a more accessible future.”

At the end of the cohort session, nonprofits had not only a clearer picture of their core goals and objectives, but also a better sense of how to improve over time.

The cohort learning workshops both inspired and equipped the organizations to undergo transformative change. Many have begun turning practices into formal policies. Others have reached out to potential service providers. And others have built accessibility into their planning conversations. Here’s what two participants had to say about their experience.

Since 2011, Delilah Poupore has served as the executive director of 

, a nonprofit that, in her words, “works to create a vibrant, inclusive, and sustainable downtown through community development, placemaking, and public events.”

The cohort helped move accessibility from being something we thought about on a case-by-case basis to something we can intentionally build into our planning. The sessions were practical, welcoming, and realistic (focused on continuous improvement rather than perfection). It was also valuable to learn alongside other organizations working through many of the same questions, and making some of the same mistakes we've made. Dani Rose modeled accessibility throughout the training, from the way sessions were facilitated to the resources and tools shared.

Based on the workshops, what kinds of strategies have you included in your action plan to improve accessibility?

The assessment highlighted how much accessibility depends on having consistent systems and planning. We realized that many of the things we do happen informally and that creating clear organizational practices — such as event accessibility standards, communication guidelines, and requests for accommodation processes — will help us provide a more consistent experience for everyone.

Our plan focuses on creating accessibility standards for all events, improving the accessibility of our communications, and building stronger relationships with disability-related organizations and with people with disabilities in our community. We also plan to begin evaluating accessibility at our major events and to incorporate accessibility into the planning of exhibitions, ArtWalks, and other arts programming, rather than treating it as something to address after plans are already in place and someone has made a request.

How would you describe the overall impact this workshop series has had on your organization?

The workshop series gave us a practical way to think about accessibility as an ongoing organizational practice instead of a checklist. Rather than leaving with a list of ideal solutions, we left with realistic goals we can begin implementing now while continuing to learn and improve over time. For a small organization, that made the work feel approachable and sustainable.

 community programming steward, Emily Guirl, joined the cohort to learn more about accessibility and practices she could implement right away. The Institute hosts outdoor educational programs focused on community well-being, sustainability, and deep relationship-building.

I was initially overwhelmed in the accessibility cohort, being fairly ignorant of the disability rights movement, workplace requirements, and disability inclusive language. The facilitator, Dani, created a compassionate learning environment in which I felt welcome and supported in my learning. The spreadsheet that Open Door Arts provided to help us write our accessibility plan was extremely helpful!

Cobscook Institute is a progressive and inclusive organization, so I was surprised to find through the assessment how much more we could be doing on campus and online to improve access for people with all kinds of disabilities.

Training staff and designating an accessibility coordinator or hiring an accessibility auditor (who’s also a person living with disabilities) were at the top of our action plan items. These steps will assure that access work stays at the front of organizational planning.

I think the program has started a shift within the organization to be proactive in our inclusive strategies. If we wait for people with disabilities to come to us to tell us what they need, they might never come and we’ll miss an opportunity to serve part of our community.

For Rose and the rest of the Open Door Arts team, accessibility is core to nonprofit work, and building a more accessible future in programming starts with curiosity.

“People often ask if they’re ready to begin this work, but I don’t think there’s any such thing as ‘ready,’” says Rose. “Curiosity is readiness. If you’re asking questions about accessibility, you’re already taking the first step.”

Leading with curiosity, the nonprofits in this cohort are on a path toward greater inclusion for 

Opening Doors to Mainers With Disability: A Look at Open Door Arts’ Accessibility Workshops

, Onion Foundation cofounders, Susan and Fritz Onion, explained their reasoning for creating a spend-down foundation. The blog has generated considerable interest and, in many cases, expressions of appreciation for the Onions’s transparency and commitment to spending the foundation’s resources at a rate much higher than the 

 that the IRS requires all private foundations to give out.

Some grantees, however, have expressed concern that the foundation — and our support for them — might change in the near term as a result of spending down. We want to reiterate that, while our strategies will continue to evolve, we’re not likely to make any abrupt changes. Our foundation has operated as a spend-down organization since its inception, and we remain committed to helping our grantees sustain their work long after we close our doors 18 years from now.

In their blog, Susan and Fritz posed one question that, for me, gets to the heart of philanthropic work and, frankly, is the hardest to answer: 

Where can we make a difference that will hold?

 It’s the kind of question that can keep me up at night and that can provoke conversations with plenty of silence. Simply pondering the question makes clear that it’s not so easy to give money away well.

Catalyzing Multiple ‘Differences’ in Maine

Both perpetual and spend-down foundations confront this question. If they’re serious about their missions, they’re driven by it as they develop, implement, and assess their strategies and activities.

But for spend-down foundations, the question is acute. The years speed up. There’s less time to correct the course and start anew. Being clear about the “difference” we hope to achieve becomes paramount, requiring three things:

Board and staff agreement on the foundation’s values, mission, and legacy goals

Deep, unfettered conversations with people directly affected and others with expertise and relevant experience

Honest, nuanced discussions with our grantees to understand the changes their work is bringing about, what more they want to accomplish, and what they need to do so

 — there are endless “differences” that the Onion Foundation can aim to catalyze. As a place-based funder, we take our lead from local and statewide organizations, especially those that offer high-quality programs and regularly assess and tweak their work. These organizations have strong relationships with the communities they serve and shape programs to respond to community needs and interests.

We feel comfortable working hand in hand with 

 and others with relevant experience to identify the specific “differences” toward which we use the foundation’s resources.

 — is the most challenging. How do we ensure change will hold? How do we help grantees achieve sustainability? What factors impede an organization’s long-term stability, and how do we solve those challenges?

We have a strong conviction that healthy organizations have a better chance of sustaining their work. Accordingly, we’ve devoted more resources to our grantees’ organizational development in recent years. As described in our 

, our technical assistance offerings have included:

Organizational self-assessments using an instrument created by the TCC Group

Workshops on making programs, facilities, and practices welcoming to 

We also launched an Intrapreneurship course at 

Northeastern University’s Roux Institute

, which prepares nonprofits to develop an earned income stream using their existing expertise, facilities, and/or networks. Going forward, we plan to broaden the portfolio of capacity building tools, workshops, and coaching available to our grantees.

We continue to encourage our grantees to embrace the 

. This fall, we’ll be supporting five free advocacy workshops offered by the Maine Association of Nonprofits, which we sincerely hope our grantees and other nonprofits will attend.

Effective advocacy can result in more public investment in nonprofit organizations’ important work as well as new policies and regulations that help them accomplish their goals or remove roadblocks. Public education and storytelling aren’t only the first parts of an advocacy campaign but also critical to increasing sustainability.

When the public and targeted audiences have a comprehensive and accurate understanding of what a nonprofit offers, participation and appreciation increase and the value of the nonprofit is better understood. All this paves the way for greater public support and a sustainable future.

Strategic Communications To Build Support

We’ve also ramped up our own communications capacity with 

 and email newsletters so that we can bring more attention to the good work of our grantees. By doing so, we hope to increase the number of foundations and individuals supporting the work. Grantees can also use this content within their own networks. Blogs provide a platform for sharing what works and “how they did it” stories, all meant to strengthen other nonprofit organizations.

With 18 years ahead of us, we’re looking hard at what’s missing in the arts and environment landscapes. Are there organizations we could help build or strengthen that would provide important resources and support to nonprofits in the arts, environment, and philanthropic sectors, even after our doors close? Where could we help increase collaboration, efficiency, and impact?

, for example, has allowed it to expand its role as an 

, providing funding and technical assistance to land trusts throughout the state. Our hope is that the regranting mechanisms and programming that Momentum has established will attract new sources of support for conservation groups, increasing the likelihood of their sustainability. With guidance for the nonprofits in each sector, and with an eye to nonprofit infrastructure in other states, we’ll continue to seek out similar opportunities.

In the years ahead, we plan to immerse ourselves in learning about the experiences of other spend-down foundations, looking for lessons that have application to conditions in Maine and our work. For now, though, we welcome your ideas of ways to increase the sustainability of arts and environment organizations and to create robust sectors.

Hear from Executive Director Diana Morris about the Onion Foundation's commitment to ensuring grantee organizations thrive well beyond the foundation's end.

Where Can We Make a Difference That Will Hold?

program officer in the environment sector

 is about more than making grants to organizations. It’s about continually tapping into those organizations’ needs and opportunities, then adapting foundation strategies to help nonprofits solve their most pressing challenges.

Here, Roz shares a bit about the professional milestones that led her to the Onion Foundation, the responsibilities of her role, and the values she brings to her grantmaking work everyday.

What has your professional journey looked like so far?

I always wanted to do something related to the environment, but I didn’t quite know what. After earning my master’s degree in environmental science, I landed a job at the Helmsley Charitable Trust in New York City, a foundation that, at the time, made grants for biodiversity conservation internationally.

I learned a lot there — the basics of grantmaking, how to be a program officer, how to partner effectively with nonprofits, and how to think about grants as a portfolio that works toward a bigger strategy. The role taught me about expenditure responsibility, rules around lobbying, foundation governance — things that would serve me throughout my career. Later, as a program officer at the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation, I was also thinking through how to honor the intentions of donors, both living and deceased, through the grants we made. That really set me up well for working with a family foundation.

How does the average grant cycle kick off?

Before and after we open up the application, I’m inviting conversations with 

 to learn about recent developments that inform their goals for the next few years.

Those touchpoints are so important for the grantmaking process because they allow me to articulate the Onion Foundation’s environment strategy and the type of work that we’re interested in supporting. Having conversations with applicants about those key areas helps them emphasize the parts of their work that align with our priorities and put their best foot forward in their grant proposals. It also helps me learn about what’s happening in the field so that I can be responsive to emerging needs through our grantmaking and capacity-building activities.

What happens after those conversations take place?

Sally [Onion Foundation Grants and Office Manager] and Ben [Environment Program Associate]

 do the hard work of ensuring applicants have submitted everything and importing the materials into our grants management system.

Then, I read every word of every proposal, and I reach out to grantees with clarifying questions as necessary. That review process takes about four to five weeks, and it ends with me writing up a recommendation to the board for every proposal. After we review and revise the recommendations internally, I write a cover memo that describes the trends we’re seeing across nonprofits in that particular strategy. Since I do that every year, it becomes an ongoing narrative that builds context over time.

Finally, we have a long meeting with the board where I walk through the grant recommendations and invite questions, after which the board members make final decisions.

Why do you think it’s important to connect each grantee organization’s context to the larger picture of Maine’s environmental sector?

My job is to think through how our strategies (

) can move us toward statewide goals. There’s a lot more to a foundation strategy than just the grants, though that’s a big part of it. We also commission research to understand the field better. We use our website to explain our strategies to the public through 

 — from spotlights on exemplary grantee programs to longer explainer pieces. And we regularly meet with stakeholders and other funders to build support for this type of work.

The state is small enough that we can do a pretty good job staying on top of everything that’s going on and see the value of what even a relatively modest grantmaking budget can do statewide. Staying aware of the bigger view also helps us prepare for what might come next.

What other responsibilities do you have as a program officer?

I read and respond to grantee reports, and I offer thought partnership and support to grantees if they request it. I like to do a number of site visits every year so I can meet staff, board members, and volunteers in person and see their work in action. Sometimes that means staying overnight to meet up with several grantees in a more distant part of the state. This year, I’m also participating in committee work for two environmental funder affinity groups, and I work with the whole Onion Foundation team on our ongoing learning agenda.

Right now, we’re also doing a lot of reflecting, researching, and thinking to prepare for refreshing our programmatic strategic plans. As part of that process, I’ve been conducting mini focus groups with grantee partners to learn what they’re seeing and how the Onion Foundation can help make a positive impact. In addition to that, I’ve been diving into some recent research about outdoor access and nature learning.

What do you think are the top responsibilities of an environment program officer?

First, I see myself as an advocate for the grantees. If their work is well-aligned with our strategies, it’s important for me to stay up to date on their priorities and challenges so that I can represent them well and make a sound case for support.

Along those lines, we have this 30,000-foot view, which enables us to help catalyze partnerships. If I see that an organization has an aspiration that is similar to that of another group, I can easily make those connections. For example, one of our grantees, 

, has been working with high schools to allow students to recover credits during the summer by learning about nature at the refuge. I’ve always thought that this program is such a unique and creative approach to partnering with schools. When I heard of another organization looking to do something similar, I immediately suggested they connect with Hirundo to learn about its process, and they did!

I also work with partners who can provide technical assistance to strengthen the nonprofits beyond the grant itself. There are already some great technical assistance providers in the environmental field, like the Conservation Capacity Project, and we direct our grantees to their offerings. Other times, we may offer something more specialized — like a training series on the Next Generation Science Standards with 

developing a mission-aligned earned revenue stream with the Roux Institute

What are the biggest rewards you’ve experienced in this role?

It’s so rewarding to follow grantees’s stories. Two years ago, some of the work we supported were just pilot projects. But this past year, I really noticed how much they’ve matured. They have big followings now of people who are so fulfilled by participating in them. I love to see that evolution and know that our grants play a small role in it. I have a front-row seat to track that story, and, to me, that’s such a gift.

Where do you see the environmental sector heading, and how do you hope to be a part of that?

I hope we’re moving in a direction where everyone in Maine can enjoy and learn about the state’s natural landscape. What a gift to live in this beautiful place with such varied ecosystems — there’s so much to discover! Being in nature also increases joy, wellness, and connection. The grand vision is that, through those experiences outdoors, everyone in Maine can become stewards and advocates for nature, whatever that means for them. That grand vision animates our grantmaking strategies for the 

Hear from Environment Program Officer Rosalind Erwin about her background, her priorities, and her hopes for the future of the sector.

Supporting a Sector, One Grant at a Time: A Conversation With Environment Program Officer Rosalind Erwin

The financial landscape of the past two decades has been nothing short of tumultuous — from economic recessions to a highly disruptive pandemic to federal funding rollbacks. Few nonprofit organizations have come out of this period unscathed, and many continue to test out strategies for securing longer-term sustainability.

In this challenging financial moment, Portland’s 

By transitioning from large, one-time federal and state funding sources to smaller, ongoing funding streams, the 

environmental youth development organization

 has done what many nonprofits are working hard to do: achieved financial stability and the ability to plan longer term. Here’s how the organization did it.

, Rippleffect’s primary goal is to use adventure to develop the next generation of leaders.

“Our main focus is to be a program of access to outdoor experiences for any child in Maine,” says Adam Shepherd, executive director. “We want to lower the financial, cultural, and operational barriers that exist.”

To achieve this goal, the Rippleffect team offers low- or no-cost adventures, including zip lining, kayaking, and climbing, as well as a robust gear store and boat charters around various Casco Bay islands. The 

Rippleffect Outdoor Leadership Education (ROLE)

, uses team-building activities to help students grow their collaborative problem-solving skills and learn what it means to be a leader to oneself, one’s peers, and one’s community.

Rippleffect’s lineup of programs is truly robust, spanning locations and serving more than 4,000 youth each year. The financial investment needed to run the lineup successfully is also hefty.

But like most organizations, Rippleffect was hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of the organization’s programs weren’t compatible with social distancing protocols, which required it to pause some revenue-generating activities. Program shifts led to financial strain, especially as federal and state funding became even more difficult to obtain.

The Rippleffect team leveraged federal Paycheck Protection Program loans to fill in the revenue gaps — but they remained vigilant about how they used those funds, knowing they wouldn’t be available long term.

“We worked really hard to be conservative in how we utilized that funding, and we tightened our belt fiscally to enable us to maintain our staffing structure,” says Shepherd. “If we had trimmed our staff, we would’ve lost a generation of programming knowledge.”

As the pandemic unfolded, the organization took advantage of various federal and state granting and loan programs to ensure it remained afloat. Simply staying afloat, however, wasn’t the goal. Building lasting sustainability was.

Shepherd knew that large, one-time funding wasn’t the pathway to sustainability: “I would rather do less programming on $90,000 of grant funding than expand with $180,000 for a particular funding program that’s going to end in a year.”

Federal grants and loans, while useful, could only serve as bridge funding while Rippleffect built a more stable funding approach. So the team worked to diversify their revenue streams, improve revenue-generating activities, and layer in philanthropic funds to cover their core operating costs. Several intentional decisions led to the organization’s success:

Rippleffect began creating a sustainability strategy in 2021, with the goal of balancing revenue generation and grant funding to secure about $150,000 each year — the total needed to sustain programming in addition to its regular budget, which was largely supported by revenue. Getting ahead of the issue before it impacted staffing and programming decisions was critical, as it allowed the organization to:

Gradually make the shift from one-time funds to smaller philanthropic streams without disrupting programming

Separate operating costs and programming costs, ensuring grant funding went directly to the programs and the people those programs served — which helped the team more effectively make the case for program support to private funders

Forecast costs and address potential funding gaps before they occurred

Treat any opportunistic federal or state funding programs as supplemental to the overall budget — not something critical for it to financially survive

Because of its meticulous, proactive planning, Rippleffect was able to make the switch over time. By 2025, the organization hit the sweet spot, with a wide range of smaller philanthropic grants from multiple funders that would cover program costs for years to come.

It’s tempting for nonprofit organizations to apply for as many grant funds as possible as early as possible. But staggering applications and awards can be a better sustainability strategy. “We created a grants calendar to ensure that we’re not tapping all of our funding sources in one year, but instead have them staged over time,” says Shepherd. “I can now look at my budget and project ahead.”

When the organization reestablished the ROLE program after a pandemic-related hiatus, for example, the team planned out years of potential grants to ensure long-term stability for the program. “We feathered in grants over time so we could enact the program operationally without jumping from government funding into applying for all of our grants at once.”

This strategy requires more patience and long-term thinking, but as Rippleffect exemplifies, it often leads to a greater long-term success.

Part of what works for Rippleffect’s approach is the team’s intentional relationship-building with grant funders, which enables them to truly connect with the funding sources that resonate with the organization’s goals.

“We want to operate in good faith, understand what funders’ priorities are, and ensure that what we do aligns with their priorities,” says Shepherd. “We look at these granting organizations as true partners in the work.”

Engaging with program officers prior to grant cycles helps Shepherd gain a strong pulse on whether his team is on the right track with grant applications. It also helps him better understand the funding landscape and make more informed financial decisions.

“There’s a temptation for rationalizing mission creep when you’re trying to secure some of those big pockets of funding,” explains Shepherd. “But that can impact culture and bring about a negative turning point.”

As Rippleffect illustrates, focusing on smaller pockets of funding from grantmaking sources that connect well with the organization’s mission enables teams to ground their decisions in their specific niche.

Previously, Rippleffect brought in significant revenue by hosting weddings on Cow Island. Yet, the impact to staff wellbeing was far too great, leaving staff members burnt out before the youth education programs opened up. After putting the financial and cultural impacts in conversation with one another, the Rippleffect team quickly decided to cut the wedding events program and invest in other revenue-generating activities to fill the financial gap.

“Always ask: Is this in service to our mission?” advises Shepherd. “If you can’t answer that with an emphatic yes, then you should let it go.”

Since switching up its approach to funding, Rippleffect has achieved full financial stability without relying on large federal or state programs. The organization is far more agile now, too — smaller funding changes require smaller adjustments, not dramatic cuts.

As the Rippleffect team looks ahead to what comes next, they’re redefining growth altogether. What’s possible with a sustainable foundation? Anything.

Learn how Rippleffect navigated financial uncertainty by strategically diversifying funding streams.

How Did They Do It? Rippleffect’s Strategic Approach to Financial Sustainability

 will be hosting its 32nd annual festival, a community event aimed at enriching Midcoast Maine’s vibrant arts scene. The festival brings traditional, centuries-old chamber music into conversation with works from living artists of various ethnicities, identities, and backgrounds.

That’s the power of the event: It underscores the throughlines that connect the past and the present, the canonical and the experimental.

This year’s festival, titled “Music Unearthed,” is a shining example of those connections. Through a series of six concerts in Damariscotta, Rockland, and Orono, plus additional special events and community engagements, performers from throughout time and space will showcase compositions honoring the natural world around us.

Established in 1995, the Salt Bay Chamberfest — an multiyear 

 — has become a true hub for audiences to experience and appreciate chamber music. The organization offers more than a dozen free community events per year, many of which showcase world-renowned artists in outdoor settings. It also commissions new compositions to add to the chamber music repertoire and has been awarded a 

National Endowment for the Arts grant three years in a row

Some of Salt Bay’s free community concerts include a pre-show talk in which artists discuss their work, including how it references work from other composers, the ways in which it reflects innovation, and how it connects to their life. These discussions enable audience members to better understand the context and cultural aspects that inform the compositions.

This year’s festival will explore heritage, home, and cultural identity through a series of events, including four primary concerts held at the Lincoln Theater in Damariscotta:

which will combine forgotten string and horn works from classical Austrian composers Mozart and Bruckner with pieces from contemporary American composer Gina Gillie

 which will use the magic of birds and birdsongs to find the throughline between Nipmuc artist Hawk Henries and traditional pieces like Haydn’s “The Lark,” Messiaen’s “Abyss of the Birds,” and Brahms’s “Clarinet Quintet”

which will showcase Andy Akiho’s percussion compositions, performed by Akiho and Sandbox Percussion

which will highlight music inspired by Karen Ouzounian’s family’s journey fleeing the Armenian genocide

“When I started this festival in 1995, it was rare to experience contemporary music in a concert with older music — they were almost always separated,” says Wilhelmina Smith, artistic director. “I set out to change that because I value both so much, and I believe that presenting them together opens up meaningful dialogue.” 

With a dynamic mix of time periods, composers, and cultural traditions, the concerts accomplish Smith’s mission, creating a pathway for a deeper understanding of chamber music and 

Explore Midcoast Maine's Salt Bay Chamberfest, a festival bridging the classical and the experimental.

Test Blog Post

Photo 1