As part of Numun’s recent Seed, Grow and Sustain 3.0 grant open call in August 2026, we engaged our very first cohort of 10 interns to undertake the first level eligibility screening of applications. They played a key role in this first phase of our participatory decision making process. Here, in their own words, some of the interns share their reflections on their experiences and takeaways. Read all posts by the SGS 3.0 interns here. Read about the overall SGS 3.0 desicion making process here.
Being part of the screening team in the grantmaking process, and deciding who advances, as opposed to applying for a grant, has been a real eye-opener for me. It was nerve-wracking, and I evaluated each application without AI support. This involved long, rigorous hours stretched across weeks, doing meaningful work with my own mind.
Why did that matter? My mind was working a little differently before this internship. I think my thought process, and my attention span, had fallen prey to brain rot. I had tried to address it by playing brain games like New York Times puzzles, and limiting my time on Instagram and TikTok (no more endless scrolling), and simply going outside more. None of these really worked, because I inevitably adjusted back. Additionally, somewhere along the way, I had handed over a lot of my research and decision-making to novel AI apps.
This is why the grantmaking work was so refreshing. Screening applications and researching each organisation and its team without AI meant using traditional resources like Google search, taking my time to read and actually digest information, and taking breaks when I needed them. Hence, what initially felt like an unfamiliar exercise quickly became one I realised I knew and that my brain had quietly craved.
I was also new to participatory grantmaking. For those like me, participatory grantmaking is defined by its ceding of grantmaking power to the communities funded. It responds to how big INGOs and grantmaking organisations can be far removed from the context of organisations and communities they serve. This distance increases the risk of enabling the very oppressive systems communities are fighting against, and for example, push communities deeper into poverty.
Participatory grantmaking, as I understand it, can decolonise philanthropy because it deliberately centres the people that grants are supposed to support. I still don’t know its specific origins, but given the history of so many Larger World nations and our communal way of living and doing, it felt familiar and as a result, was refreshing.
I now see a common thread between participatory grantmaking and the human-centred process I used as a screener. The participatory grantmaking approach returns decision-making power with communities, while evaluating without AI returned some of my decision-making power to me. At a time when we are becoming desensitized, as well as outsourcing our thinking and our decision-making to AI: what does it say about us that thinking for ourselves now feels like a novelty?
My experience has been more than a lesson in grantmaking. It has reminded me what it feels like to think for myself, and both are the breath of fresh air I didn’t know I needed.
Sophia Premo is a legal enthusiast and development consultant who builds tech-enabled systems for social good through a decolonial feminist lens.