You can use these questions to help kick off this discussion thread:
- What does successful funder/recipient collaboration look like?
- How can organizations use donor requirements and guidelines to improve their work? More generally, what can human rights organizations learn from funders/donors? What can funders/donors learn from organizations?
- What roles do human rights groups have to influence the policies and practices of funders?
- What role do human rights funders have in influencing each other's policies?
Share your experiences, thoughts, ideas and questions by adding a comment below or replying to an existing comment!
I think this is a fascinating question and would love to hear from others.
I believe that peer-to-peer interactions in the funding world are hugely important -- and have met many funders who are constantly seeking to learn more about the issues.
One of the best models I've seen so far are the funder/grantmaker gatherings that create space for honest discussions and debates. This includes Grantmakers without Borders, the International Network of Women's Funds, the International Human Rights Funders Group and I'm sure many other examples.
I also think that combined activist and donor activist gatherings, such as the AWID Forum, offer great opportunities for deepening relationships.
I wonder if we might be able to brainstorm a list of the most effective spaces for donor education and reflection?
Finally, I would love to see more opportunities for funders and human rights activists to spend honest, quality time together, because I believe it is these relationships that can radically change the way we all work together.
Hi Jane - I completely agree about the 'human' part of the interaction. It is essential. Building relationships with supporters who understand your work, over the long term. And taking those relationships seriously - respecting how each other works, communicating honestly about difficult issues.
You were asking about spaces for exchange: While it is focused on freedom of expression, the IFEX Strategy Conference takes place every two years and it is a place that donors supporting work in the field make an effort to attend because it is an opportunity to meet with so many free expression NGOs in one go. One challenge we have seen with that though, which we keep working on, is that when we hold it in a Northern/Western country more donors attend - and when we hold it in a Southern/Eastern country fewer come - which is unfortunate, as we alternate North / South - and one of the reasons we do that is to help bring focused attention to free expression issues in the Global South.
Again on honest, quality time as you say: I think another really important related point is that many smaller, newer struggling organisations or initiatives sometimes haven't developed the confidence to understand that donors exist to be their partners - not their superiors. There is certainly a power differential, but with the important work being done by soooo many organisations on the ground, donors wouldn't be able to achieve their mandates. We need each other, even if it is not necessarily always an equal playing field.
Maureen
One thing that would facilitate a more frank exchange of opinion would be more multi-year grants. It is far easier for a grantee to speak openly and honestly when we're not in the position of advocating for renewed funding in the next grant round.
I think grantees also need to re-think their relationships with funders and recast that relationship as more of a partnership and less as simply a source of funds. Funders have a unique perspective, given their relationships with dozens or hundreds of organizations working in our sectors; we should see them as sources of information, ideas for potential collaborators, etc.
Pete Dross, Director of Policy and Development, The Center for Victims of Torture
Pete, you make an important point here. Do you have examples of working with funders where they have offered linkages effectively?
In my experience, in order for honesty to exist, there has to be a longevity in the relationship and an expectation set by funders from the very start that making mistakes and learning from failures is invited for both parties. In other words, the cost of failure cannot be so big that it detracts from an authentic dialogue about areas of growth for both parties. Otherwise, honesty remains an ideal to strive towards without a lot of practice!
I
Some important insights have been shared in this dialogue about the need for exchange spaces for funders in order to influence funding flows for human rights. And i am grateful for those spaces. And another question emerges -
Fundamentally, IDEX's partnership approach to human rights grantmaking promotes an understanding of rights and responsibilities of local people to tackle powerlessness and exclusion. The underlying assumptions of this type of human rights grantmaking is that local people, frontline leaders have the best understanding of the culture, history and conditions of their communities. They are in the best position to create solutions to address the root causes of injustice and inequity. This grantmaking approach is part of a growing movement on the part of individual funders and grantmaking organizations in the Global North to incorporate a more democratic approach in their work. This kind of partnership between a funder and grantee requires a high level of patience, time, presistence and giving up of control on the part of the funder. It is not easy or simple. It is not the traditional welfare and charity grantmaking but about fundamental social change. This approach requires actually inquires systematically and consistently on the effectiveness of grantmaking practice, process and methods as much as about grantee outcomes. So I am all for great spaces for exchanges amongst funders. But what about the paradigm as a whole? Are we attempting to influence each other as funders to improve practice or in fact, to change the paradigm altogether?
Would love to hear thoughts on this!
Hi all
My experience of a successful funder recipient collaboration was on the creation of a coalition of all member organizations supported by the same funder. The coalition brought together organizations working on diverse human rights issues, with the funder as a member but exploring possibilities of sustainability. Likewise, it was a way to build efforts to lobby with policy makers.
I think one interesting place to look for "lessons learned" in developing partnerships between funders and activists is with collaborative funds like Disability Rights Fund and the Red Umbrella Fund. These grantmakers are attempting to bridge the gap between donors and activists, bringing them together to make strategy and funding decisions. I think that both funders and grantees could learn quite a bit from these partnerships about how to best support human rights movements, build trust and develop programs that effectively support grantees.
Furthermore, one exciting resource for grantmakers comes from Grantmakers for Effective Organizations. They have published a resource called "Do Nothing About Me Without Me" which explores the ways that different grantmakers engage with grantees and they make the case including grantees in grantmakers' policy development and decision making processes.
To comment on Jane's question about spaces for peer-to-peer learning - GEO's conferences might be a good place for this kind of work.
thanks Jessica for sharing the "Do Nothing About Me Without Me" guide. Any other resources for stakeholder engagement that you can point us to?
This conversation is timely as the International Human Rights Funders Group will be meeting next week and their pre-conference institute will focus on cultural competencies and how power dynamics play out in grantee/grantmaker relationships.
A paper exploring these issues by IDEX director Vini Bhansali can be found here. Vini says:
...We have learned some key lessons worth sharing about grantmaking practice to advance human rights. What matters is this:
What else?
Thank you so much Jessica for the quote and for pointing folks to the cultural competency institute and related paper at IHRFG. I wish we could have many more practitioners and dialogue participants from this virtual space here join us at IHRFG in real time.
I would say that the act of engaging in open and transparent dialogue between funders and grantees is critical to transformative action. We can deploy impact assessments and evaluation reports galore but if trust, credibility and integrity in funding-grantee relationships are missing, then I wonder if we are really moving the needle on social, cultural, environmental rights.
One request of those of us who run human rights organizations (and seek funding from institutional funders, individual donors and/or grantmakers like IDEX and AJWS) is to more boldly and courageously articulate not only the impacts from a particular source of funds but in fact, to make the case studies, stories, complexities of rights-based interventions/actions/analyses come alive for funders. In other words, educate and inspire funders and individual donors to make better philanthropic choices and learn from your first hand experience! This way we not only serve our own organizations but also philanthropy overall!