Leveraging Philanthropy for Policy Change

1
New Philanthropy
& Social Investing
Leveraging Philanthropic Investment:
Advocacy & Policy Change
Sciences Po – Economics & Business
Judith Symonds (jcs@jcsymonds.com)
Autumn Semester 2014/2015

Leveraging Philanthropic Investment: Advocacy & Policy
Change
New Philanthropy & Social Investing
OEBU 2080A – Autumn Semester 2014/2015
Session Format
–Outlines for Final Paper – Missing Submissions
–14:50 – Lobbying and Policy Change
–15:50 – Spontaneous Assignment, “The Elusive Craft of Evaluating
Lobbying?”
• Myriam Malki
• Jerome Morvan
–16: 05 – Group 4: Clinton Foundation – Health initiative
2

• Why Advocacy & Philanthropy
– To leverage philanthropic investment
– To bring about systemic change
“In the funding community, if you want systematic change, the way
to get it is through advocacy…Direct services solve the immediate
problem, but systematic change is created through public policy” 3
3
Change

• What is Advocacy?
– Advancing an idea
– Advancing a position
– Leveraging value
– Catalyzing Change
– Enriching the debate
• When is it lobbying?
– Direct lobbying
– Indirect lobbying
• What is the Problem?
U.S. Foundations –example
– 12% of $30 billion goes for Public
Affairs/Society Benefit vs. 25%
Education Sector
– Charitable organizations spend 2%
on advocacy &lobbying - 16
– Europe % of philanthropy for
advocacy is relatively low
– Foundations tend to define their role
in relation to the state.
– Changing as the role of the state and
philanthropy become strategic
4
Change
What is advocacy?

• Making the Case – Research & Policy Development:
setting the policy agenda
• Constituency capacity building, organizing and
mobilizing
• Grassroots mobilising
• Forming and sustaining coalitions: making current
advocates more effective
• Using media, monitoring, evaluating, and communicating
progress
• Litigation (National, EU & Int’l courts)
• Direct approach to policy makers – within legal
limitations (Lobbying)
5
Change
How do you advocate?

• Policy advocacy is a process that requires a long-term
strategy
• Every advocacy effort requires insiders and outsiders
• You don’t have to be there, but you have to be there
(Washington, Brussels, etc)
• You can buy access (paid lobbyists)
• What is required to play, is to play
* At the Crossroads: A Study of Federal HIV/AIDS Advocacy, Derek Hodel, The Ford Foundation , May
2004
6
Change

Challenges & Risks
Evaluation & Impact Assessment
The Role of Funders in Advocacy
7
Change

Change
European and US Foundation policy change*
OEBU 2080A – Autumn Semester 2014/2015 8
Engagement in Policy
Change
Country
Active
Involvement
Denmark, Hungary, Poland United States
Moderate
Involvement
Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany,
Greece, Ireland, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain,
Switzerland, UK
Less, not at all Austria, Finland, France, Italy, Norway, Sweden
*Macdonald, Norine, de Borms, Luc Tayart, « Philanthropy in Europe: A Rich Past, A Promising
Future, » Alliance Publishing, 2008.

Change
Advocacy approaches
ADVOCACY
APPROACHES
PHILANTHROPY
POLICY
PUBLIC POLICY:
ISSUES
PUBLIC POLICY:
IDENTITY-BASED

Change
Networks and Affinity groups
PUBLIC POLICY:
IDENTITY AND ISSUES - BASED
FUNDING NETWORKS &
AFFINITY GROUPS
Example: Funders Concerned About Aids:
“to mobilize and motivate effective funder responses
To HIV/AIDS worldwide” Ford Foundation
Examples: Climate Change, Child Protection, ONE

Change
Case Studies

 Funders –
 Objectives
 Recipient
 Results:
* Foundation Center, 2009
 US Foundations
 Significantly increase
engagement and funding to
fight Climate Change
 Comprehensive range of
grants – 25% for policy change
 Doubled in numbers and
increased from $ 100 million -
$ 850 million from 2001 - 2008
12
Change
Climate Change

 Grantmaking for Community Impact Project
– $ 231 million from foundations and other donors produced $
26.6 billion in benefit for taxpayers and communities in 13 states
– Every dollar grantmakers invest in policy and civic engagement
provided a return of $115 in community benefit.
– Hundreds of policies affected for: additional government
spending, and/or savings, making programmes more efficient
– 700,000 people in 13 states – given a voice
– 321 grant makers
• Full series of studies: http://www.ncrp.org/campaigns-research-policy/communities/gcip
13
Change
ROI of $ 115 - 1

 Grantmaking for Community Impact Project
– $ 231 million from foundations and other donors produced $
26.6 billion in benefit for taxpayers and communities in 13 state
– Focus on the most marginalised and underserved groups:
children and youth, low- wage earners, families living in
poverty, people with disabilities, people of colour
– 3 most effective policy campaigns:
• Raising minimum state or local wages
• Increased funding for public schools and pre-kindergarten
• Catalyzing affordable housing development
• Full series of studies: http://www.ncrp.org/campaigns-research-policy/communities/gcip
14
Change
ROI of $ 115 - 1

• Objective: Transform the U.S. Policy Landscape to Reflect
Conservative & Neo-Conservative Values
• Long – term investment in ideas and the policy landscape:
– Cato Institute
– American Enterprise Institute
– Heritage Foundation
– Manhattan Institute
• Parallel Support of “Like-minded” Political Candidates
• Result: A New Political Landscape with trillions of dollars
• Philanthropists cost: $70 million / year (est.)
15
Philanthropy, Advocacy and Policy Change
Case Study – U.S. Conservative Revolution

 Political & Social Context in Ireland in the 90s
– Economic Boom
– Highly qualified workforce, but neglected research
– Issues as Perceived by Atlantic Philanthropies
• Deficit of strategic management of higher education
• Disjointed university system
• “less than satisfactory performance by university
sector”
16
Philanthropy, Advocacy and Policy Change
Higher Education in Ireland & Atlantic Philanthropies

Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation
Malaria Advocacy Campaign
17

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Advocacy
grants
Films of Record,
“Fever Road”
•UNF – “Next
Rotary”
•Kaiser
Foundation
•MIM Conference
•Red Cross
•Johns Hopkins
– VOICES
•World Economic
Forum
•UNF – “Nothing
But Nets”
•Malaria
Consortium –
GFTAM TA
•UNF – “Next
Rotary”
Phase II
•PSI – ACT
Market Watch
•UNF Malaria
Partnership
•World Economic
Forum
• Global Business
Coalition on
HIV/AIDS, TB,
and Malaria
•UNICEF –
GFTAM TA
•AED – Taxes
and Tariffs
•Malaria No More
DC
Advocacy
components
of
IDD grants
MVI MVI IBRD –
ACT subsidy
MACEPA
Use of
foundation
voice
•Co-chair trip to
Mozambique
•Bill Financial
Times op-ed
•MACEPA
announcement
•MVI / MMV
announcement
•LA Times
malaria
editorials/New
Yorker article
•Melinda Zambia
trip
•MCTA
announcement
•Funder’s
Consultation
Malaria Forum •NY malaria
event
18
Overview of foundation’s malaria advocacy activites
Emphasis on using foundation “voice” as well as grant-making

Examples of Malaria Advocacy Grants 2006
• Johns Hopkins University – VOICES (2006)
– Regional advocacy: Coordinate African malaria advocacy network with NGOs in Ghana, Kenya,
Mali, Mozambique
– Global advocacy: Work with donor countries, opinion leaders, Global Fund, RBM, other
advocates on malaria issues
– Track funding trends from World Bank, Global Fund, governments, and other funders
• Red Cross / European Alliance Against Malaria
– Build advocacy in France, Germany, Spain, UK and EU
– Partner with JHU on global advocacy
• Nothing But Nets
– $3 million challenge grant
– Platform for engaging new partners: Methodists, Lutherans, National Basketball Association,
Major League Soccer

• Malaria Forum (2007)
– Foundation leadership commitment, Keynote speeches by Bill and Melinda Gates
– Leadership Summit: Participation from WHO, Global Fund, World Bank, US government and Ministers of
Health from four African countries
– Country Roundtables: Separate side meetings led by Ministers of Health from Ethiopia, Mozambique, Tanzania
and Zambia
– Technical breakout topics including costing, monitoring and evaluation, reaching new partners, drug
resistance, clinical trials, research partnerships
• ACT Market Watch (2007)
– Monitor price and availability of artemisinin combination therapies in eight target countries
– Population Services International
• UNF Malaria Partnership (2008)
– UN Foundation secretariat and technical support for two denomination-wide campaigns in the U.S.
– United Methodist Church and Lutheran World Relief
• AED (2008)
– Understand the role tariffs and taxes play in malaria commodity access and end-user price
– Collect and analyze T&T data for malaria commodities across many countries
– Develop advocacy strategy in tandem with research
20
Examples of Malaria Advocacy Activities & Grants 2007-2008

Genome mapped
Mozambique trip/
Gates funding
Vaccine trials
Celebrities, PMI
Foundation strongly present in malaria media
Media points = articles with keywords in lead paragraph or headline and as the major subject of the article
(Articles about Global Fund excluded)
Gates funding,
PMI
21
Using our voice: Malaria in the media

• Raising malaria profile on the global agenda
– Foundation efforts created building blocks for momentum that exists today including solidifying donor commitment (PMI,
World Bank)
– Malaria Forum brought together leading scientists, business executives, policymakers, and political leaders to discuss and
advance the malaria control agenda
– Co-chairs and WHO Director-General call for eradication put eradication back on the agenda
• Strengthening RBM partnership and improving effectiveness
– Increased engagement of the global malaria community and recognition of RBM as the primary coordinating mechanism
for malaria control
– Improved governance of the partnership
• Building grassroots/grasstops advocacy and funding in the US
– UNF Malaria Partnership – The United Methodists Church (9 million members in the U.S.) and Lutheran Church (8 million
members in the U.S.) committed to raising $200 million for malaria
– Nothing but Nets – Engaged 60,000 individuals, raised $18M for bednets, and distributed more than 700,000 nets across
Africa
• Increasing ACT availability
– Affordable Medicines Facility for Malaria – The global community has endorsed a financing mechanism which will
provide ACTs at reduced prices and increase overall use, availability and affordability of ACTs. A detailed technical plan for
launching the subsidy will be submitted to the 13th RBM Board meeting in November 2007
– ACT Market Watch – Monitors price and availability of artemisinin combination therapies in eight target countries
22
Foundation’s Malaria advocacy successes

1 Catalyze global agenda around control
and eradication
1. Catalyze
global agenda
• Use foundation voice to maintain
global visibility and momentum
• Help drive global architecture,
including evolving and maturing
RBM partnership
• (Need to ensure that we are
transparent with others
about our agenda and role)
2 Ensure adequate funding for
malaria control and R&D
• Maintain (and grow) commitments
from existing donor base
• Recruit new donors
• "Channeling the energy" of donors in
useful directions (create new vehicles
if needed)
3
4 Build evidence base to
support the malaria agenda
• Commission research to fill gaps in
evidence needed for policy and advocacy
• Ensure others commit sufficient resources
and attention to gathering evidence (e.g.,
M&E, resistance monitoring, resource
flows, etc)
2. Ensure
4. Build funding
evidence
base
Support and showcase models
of success
• Concerted efforts in targeted African countries
– from political leaders down to grassroots
• Development of African leadership and voice;
build local capacity
3. Support and
showcase models
of success
1
2
3
4
23
Our new objectives for the Malaria advocacy strategy

Advocacy efforts will focus in targeted areas to maximize impact
• Our strategy, initiatives and grant-making are firmly rooted in our past successful
efforts
– Increasing the visibility of malaria as a global health priority
• But broadened focus to reflect different stage of community, call for eradication
– Implementation, need success stories in Africa
• We will engage additional groups as part of the broader foundation advocacy
agenda, rather than with malaria specific activities
– Other donor countries (outside of US and Europe)
– Private sector
• May broaden our focus in the near future based on evolution of
foundation programs
– Go deep in Europe – build out of European presence
24

 Advocacy evaluation: art vs. Science
– The ‘Elusive Craft point of view: (spontaneous
discussion)
– The ‘science point of view: framework & indicators:
• ‘Who will acemerginghieve a given change or accomplish a
given task?What will change or be accomplished through the
effort?
• When will the change or accomplishment occur.
• How much change will occur or be the level of
accomplishment?
• How do we know the change or accomplishment has
occurred?
25
Advocacy and Policy Change
Evaluating Advocacy

Leveraging Philanthropy for Policy Change

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (17)

Similar to Leveraging Philanthropy for Policy Change

Similar to Leveraging Philanthropy for Policy Change (20)

Leveraging Philanthropy for Policy Change