Staying relevant in a fast-changing world

To remain relevant as a foundation and continue working innovatively, we have to keep asking ourselves critical questions. Do our good intentions yield the desired results? Our strategic learning manager Lizzy Eilbracht tells us how we tried to answer these questions with our team, fellow foundations and partner organizations in 2022.

The questions we ask ourselves

We ask ourselves questions that help us use our resources more effectively. One question is on the involvement of people with lived experiences in our Social Initiatives program. For example, civil society organizations that strive for a humane treatment of refugees or undocumented people increasingly base their approach on suggestions provided by the target group itself.

Adessium offers ‘institutional funding’ where possible, with the aim of endorsing an organization’s mission and minimizing restrictions on the precise allocation of funds. We asked our partners whether this freedom to deploy resources at their own discretion is perceived in the same that we intend it to be. It turns out that our partners do not necessarily always feel that they have this freedom. This is an important lesson for us, showing that we need to communicate more clearly about the nature, intention and flexibility of our funding.

The questions we ask our partners

How do we monitor our partners’ objectives?

Lizzy Eilbracht Manager strategic learning

We asked ourselves: can we help access best practices in utilizing this expertise? How can we use the experiences of such front-runners to inspire others? We also looked at important safeguards to apply this method carefully, as we do not want to cause harm to these vulnerable target groups.

We also continue to reflect critically on our approach. Does our method contribute to effective actions? What can we improve? That is why in 2022, we tested several elements of our approach and practices through our partners (see text box). For instance, we asked how partners deal with the conditions attached to our funding.

We have discovered that having strategic conversations with our partners is becoming increasingly important when assessing the progress of a project or program. Partners shared that they appreciate that we listen and engage in a deeper understanding of the evolving context in which they operate and the continuous adjustments this requires in their work.

For instance, instead of making agreements based on, say, ‘reaching 3,000 people with a news article,’ we prefer to talk about what the impact of an article was on a specific government policy. This allows more constructive discussions on the long-term perspective, making objectives a shared task rather than a ‘tick the box’ exercise for us as funders. The key question in such conversations is often: what are the big dilemmas that our partners deal with, which problems do they run into when trying to achieve their goals? A qualitative conversation is as important as a quantitative analysis. We hope these conversations help our partners, as some of the insights we share are based on similar experiences with other organizations, which may provide additional insight. We already had such discussions in place, but our monitoring processes and forms have now also been adapted accordingly.

The questions we ask fellow foundations

We do not work on societal challenges in isolation because we realize that we can achieve more together. A good example of a social development that requires a collective approach is toxic polarization. Polarization is toxic when the conversation between groups stops because society becomes more and more opposed. When this is the case, solutions to polarized topics seem to disappear. We noticed that our partners are increasingly affected by this phenomenon. So we asked our fellow foundations: what is your take on toxic polarization? Is it a subject we can tackle together? To answer this question, we invited an expert on polarization from the Hannah Arendt Institute for a gathering with 15 other foundations in the Netherlands. Often times, such a day leaves us with more questions than answers, but it made different perspectives visible. If foundations would collaborate more closely on such topics, we would have greater influence in contributing to improvements in our society.

Survey of partners

We wanted to test some of our assumptions about our approach with our partners. An external consultant made a selection from our portfolio and conducted in-depth interviews with 12 of our partners. We did not know which partners were interviewed. It was an anonymous process to ensure that partners could provide feedback without any hesitations. It was good to hear what our partners value in our approach and to hear that our emphasis on organizational development can actually make a difference. The survey also provided valuable insights on what we can improve, for example sharing our strategic choices better. A comment that was frequently expressed in the interviews was that our partners generally value our partnership. In addition to the funding we provide, our flexible attitude and critical thinking appear to be valuable for them. One quote from the survey stood out: “It wasn’t just money. They helped us think outside-the-box.” Do you have questions or feedback or want to learn more about the survey? Send an e-mail to feedback@adessium.org.

Left: Protest against the coronavirus measures in Amsterdam. Proponents and opponents clash in a polarized debate.

Movement on the Ground volunteers have opened a hair salon in an asylum center. The organization uses the talents and ambitions of asylum seekers to improve their environment. Page 21