The capricious nature of groundwater has resulted in so much exploitation and overuse that we now have a consistent crisis. Presenting a roadmap for groundwater governance and information transparency using technology.”
Type: Article
Karnas of Philanthrophy – Telugu – Eenadu
Nandan Nilekani and Rohini Nilekani have pledged half their wealth for Philanthrophy.
The people’s struggle to find solutions to water challenges
With the summer looming, water comes more easily to the urban mind. Even for those who had been reasonably secure all year long, it is an uncertain time. Maybe it is time to build a sump, to invest in a rainwater harvesting system, or to try, again, to dig a private borewell.
IDR | The power of pooling philanthropic funds
Deployed well, this form of funding offers multiple advantages. Here is a quick guide to understand the various options available and find the one that best matches your requirements.
By Reshma Anand & Gautam John
Pooled funding from multiple donors has historically been used in emergency response situations, such as natural disasters and human made conflicts, to get timely resources and results on the ground.
However, the principle of pooling funds is increasingly being deployed by donors on issues that go beyond humanitarian aid. They see multiple advantages to this approach: they can take a comprehensive approach to a problem, address multiple facets instead of providing symptomatic relief, and have flexibility in supporting areas aligned to their priority areas.
Deployed well, pooled funds can improve efficiencies, limit duplication of efforts amongst donors, lower transaction costs with economies of scale, and ensure better risk management if governed well.
The different models
There are several ways in which donors can pool funds. Their impact and success depend on a range of factors, some of which are illustrated in this article.
1. Classic co-funding refers to a large-scale programme with two (or more) donors bringing in a similar quantum of funds.
- Funds may or may not be centrally pooled in one place–donors may hand over the baton from one funding cycle to the next.
- Key decisions are usually run through steering committees with representation from donors.
- This model may involve smaller, sub-contracted grants as well.
This model is widely known and adopted, especially since there is an emerging practice amongst Indian donors today to support no more than 40 percent of a programme’s cost. The onus usually lies on the implementing partners to find matching donors or use their own funds to finance the rest of the programme.
2. A managed fund entails a community of donors coming together for a common cause and common set of outcomes.
- Funds are typically pooled at a central repository and are managed either by a professional agency or a dedicated programme team based at the lead donor.
- The governance structure for this kind of a model involves a steering group, programme management group, an advisory board and an external evaluation agency.
The Dasra Giving Circle and the recently launched Co-Impact (from the creators of The Giving Pledge) are examples of this kind of funding.
3. An independent platform differs from a managed fund primarily in terms of the legal structure. In this case as well, a common cause and ambitious impact outcomes bring together a community of donors.
- The operational model, however, comprises a new and separate legal entity that is set up for developing and implementing strategy towards the intended impact goals.
- Oversight and control for an independent platform involves varying combinations of boards, advisory groups, steering committees, selection panels and programme management teams.
Examples of independent platforms include Ashoka University and the Independent and Public-Spirited Media Foundation (IPSMF).
Ashoka University is India’s first collaboratively funded, liberal arts private university with over 90 donors bringing in INR 750 crore.
IPSMF is a foundation with contributions from several Indian philanthropists to fund independent journalism. Decisions are taken by an independent operating team and the donors have no influence over the organisations funded.
What to ask when picking a model
Each of these funding mechanisms have their own unique compelling factors, including alignment of purpose, structure, governance and systems for operational excellence, that will determine their sustained impact and ultimate success.
Within these factors, we have listed some guiding questions that we can ask to arrive at the funding model that would be best suited to help achieve the results we seek in our spheres of work.
Alignment on purpose (across donors, boards/committees and implementation teams)
- Is there a shared understanding of the problem?
- Is there a consistent articulated vision of what impact would look like? Is it tangible?
- Is the overall purpose politically neutral? Is it likely to have broad-based resonance or does it appeal to a restricted, finite group of people?
- Are there a couple of well-regarded core champions for the idea who can drive peers to contribute and collaborate?
- Are the motivations of the core champions clear and aligned?
- Is there a broad strategic framework that defines what the vehicle would do and not do?
- Is there an in-principle agreement on the risk(s) the collective is willing to take?
Alignment on metrics (across donors and implementation teams)
- Is there a clear set of cause-impact hypotheses in place?
- Are outcomes and impact metrics emerging from the core hypotheses defined?
- Are operating team performance metrics clearly defined and aligned with the above?
- Are the metrics of impact in sync with the proposed timeline for engagement? Are they feasible given the time frame?
Oversight and governance (board, selection/ steering/ advisory committees)
- Should the board/steering committee be constituted to maximise for credibility or practice?
- If the board is maximised for credibility, is the operating team strong enough on the subject matter? Does it need an advisory panel?
- If the board is maximised for practice, how is the operating team empowered with freedom to execute?
- Is the board in sync with the risk appetite of the overall partnership?
- Does the board define boundaries of what it would do and what not?
- Are clear firewalls in place between boards, operating teams and external experts/selectors?
Selection
- A grantee selection panel or committee is one way to build in independence into the model. The composition of this panel is an important determinant to factor in.
- Is a distinct selection team of external experts in place? Do they have a clear set of criteria for selection based on the overall strategy?
- Is selection done internally by the programme team based on an approved set of criteria determined by strategy?
- Is the external panel balanced between practitioners and subject matter experts?
- Is the selection of panel members free from bias and influence?
Operating processes
- Is a team or organisation structure in place for operationalising the strategy?
- Are clear and distinct roles in place for core members?
- Does the team have the right balance of generalists and specialists?
- Are effective management systems in place for periodic tracking of deliverables and course correction?
- Is the operating team suitably empowered to take core implementation decisions?
Expertise
- Are core subject matter experts in-house or external?
- Are subject matter experts represented through the board, selection panels and operating teams? Or only at certain levels?
Funding
- Should a bulk of funding to be raised upfront? Or is the mandate to seed, prove and then scale?
- Who should take the onus for fund raising? Core champions or others?
- Should there be a consistent fundraising momentum with new donors being added each year?
- Should the mix of funders be a consistent cohort or a mindful mix? Are individual philanthropists, institutional donors, CSR natural allies and partners?
- Are there clear benefits—wider, deeper impact, efficiency, influence, etc—for the funders who join the cohort?
- Is there any potential conflict of interest between the cause supported by donors and their ‘core business’? When does this become a deal breaker?
What is the expectation from government funding? Are areas likely to get government attention and funding more likely to be successful for pooled funding mechanisms?
Pooled funding vehicles are excellent venues for learning and we believe that these models are a natural progression as philanthropy moves to tackle difficult systemic issues.
However, what holds true for all such pooled models and must be a vital first step, is asking the right questions about their design, structure and governance. We hope that this article provides a starting point for your own pooled funding journey.
Stop the waste from burying us: State or society is usually blamed, but let’s look upstream at producers of waste
You cannot walk or drive more than a few metres in any Indian city without encountering mounds of rubbish. Even in our villages, you will find garbage billowing around fields, piling up along roads or even lining the forest floor. At many beaches, you are as likely to find your toes tickled by strands of plastic as by little fish.
It is no longer possible to look away.
India’s waste problem is gigantic, and with its economy growing steadily, it will be compounded manifold. Yet, our waste stream management has not even got off the ground.
How India’s richest 1% can effect change
The super-rich must not just be super-generous but also be seen to be super-generous, to inspire more people to give.
TurningPoint: India is giving more at this stage of its economy than many other countries.
When a few people get super-wealthy very rapidly, societies sit up and take notice. When some of them talk publicly about what wealth means to them, it starts off a healthy discussion on the role and responsibility of private wealth in a deeply unequal society.
IDR | Crowdfunding: What can philanthropists do to support it?
By Gautam John
There are many opportunities for funders to help their grantees experiment with this new channel of fundraising. Here are some ways they can support nonprofits in building this capability.
Philanthropists and funding organisations grapple with various kinds of risks when considering grant making opportunities. Some are failure risks of theories of change, some of organisational capability and some of sustainability.
As grant makers and partners in change, it is imperative to proactively identify and mitigate these risks. Over this year we, at Nilekani Philanthropies, engaged in interviews and research that highlighted unique ways in which crowdfunding could change and expand the way we imagine our nonprofit engagements.
Why should philanthropists be thinking about crowdfunding?
While the primary case often made is to think of crowdfunding as a way to de-risk traditional funding models, there are other benefits and upsides that we identified.
It can be a crucial way to facilitate deeper engagement between nonprofits and the wider public–to create new ways of bringing people in and build networks and communities of support.
It can create new ways of bringing people to the sector.
Digital networks have the potential to keep us disconnected from the lives and experiences of others. This deprives us of the empathy, vibrancy and ideas that flow from the diversity of communities beyond our own.
Crowdfunding engagements offer an opportunity to change that; to get involved and to acknowledge our interdependencies.
What can philanthropists do?
We believe there are clear opportunities for philanthropy to support and incubate crowdfunding platforms at a strategic level, and as a tactic within grantee organisations.
Offer matching funds
There is tremendous signalling value in philanthropy showing belief in the model and it can do so in multiple ways. It can be via for-profit investments in crowdfunding platforms, or through offering matched funds to grantees or to crowdfunding platforms to drive individual giving. These can be done either through the lens of sector portfolios or events such as #GivingTuesdayIndia.
Support storytelling and communications costs
It is important to keep in mind that organisations that are effective at crowdfunding are those that can tell their stories using both data and empathy.
As a primary step, grant makers must recognise the importance of this from multiple perspectives: it is vital for organisations to be able to tell their own stories of change; it is important to the narrative around civil society; and it is critical from the perspective of reaching out to wider audiences and engaging the communities so built.
Encourage grantees to experiment by underwriting implementation costs
Philanthropic commitment to the nonprofits they support must extend beyond the immediate grant period; they must be partners for the long term.
One way to do so is by creating capacity for sustainability within their portfolios. Grants as the primary solution to funding needs are not sustainable and organisations need to communicate their cause and impact to the public at large.
Grants as the primary solution to funding needs are not sustainable.
Grant makers can nudge nonprofits to experiment with such models by moving a small percentage of their philanthropic funding to matching grants against monies raised through crowdfunding and by underwriting the costs of implementation and execution.
Think beyond the immediate portfolio
Donors have an interest in the civil society ecosystem beyond just their immediate portfolio. Creating capacity within their portfolios to tell their stories of change and impact allows for new conversations and connections within the ecosystem and outside of it. This is vital if we want to move the needle on India’s societal challenges.
There is an opportunity to create a new energy around India’s vibrant civil society that includes a much wider section of citizens in change, and also has the potential to create new pathways to sustainability.
Want Empowered Women? Start Thinking About how to Help Young Men.
We need to turn to the 200 million young men of India with as much urgency and focus as we spend on the millions of young women in the country. Every day, we hear of horrible atrocities that have taken place against girls and women in India. This is despite the fact that as a country, we can boast of having some of the most progressive policies and civic movements. It is despite the fact that we have the world’s largest pool of elected women representatives – adding up to more than one million across all tiers of government. It is despite the fact that tens of millions of women belong to self help groups that are working to empower them. And, it is despite the fact that as a society, we are becoming more and more aware of our inherent gender bias and gender based problems.
1st-generation entrepreneurs – Premji, Nilekani, NRN – make Bengaluru India’s philanthropy capital
With four Bengalureans being the only Indian signatories to Bill Gates’ Giving Pledge, the IT city could very well be the philanthropy capital of the country. Representatives of India Inc here adopt fresh approaches to humanitarianism — from closely-monitored capacity building in existing nonprofits to promoting tech-led scalable market solutions for development issues. Additionally, younger good samaritans are creating a new culture of giving that is inspired by, yet distinctive, from what their role models initiated.
Infosys co-founder and non-executive chairman of the tech giant Infosys Nandan Nilekani and wife Rohini just pledged half of their wealth to charity
That’s 50 per cent of $1.7 billion.
Infosys co-founder and non-executive chairman of the tech giant, Nandan Nilekani, signed the Giving Pledge with his wife, Rohini. The couple committed to giving away 50 per cent of their total wealth – which Forbes estimates to be ₹110 lakh crore ($1.7 billion) – over the weekend. Bill and Melinda Gates, who founded the pledge along with Warren Buffett in 2010, were also present at the event. The Nilekanis’ signing on makes them the fourth (and fifth) Indians to be amongst 171 unimaginably wealthy signatories from around the world, who have pledged at least half of their net worth to philanthropic causes.