Reflecting on the Shifting Systems Initiative with Ford Foundation’s Kathy Reich
Kathy Reich leads the Ford Foundation’s BUILD initiative both in the United States and in Ford’s 10 global regions. BUILD is an essential part of the foundation’s strategy to reduce inequality, a strategy arising from the conviction that healthy civil society organizations are essential to driving and sustaining just, inclusive societies. To that end, Kathy guides Ford’s efforts to implement sector-leading approaches to supporting the vitality and effectiveness of institutions and networks that serve as pillars of broader social movements. Kathy sat down with the Shifting Systems team to discuss progress, advice for funders, and power dynamics.
Q: As you have been a part of the Shifting Systems Initiative for a few years now, what are you proud of and what would you like to see pushed further?
The most impressive part of the Shifting Systems Initiative is the amount of high quality research that it has generated and the development of the scale framework. The initiative has continued to build out knowledge and practice around impact investing, systems mapping, and now diversity, equity, and inclusion. Taken all together, it’s an incredibly useful set of resources for funders around the world.
The second thing that has impressed me is the global nature of the initiative and its work. We have been able to engage with such a diverse range of funders in so many countries and regions around the world. This is not seen as a colonialist or American model, but instead a global community of funders.
I think we have made significant progress on each of the scale practices but there’s a lot of work that needs to be done as well. To me, the one that philanthropy needs to investigate the most is empowering grantee organizations. There is still a tremendous power dynamic between givers and receivers that gets in the way of impactful work. As funders, we need to become much better listeners and partners. How can we bring our nonprofit partners into our strategy and decision making so they are true partners and not just vendors?
In my opinion, funders have made significant progress in the development of high-profile, high-stakes collaborations for impact. Donor collaboratives are bringing large sums of money toward broadly networked systems solutions that might help move the needle. There are bright spots out there that we should celebrate, but we also need to stay humble and aware that there is so much more that needs to be done.
Q: Can you speak to your experience with the BUILD Program and what you have learned about the power dynamic between funders and grantees?
Within the BUILD Program, shifting the power dynamic is a stated goal. The primary way we do this is by selecting partners that align with our values and strategic goals, and giving them five year commitments with largely unrestricted support. We ask them to set aside some of that money to invest in their own organization. In return, we request that they share what is working and what is not working. When something is not working, we want to figure out a solution together.
We have seen that this approach to grantmaking results in more resilient organizations. More than 80% of the BUILD grantee partners report that they are more resilient now than when the program started; that is pretty remarkable considering the two years we have just been through. They also can give very concrete stories and examples of how increased resilience helps their mission and impact. They also report that they feel the power dynamic less; in other words the, program is working.
This has shown us that there are things funders can do to pursue deeper and more equitable relationships with their partners. Obviously, multi-year flexible funding alone is not going to solve the power dynamic issue. There is no silver bullet here, and the unfortunate truth is that this power inequity can probably never be truly erased. However, you can mitigate it. I would recommend funders look at their own organization and listening practices to start. Philanthropy in general has to take a look in the mirror and determine if the traditional models are working. I love this initiative because it asks those hard questions.
Q: What would you say to funders who are hesitant to engage in large-scale, unrestricted funding?
I would ask funders to consider what barriers are standing in their way. There is always an excuse, and those barriers can always be dismantled. It usually just requires the will to change. The problem is that people within philanthropy must want to change, and that is a core challenge of the Shifting Systems Initiative.
Educating funders as to what a systems frame entails is very helpful. It makes you realize that there is very little you can actually control. Once you realize that exerting tight control over resources is not beneficial, it can be freeing; paradoxically, giving up control can lead to the breakthrough you have been seeking.
Q: Do you have ideas on how to push funders to do this work?
Part of the answer is to just try. There was resistance at Ford Foundation when we started the BUILD Program, but we have only seen positive results. You can start small; you do not need to be making multi-million dollar unrestricted grants out the gate. I also think working through a collaborative is a good way to get started and experiment with this kind of funding without taking on all of the risk yourself.
I will also say that traditionally, philanthropy itself has been an elite place. Bringing in people from the communities that we are trying to support will only strengthen our work. Philanthropy is highly susceptible to group think, and we need to be open to learning from people that think differently.
