Institutional donors about

Global Fund for Women

Interviews conducted in the context of the
strategic planning process
(October/November 2007)
(version January 22,2008)
Interview protocol
Phone interviews with GFWs institutional donors as selected by
GFW staff
Selection was based on the assumption that respondents represent
a broad range of perspectives
Of the 13 individuals selected, 5 declined or did not respond to three
different email requests over a period of 1 month
The 2 individuals who declined felt they did not have much to share
or contribute
Interviews were conducted over the phone and took between 30 - 45
minutes
A total of 8 interviews were conducted in the period of
October/November 2007
Before starting the interview GFWs strategic planning process was
introduced and questions about the process were answered
All interviews were conducted by Ellen Sprenger

Interviewees
The following people were interviewed:
1. Jael Silliman, Ford Foundation
2. Laura Scher, WAFS
3. Jessica Horn, Sigrid Rausing Trust
4. Karen Plafker & Doris, Wellspring
5. Lisa MacCallum, Nike Foundation
6. Brad Smith, Oak Foundation
7. Stuart Burden, (former) Levis Strauss
Foundation
8. Chris Kwak, Kellogg Foundation

Declines and no responses
Declines:
Gara LaMarche, former OSI, now Atlantic
Philanthropies
Carol Lake and Tracey Bloomfield, JP Morgan

No response:
Chris Harris, Ford Foundation
Anthony Richter, Open Society Institute

The interviews
summary notes
Interview questions
1. What do you see as the key organizational strengths and
weaknesses of GFW?
2. In your opinion, what kind of impact has the GFW had-- on the
womens movement and womens rights groups in the Global
South and East and on the philanthropic community?
3. Going forward, what in your view are key external opportunities for
the GFW?
4. Similarly, what in your view are key external challenges/threats for
the GFW?
5. What is your sense of the community of womens funds?
6. What role should the GFW be playing in this community?
7. If you could share one piece of advice with the GFW, what would it
be?
8. If the GFW was a person, what personality traits come to mind?
GFW strengths
They operate in a niche, do important work, are a vital
source of funding: reach groups other funders do not
reach (4)
Immense growth, successful at raising money (4)
Kavita is an incredible force (3)
Low cost, they make sure the funds reach the right people
in place otherwise not reached (2)
That AFM was replaced by a woman of color, that they did
not fall into the trap of founders syndrome
Relatively progressive agenda, not just charity
Excellent self promotion


GFW strengths (continued)
Advisors all over the world
They never gave up on general support and refrained from
focusing on specific countries and regions
Love the concept of letting a million flowers bloom

GFW weaknesses
One person (Kavita) in the spotlight, but is the organization
build in a way that is strong? (6)
Not good at showing impact (4)
but then the initial goal was to reach women
We dont think of them as strategic (in their programming or
collaboration with other organizations) (4)
GFW should have more long term funding commitments so that
groups can change deep structures
They should support initiatives that address structural causes, not
vulnerable groups per se
They are reactive and need to become more proactive, have an
agenda against which they assess progress
Inability to articulate their strategy





GFW weaknesses (continued)
Turf battles, very competitive
Not enough young women on the board, in leadership
positions
Communications with staff is often highly emotional and
circular: they are an old organization set in their ways
Collaborating with them is like pulling teeth: we get no
learnings or insights from them
Affinity with the cause is no longer enough: they need to
innovate (like Robin Hood Foundation, Witness, others)
They are just a drop in a bucket: are they ambitious & bold
enough?
They should be able to raise a lot more money









GFW weaknesses (continued)
Heavy reliance on advisors: less than 15% of groups are
visited by staff
The website does not provide a strong argument for
supporting groups. Need more up to date information on
the groups, and the difference funding could make
GFW limits its own impact by not allowing men on the board
Create more opportunities for sharing invitational power
Publications are very superficial






Impact on womens movement,
groups and rights
Need to do a better job of measuring impact / would like to
know more about impact (5)
Undeniably have empowered womens organizations
They succeeded doing what they set out to do 20 years
ago, i.e. get funding out to women in many (far away)
parts of the world
Impact is best told by them through their stories
They are a leader in the womens funding movement,
especially raising money from individuals: really
pioneering
Incredible spin offs: Tewa and Semillas


Impact on philanthropy
Raised awareness of importance of funding womens
initiatives and rights (4)
Not much of a presence in COF, in organized US
philanthropy
Influential with their individual donor base
If they really want this kind of impact I would go after major
donors, not institutions. Many more opportunities there
They make people individual donors feel good about giving
to womens rights: they make it non-threatening and safe,
and this will keep the money flowing
At McArthur foundation a grant from GFW was seen as a
stamp of approval
Other small foundations often go to GFW for advice




Key external opportunities
New information and communications technology (3)
The opportunity of truly putting global in GFW
Learn from new (internet based) models that support global
initiatives, like KIVA
Learn from existing models of building online & networked
communities
Attract younger women this way
Individual (major) donors, intergenerational transfer of
wealth (2)
Serve as a pass through for big amounts of money,
including from governments (2)
Use alarming statistics (on health, HIV-Aids) and show how
GFW is getting to the root causes




Key external opportunities (contd)
A growing number of players are thinking about womens
rights and gender equality. Take advantage of this and
turn potential competition in opportunities for
collaboration
That Kavita is on the advisory board of the Gates
Foundation. But remember, GFWs greatest power is its
constituency: demonstrate this!
Connect grantmaking to themes and areas that are in the
public eye, like the Middle East, climate change






Key external challenges & threats
The fact that a growing number of players are thinking
about womens rights and gender equality could lead to
more competition (3)
Potential competitors (or strategic partners) are: Care International,
Christian Aid, Safe the Children and younger womens funds that are
more spirited and innovative
Backlash and (political) attacks against GFW and grantees,
rising fundamentalisms all over the world (2)
Proliferation of NGOs, especially if GFW is unable to
distinguish itself from others and position itself as unique
Economic recession in the US
Not being able to keep up with new models, innovative
ways of working




Key external challenges & threats
(contd)
If other womens funds are seen as more knowledgeable,
closer to the ground
Dont move too far to the left (by focusing on lesbians and
abortion): focus on what helps bringing innovation into
the mainstream
US restrictions around international giving
Increasing pressure to show evidence of impact




Community of womens funds
We fund several: what are their different roles? We try to
figure this out internally, but would be great if GFW could
tell us (4)
Womens funds are in the rise, but need to make
themselves bigger & smarter through better collaboration,
streamlining and less duplication and competition (4)
a global confederation like the Star Alliance?
It is a beautiful thing
Proud and strong human rights orientation
They talk to the already converted: need to align
themselves better with what is at the forefront, like
climate change, peace and security
Community of womens funds
(contd)
Younger funds are less complacent, defensive
I love that they are developing Making the Case, an
evaluation model that works for grantors and grantees
GFW fails to communicate about the more strategic pieces
of their collaborative work with other womens funds: they
are selling themselves short



Role in community of womens funds
I dont see much GFW presence in community of US based
womens funds and not sure why: they could play a
brokering role:
help channel money from US based funds to the rest of the world
why do Semillas, AWDF and others each need their own US
presence?
Together with Mama Cash: more visible coordination
between funds, feature other funds as strategic partners
Create mechanisms for sharing information, knowledge
Share fundraising expertise, especially from individuals
Be a model, promote collaboration, mentoring, partnerships

One piece of advice
Stay focused on the evaluation and impact question: build
some kind of system (2)
Consider unexpected alliances (including men), they
represent important opportunities (2)
Hear the drum beat of what people are thinking and saying,
those who applaud and criticize: really pay attention
Use this strategic planning period to explore bold
reinvention: you might not be as innovative as you think
Consider adolescent girls as a specific pillar in
programming
A donor is someone who does not speak on behalf of
grantees
Ask larger amounts for traveling with Kavita: current price
of entry is way too low
One piece of advice (continued)
Create more Now or Never funds: a great idea!
Actively support grantees in their fundraising efforts,
through capacity building, leveraging connections
Team up with other organizations, like AWID
Rethink your grantmaking and how you can better support
movement building
Create more opportunities for grantees to meet
Be a broker and communicator between what is happening
on the ground and in the public eye
Have experts work with Kavita on policy and strategic
matters: GFW is no longer the cute little organization
people embrace unabashedly: with a higher profile more
people are likely to take shots at you





If GFW were a person
Articulate
Attractive
A 1980s feminist
Committed (2)
Competitive (2)
Confident
Courageous
Determined
Energetic
Engaging
Esoteric
Extroverted
Introverted
Member of the old girls club
Old fashioned
Optimistic
Outspoken
Patronizing (2)
Primadonna
Scattered
Set in her ways
Skeptical
(In profound) solidarity
Successful
Thoughtful
Visionary
Well intentioned hippy