How can we better engage foundations in CVA initiatives?

We all love cash and voucher assistance (CVA), and we all want more of it, right? Maybe those points are true. Or maybe people love the concept of CVA, but when we use specific that term, they have no idea what we are talking about. It is as if cashies are in one tent with the flaps closed tight; if you don’t speak our language, you cannot get in. However, some of those people outside our tent are vitally important to getting us closer to CVA’s potential of being 30-50% of international humanitarian assistance. To close that gap, we will need to bring more, different and influential people into our CVA tent. 

Are we overlooking a key actor to help expand CVA? 

One group of influencers that we may overlook are foundations. Think that foundations do not have a significant role in funding global humanitarian actions? Think again. Foundations contributed an estimated US$8billion annually to humanitarian causes; this represents 10% to 12% of total private philanthropic giving worldwide. It is also a whopping 17% of international humanitarian assistance.  

But it is not just that foundations financially support humanitarian response. Equally important are the roles that they play in advocacy and policy. Foundations contribute leadership on a range of topics that directly impact people living in crisis and in chronic poverty. Major foundations often play a role in global debates and shaping future thinking. Plainly said, they carry more weight than we give them credit for. 

CALP wanted to know more about the current and potential spheres of influence of foundations on humanitarian CVA, following a recommendation from a study of the CVA policy landscape. We commissioned a review of the strategies, activities and documentation of over 40 foundations throughout the world to understand how much humanitarian CVA features in their work. 

 What did we find out about foundations and CVA? 

Do foundations care about humanitarian CVA? Yes and no. Our study found that only a small number of foundations explicitly reference CVA in their materials. Foundations don’t seem to be modality obsessed like humanitarian actors; they want to see outcomes for their work. The narrative around outcomes is more important than the tools used. Generally, they leave delivery modalities to the partner. 

Some other interesting points from the review were: 

• Foundations are diverse in type, focus and funding mechanisms. Their ways of funding are shaped by societal norms and values from their contexts, which could be cultural and impact their interest in CVA. 
• Foundations often emphasize the importance of strategic partnerships. The choice of partners is often more crucial than the specific content of projects.  Many foundations emphasize values that align with the use of CVA such as people-centred responses and localization. 
• Over half of the foundations studied report using trust-based philanthropy, granting their implementers full freedom to choose strategies and tools to achieve the desired outcomes. 

Change the way we communicate about CVA 

Where we lose the attention of foundations is with the rigidness of terms and technical obsession that CVA actors have. Our 20-page glossary of terms is not likely to resonate with most foundation staff. To increase foundation engagement with humanitarian CVA, we need to change the way we communicate. If we focus less on technical jargon and more on storytelling and long-term outcomes, we may find it easier to engage foundations on areas of mutual interest where CVA contributes. Most foundation staff are not trained in CVA; even more unlikely are that their board members trained either. A shift in the way we communicate about what CVA does and contributes to can help make the real-life impacts of CVA tangible for people that do not live and breathe CVA daily.  

Open the tent, and increase CVA  

In an ever more complex reality of humanitarian crises and shrinking funding, we need all to get as many stakeholders working towards efficient and cost-effective support for vulnerable people. We know that crisis affected people prefer CVA. Our priority must be on getting that support to them. As CVA actors, we have to see the full ecosystem of influence that the less than traditional actors can play in meeting this goal. Foundations are instrumental in funding research, advocacy capacity-building efforts; this can strengthen the effectiveness and sustainability of humanitarian interventions with CVA.  

Together we can find different ways of speaking about the same thing and both sides can be opened to other perspectives. So, let’s lift the CVA tent flap and invite as many people in as possible. Or let’s go into new tents and learn new ways of speaking.  

To learn more browse through CALP’s new publication linked below.