 Maria and Mark for that introduction. I'm going to jump straight into sharing my screen so I can get that awkwardness out of the way and get that set up, but I don't have to do it mid-chat. But I want to start by moving on and just also returning to acknowledge country and the way that Mark did when we started. I'm joining you all from Garnerlands today. I'm down on the Adelaide Plains by the coast, so down the hill from where Maria is, and I'd like to pay my respects to elders past and present, but also to future generations of leaders for that community and people that are just coming up now and the knowledge that they'll hold going forward. And I'd also like to acknowledge in this discussion that a lot of the things that I'll be talking about are not new things, but they're things that have been known and used within First Nations communities for a really long time, and I see a lot of the work that we're doing as a return to acknowledging and remembering and knowing those things for ourselves, either for the first time or returning to knowledge that we lost, and those sorts of things as, you know, evaluation that leads room to be relational, evaluation that values community as the experts in their own lives, and that leads room to understand the complexity of interwoven systems and to see it in understanding complex stories of change that aren't necessarily, you know, the hero stories or the beginning, middle and end stories that we talk about now, but ones that kind of weave through, you know, a couple of steps forward, a few steps back and the change that comes around through that. Maria's done a really great job of introducing the Faithfuler Foundation. We are a private philanthropic foundation. We operate within South Australia, and we fund in three main areas, three main focus areas, and so those are the establishment of the First Nations-led Fund for the State of South Australia that we work very closely with partners across the state in developing, likely to be launched very, very soon. And then we also fund in the preventative mental health and well-being space, and that's very much across all communities in SA, both regional and metro, and that works with everyone from grassroots community organizations to services and universities. And then we also look to fund into practice and collaboration, and so that can be the building of new evidence that can be leveraging the work of others and coming alongside in collaboration with other philanthropic funders. We began 20 years ago, so we've been around for a bit of time now, but we've really only grown as a foundation in the last five years, so the past five years have seen us move from a desktop-based foundation where we had a board and our founder who essentially would make a bunch of donations at the end of financial year to a lot of big charities and organizations to a staff foundation. And in that growth, and as we've moved to being a staff foundation and as we've grown in terms of our strategy, at our coffers, and the amount of funds that we're granting, we've also done a lot of work around things like our practice in grant-making and then alongside that, our evaluation, and so that's kind of where I came on the scene. I come from an international development background, and so the evaluation that I am familiar with and that I've worked with previously is probably evaluation that you've all seen a lot of, and that's that kind of fixed government, maybe it's like a DFAT RFQ tender that you're responding to, that kind of evaluation. And as philanthropy has moved into doing evaluation on its work, we see a lot of that very similar style, right? And that's that kind of traditional evaluation in philanthropy, which will click these dot points, right? It's about grant partners reporting back. It's often around predetermined or fixed roles and outcomes. The reporting happens on the funder's timeline. That might be quarterly. Maybe it's at the end of financial year, but it doesn't really always align with where the work is at or where it's best for the work to be reporting back. There's a lot of one-way accountability back to the funder, and then it's often used to evaluate progress, but without that context wrapped around it, which we all know is really important. Traditional evaluation in philanthropy can be used to assess need, which again is often out of context, and takes a deficit-based approach. And so often those metrics and measures that we're using are things like how lonely are people, rather than measuring how connected are people. And so in shifting evaluation in philanthropy and looking at how we might be able to do that differently, because if there's one thing philanthropy has, it's the privilege to be able to do things differently, you essentially flip all of that on its head. And so you start looking at how do we learn together and how can that sharing go both ways? How can our partners shape what good looks like and what outcomes they hope to achieve through their work? And have that be realistic within the scope of the grant? So we're not asking them to fix mental health and wellbeing in South Australia and then giving them $100,000 in two years to do it. It relies on mutual understanding that those outcomes might shift as a result of the work and that that's a good thing. It's okay for those to shift. It's because they're coming up with new information or they're having different discussions with community or we've realized that the idea or the fix that we thought we had maybe isn't the right one. It really looks to understand context and context is so important and really to understand what the challenges are, but just as much what the opportunities are and what the existing strengths and assets are that can be built upon. And then there's a little bit in there that's asked, which is about how do we evaluate ourselves and how do we get our partners to evaluate us? So how can we hear from our partners in order to better understand the role that they want us to be playing and also to understand if we're showing up well, are we showing up how we said that we would and are we supporting them in a way that feels useful and that's helping and enabling to their work rather than disabling their work. So we decided that that's what we wanted to be doing and then we brought on some really brilliant partners in Clear Horizon and we said, hello, we would like to build a framework that helps us do this in a less shitty way. How might we go about that and how can you support us in doing that? And the biggest thing that we wanted to do in shaping our framework is that we wanted to situate our partners as the experts and we wanted to build a way for us to come alongside and learn with them about how we could perform our role and function in a useful way. There are some more framework does a few things. It helps us be accountable and transparent to the community that we serve. It helps us to capture and make sense of what we're jointly learning about what works and what doesn't. So that's both in terms of philanthropic practice but then in terms of the work that our partners are doing with community, whether that's around First Nations health and funding or if it's about preventative mental health approaches and pathways. And then all of that data and evidence that we're capturing helps us to inform learning and we have a really big arch in our theory of change which I'll show you in a second and that's about sharing those learnings to contribute to influencing shifts in systems, in practices, in mindset and for funders as well. Maria, I am not in the chat so if anyone is like, we can't hear you or have questions please do let me know. So the first step that we went through with Clear Horizon in building this framework is as many of you would be used to a theory of change. So we dove straight in, we started building this out. We were pretty annoying about it. We really drilled into like questions, we can get quite finicky about language and what the things mean and we realized that in this process we actually needed our partners alongside us because we needed to understand from them if they could see themselves in this and if they could see their work represented in this and if the outcomes that we thought we were working towards were aligned with the ones that they wanted to work towards. So we brought our partners into this process and what you'll see is that science is a bit of a weird one where we're not really the doers, right? Like we're a funder, we're not doing the work, we're not service delivery and we work really closely with community for a funder but we're still not at the core face of the work. And so in our theory of change you'll see the kind of lilac part at the front end and that's really the things that we felt were within our sphere of influence and where we had the most kind of ability to control and have impact and then as it shifts into that sort of more partiality color that's really where our partners step in and that's the work that they're doing and those are the outcomes that they were kind of saying we want to be contributing to this and this is what we want to see happen for our community and then we kind of come back together at the end very acutely around those kind of big shared outcomes there. And having our partners in this with us was really important because first of all they helped us to kind of get out of our own heads around is this the right word is this the right language is this phrasing correct when we talk about community who are we talking about and those sorts of things and they really helped us to see as well roles that maybe we didn't realize we were playing and so partners would say to us hey actually you do this when you partner with us and we really think that that's important and we want you to hold yourself to doing that with other partners and that really strengthened this piece of work for us. And so this was the first step and then we had this and we were like great we love it we feel pretty comfortable we're really happy that it's going to change over the next few years we'll probably revisit it in five years and it might be completely different by then. But in the meantime how are we going to measure against it and how are we going to do that in a way that feels comfortable and accessible and isn't too much work for our partners and feels like it also brings value to their work so it doesn't just feel like a thing that they're doing for us but that it's helping them build their own case and evidence for the work that they do. And I have somewhat promised in how I have framed up this presentation that you have signed up and come along to that I'm going to unpack that in three different ways. And so those things are that we're going to look at how we're defining measuring and understanding impact with our grant partners. We're going to talk a little bit about how we're using evaluation and the data and evidence we're capturing through that to inform reflection and iteration of our practices internally within our organization. And then I'm also going to talk a little bit about the ripples of impact that we capture that are outside those kind of traditional metrics and indicators which is my favorite bit but I will save it to last and I will start in the order that I have presented these because that seems to make sense. And so the first one is how we're coming together with our partners to understand impact with them and how we're collaborating to define what that means. And it's really different across all of our different areas. And so essentially one of the first things that we do is that we start with relationships. And so we start by building a relationship with our partner and we sit down and we explore with them what they're hoping to achieve within the scope of the grant. So realistically what are you what point are you trying to get to? What would good look like? What would it feel like? What would you be seeing? And then we do the work of taking whatever those goals are and mapping them against our theory of change to understand where that partner might really be focusing their efforts. That's kind of how it looks with our mental health partners. With our strategic partners it can be a little bit different. That relationship is much more about how they would like to influence us and what we would like to learn from them. It's much more of an exchange going both ways. And so that looks more like developing a partnership agreement with each other. And sometimes that's a bit less aligned to our theory of change. And that can be a little bit more about the internal work that we want to be doing with our organization and then supporting them to achieve their goals at the same time. And then our terms are whole different kettle of fish because our terms are 10 year initiatives. And so you can kind of see that there's like more work that goes into this the bigger the program goes. And so in our town it's really like towns develop their own theories of change that they want to see happen within those 10 years. And then they leave the data capture within their own communities. And then we roll all of that up into an addition of the little theory of change and a collective shared measurement indicators and state-based wellbeing data. So that's a bit of a bigger project. And so we kind of let our town run as its own thing off to the side. And then once we have all of that data from our town in a periodic evaluation report or however much we might be rolling out those big learnings, we pull that across and we look for similarities with our theory of change there. So again, it's we're not asking our partners to report back to us on how they're meeting our theory of change. We're using the data and evidence that they're already creating to inform their own knowledge for us to understand. And we use a few different tools to do this as well. So theory of change I've spoken about and that's a big one. Partnership agreements I've mentioned in terms of strategic partnerships. But then along the way we have check-in chats as well. So we don't ask for written reports or acquittals, but we have times when we catch up with our partners. They're on a bit of a calendar, but we obviously will flex. We like them to be sort of similar so that we can see where there are learnings across our different partners so that we can have a little bit more strength in the data that we're capturing. But if one partner is like, hey, that's just not a good time for me, or actually I've got a workshop for it scheduled then. Can we do it two months later? We'll always like to make that work. And those check-in chats really look to ask questions to understand, you know, how is community experiencing this work? What's the involvement of community in this work to date? Are there any challenges or barriers that you're coming up against or has something happened that's really had to adjust how you're going about this or shift the trainer that you've been on? Or have you found out that the idea that you had is not the right idea and now we're completely reimagining what this could look like? So those sorts of check-in questions as well as some of the last specific things about, you know, are you hearing anything about narrative shifts? Are you hearing, you know, a shift in the community that you're speaking with when they're talking more about prevention and less about intervention or more about community-based responses and less about service-based responses? So we have those sorts of chats and then it's the work on our end to take all of that information and synthesize it down and see where we're getting some sort of similar learnings across our partners. And then there's a couple more cute tools. We use an impact log. All of our partners have access to their own impact log. It's online. They can type in their learnings. I would say that 50% of our partners probably use it. It's not for everyone. We use it internally. Some of our partners love it. They're on it all the time. And then for other partners, it will be like, hey, that's just not really my style. It's not working for me. I'm recording the information. I've got it in an Excel spreadsheet. Amazing. If you're happy to share that with us, we're happy to receive it in an Excel spreadsheet. If keeping it in that way is not for you at all, we're happy to have an additional phone chat or a catch-up and you can just spout those learnings at me and I'll record them in real time while we're together. So it's really about flexing and trying to make those different tools work for our partners so that we can help them to surface those learnings and that information. The important thing, I guess, is that we're not just capturing data for data's sake and we're not just capturing it to understand our impact or to understand outcome. Because while those are great, we really want to be encouraging both ourselves and our partners to work in a way that is iterative, that uses kind of social innovation principles, that encourages people to adapt based on what they're learning. And so what we see is that a lot of grants and a lot of programs of work are really fixed. It's like you put in a grant application, you said that you're going to do X program in these stages and you're going to have these outcomes at the end. And so the evaluation that we want is to check in about how you're going against those preset milestones. What we're really encouraging is for our partners instead to be capturing information along the way and then stopping and using that to reflect and go, hey, do we need to change anything right now? Like instead of just committing to this course of action and going, well, we've said this is what we're going to do and we're 100% committed to getting to the end and that's what we've been funded to do and we're going to be punished if we don't reach that. We really look to understand how might this need to shift? What are you hearing from a community that's saying, this is a really lovely idea, X-name service organization, but actually what we need is this and this would be way more useful for us right now or this would be a way of delivering it that would have more value for us. So it's really about trying to encourage that short loop learning along the way rather than that kind of brilliant get to the end of a program, do a really big external evaluation on it, find out that maybe in week two you found out that that wasn't the thing. So that's a big one. We also do that internally for ourselves, right? So we collect all of that data, we'll map it against our theory of change and I can show you on this one we'll look at where we're having impact hotspots. So where are we seeing that lots of our partners are contributing to an outcome and what does that mean? And sometimes it means that's really great and there's a lot of heat around that sometimes we'll look and go, hey this one doesn't have very much impact happening at the moment or not very much reported impact. Why might that be? Is it because we're not focusing efforts or we haven't funded someone that's working in that area? Is it just because that piece of work or that instance of change takes a lot longer than the other things that are in that role and so it's going to take us longer to see the impact in that space? Have we missed the thing that we should be measuring? Are we not asking the right question enough? We're not being told about instances of impact that are happening in that space. So we really look to use it to reflect in that way but then we also use it to understand our grant programs because we're out here doing our best but at the end of the day a lot of the things that we're deciding they're informed by practice but they're better when they're informed by community. So if we can find out from our grant partners, hey are the parameters that we're setting around this grant feasible for you? Is it enough money? Is the time frame the right time frame? Did we give you enough information at the outset to feel comfortable or fine? Did we give you too much information? Sometimes we've heard that we've not put enough guardrails around things and so when people are applying they're like hey we're not sure if you actually mean that or we don't know what's reasonable within scope can you provide us with a little bit more of a guardrail or a little bit more information and so it really helps us to do that in time in real time reflection for ourselves and it also helps us understand our strategy right so at the moment we're working in preventative mental health and we're really looking at building out new pathways and approaches but what we hear is that there's a lot of funding for innovative pieces of work and there's not a lot of funding for ongoing pieces of work. So at what point do we go cool the reason we're funding in the preventative space is because there's not very many preventative pathways as heaps of early intervention there's a big gap when it comes to prevention but at what point will we be able to understand okay we started to build enough pathways in prevention government has started to listen the government is starting to fund into early prevention and shifting money from early intervention to that space now's the time for us to start shifting into funding longer and more ongoing pieces of work and move out of that innovation space and we'll know that because we're plugged into our community and we're hearing from them and it's contextual we similarly capture these in very similar ways and there's similar tools to the other one probably the big difference is that we do a partnership and process survey at this point that one doesn't go to ask it goes to clear horizon because we really want our partners to feel like they can say whatever they want about us and that is not coming directly to us it's going to be synthesized it's going to have names redacted and we're going to get that feedback so that they can be really honest about practices that they think we might need to shift or we might say is it enough money into our face they might go yeah it's great thank you so much and then we might actually want to know if actually it would be better if it would be or if it came in a different way or something like that so partnership and process survey comes in at that point it also asks how we're showing up as a partner if we're living our principles in the way that we said that we would and then we also when we do the roll up across our different partners and we look for those trends and we look for those emerging learning we bring our partners back together and we share that back to them so there's an opportunity for our partners to go oh you're having that experience so am I and an example of this is with our discovery partners discovery the two year preventative mental health funding grant and we have four partners in that space there was a big learning around what they were calling the clunk and the clunk was like hey I come in I work with faithful it feels really nice I'm able to do my work in a certain way I'm able to be really iterative responsive I can shift things and then I go out of this little bubble and I go out and I interact with other funders that I'm working with or other services or systems that I interact with and that feels really different and it feels a bit more jarring because we're having such different experience over here and so being able to feed that back to our partners in a shared space meant that they got to have that conversation together about their shared experience around that and it meant that we all got to come around it together and go cool well what can we do what commitment can we make to try and ease that jarring and they were like hey can you sometimes when we have a you know a meeting with a new funder can you come along with us and just have a chat about what this partnership looks like can we negotiate to reduce the reporting or acquittal with a different funder or can you just be aware that like sometimes that feels a bit shitty for us and sometimes it takes us a second to switch gears when we come back into a meeting with you and just be aware that that's why so it gives us really useful opportunity to come together around that this is the final one I'm sorry that I am like blurting a lot of information at you I was hoping that if I could get it out quickly then the rest of this would just be questions which is probably a preferred format for me but this is my favorite part so I am really excited to talk about this one and this is about capturing ripples of change and this is about those stories that surface those little pieces of gold that I just don't think we would know about if we didn't work in the way that we do and that come to us because we build relationships with our partners and it comes to us because we let them know that we're really interested in this and they come to us in different ways so sometimes we'll get a little ripple of information and it might be because we're in a different network and we're hearing something that one of our partners has shared with someone else and that information is coming back to us from there it might be something that they log because they go hey this isn't directly related to the work that we're doing with you guys but maybe there's a correlation there or maybe it happened because of the work that we did with you guys and we think you might want to know about it and then the best way it comes back to us is when partners reach out to us directly and they say hey I really wanted to share this with you because I knew you guys would be interested and I knew you would be as excited about it as we are and these ripples of impact I'll give you an example using one of our partners so one of our partners anything that is a university living organization and they work with formerly incarcerated women a project they're working on at the moment is the development of a chatbot that supports women post-release in going through kind of like key steps and that can be things like getting an ID getting a bank account getting set up with Centrelink all of these kinds of things and if we did traditional evaluation we probably would have asked them what are your key milestones in establishing the tech for this piece of work and then we would have tracked if they were hitting those milestones or not and we probably would have asked them to let us know what the uptake was so what percentage of women leaving prison are using the app and what's your drop-off rate what's the attrition rate where people stop using it and what does that mean but we didn't ask them for that we just wanted to know what communities experience was with being involved and what they were learning along the way and so the kind of story that we're getting from them is that they've actually been able to employ women on the project they do joke that it's like one of the only jobs in Australia where having a criminal record is a must have and then one of the women was in negotiations to reconnect with her daughter post-release and her daughter was so incredibly proud of her mum for being employed by a university she was like I cannot believe that you're post-release eight months and you're being employed by a university like that's massive I'm so proud of you and that's just not a story that we would have and it's not a thing that we would know if we asked about how many people are using the app and another example on the same project is on this one which is that in designing this trap but they run a bunch of deco design workshops and they went into the prison and run these and they run them with 70% of the women's prison population and as a result what they saw is that they had a massive optic in the women that were coming to visit their organization post-release and what they know is that women who visit them post-release the longer that they stay engaged with the organization the probability of rearrest decreases and we're not trying to reach for impacts that's not ours right so we're not saying like wow faithful awesome job you funded these guys and now the rearrest rate of women is declining but what we know is that through the work that they were able to do and because of the way they were able to do it and the fact that they were encouraged to engage with women and to deeply deeply use lived experience in this work and to engage with their community it's had all of these other impacts as a result and there's a couple more examples on there like a really good one that we love down the bottom is that we have a part of those working in the space of mental health they're working mostly with migrant and refugee populations and they found out that for one of the groups they were working with sorry engagement with support services like counselling was really really low and there was kind of this assumption like it must be because of stigma it might be because of misinformation that it could have an impact on visa status and things like that and actually through the conversations that they were having they found out that it was just that um the translation services that were being used by this counselling service were local local translators and so the chance of having someone that was like from your community or so and so from down the road or someone that you knew really well sitting in on your very private counselling session was actually quite high and so it was such an easy fix for them to be able to share that with the counselling service we didn't know that that's why people weren't using their service and be able to bring in an external person to do translation from another state so these are all the little ripples that maybe if we were super fixed in what we were asking people to report we wouldn't capture we wouldn't know about and they help us understand the breadth of the work and they help us understand the complexity of the work so hey yep maybe it took us a bit longer to get to tech milestone two that we were approaching but that's because we deeply engaged with and paid for women with lived experience to do this work and it just took a little bit longer to build people's confidence and bringing that lived experience to the fore and that's for us that's a win and that is the impact and we always talk about valuing the process over the outcome and that if your process is good you will have good outcomes as a result and the work that our partners do is really a super strong example of that that was me and I'm so relieved I'm really happy to answer any questions I'm happy to revisit things that may have come up for you to drill down further to show examples I've put prompts because sometimes when I get to the blank question page when I've been in a presentation I'm like thank you so much I don't super remember what you spoke about especially if they're as fast as I'm sure I was so please launch at me Tori there are some questions in the chat can you see them would you like me to read them I can I can pop off of sharing and I can have a quick look and maybe that's fine I can start with challenges there's one from John about challenges if a community partner comes to us with a challenge first of all we are incredibly chuffed it is like absolute reason for joy in the faithful or office it normally gets a standing ovation it's like hey one of our partners trusts us enough to let us know that something's difficult for them right now um because you don't normally do that to a funder right like if you're doing a valuation you're like no everything's going swimmingly it's great results are awesome thumbs on seats super high numbers we're very happy so if a partner comes to us and they're like hey this is not working we absolutely have a role in helping them work through that challenge but we ask what that role is and so if a partner comes to us sometimes it's like hey nope I don't need you to do anything with me I just need you to understand that this is happening and give me some time and space we might be a little bit later on that than we thought we were going to be sometimes it's like yeah actually I'm having a really difficult time with department of corrections can you come along and sit in that meeting can you have a chat for us can you vouch for us can you send us a letter of support and we're very happy to do whatever it is that our partners need for us to do to work through that challenge we're also very big fans of whiteboarding we're a bit old school sometimes in that sense and so it's like come into the office we'll get the whiteboard markers out let's like map out how we're going to approach this please jump in if I answer a question and you're like thank you but that's not the answer I was hoping for please expand approach data collection and evaluation influencing other funders I hope so we are sharing a lot about it so I think that we definitely have a practice of working openly is kind of how we approach things and so it's very much sharing as we're going and I should know and I was meant to do this at the start and I totally forgot my bath this is very new so we've only been building this and implementing this over the past couple of years and we are learning as we go and so our intention is definitely to keep updating what we are learning along the way so this is an example of this we meet with other funders and have chats about how we're doing this um we write about it we're super open our theory of change is accessible for anyone to have a look at um and so definitely hoping I would say that our approach to evaluation is also really closely linked to philanthropic practice um and there's a type of philanthropic practice that's called trust based philanthropy that's gaining a lot of traction and so I would say that like as that grows in popularity so does trust based evaluation they kind of go hand in hand um and so as people are leaning more into trust based philanthropy we're kind of the people that are like interest based evaluation you can bring it alongside a bit of that vibe making check-in chats safe and equitable is there's a lot of little things that go into it I think the first one is a recognition that like there are safe spaces and there are brave spaces and sometimes you have to come to a middle ground on those um we try to be really upfront and clear with the power dynamic and we try to be really honest with people um what we find is that a lot of people have really had really shitty experiences with funders in the past and it can be really hard for people that we're partnering with to not think that we're going to do the same thing and so we really have to like live in those principles and that can take like a lot of repeating and that's why with my comment before about the challenges it's like if someone comes to me with a challenge I think that we must be doing a pretty good job of trying to lessen that power dynamic as much as we can um but there's definitely like we send the questions ahead of time so people know what they're going to be asked and we definitely frame it as like we're not checking in on your progress we're not using this to evaluate you we're doing this to understand your work so we can best come alongside and support so a lot of that kind of language lots of encouraging people that they don't need to be prepped for it um and giving people space to answer the questions in the way that works for them and so if you want to be prepped you can if you just want to talk at me for a really long if you just want to give me a big update on the on the project and then have me ask questions if that hasn't hit the nail on the head at the end I'm happy to do that there's a lot of like little things you do along the way but I think being people and coming to this work as people and not just our job roles and really working to understand the context that people are working within and that the organization as we partner with are working within as well so they don't have to do all of that background explaining and they don't have to say this is everything that's happening in my world because you already have a grounding in that can really help as well do I think in collecting less we weren't collecting any before so definitely not collecting less data because now we are collecting data so that's a plus um I think the type of data that we collect is different because they're really encouraging people to lean into that different understanding of data I think that our partners capture more data than we ever see and so for some of our partners they'll go we get that you don't want to know how many people are coming to our workshops but actually future funders that might fund this work or my boss or my line manager or these other people actually really do care about that and so I think our partners are probably capturing a lot of that sort of metric data um that we don't always see but I think as well if we leave it to our partners they capture data that we wouldn't have even known about because we're not in their projects and so they'll like if we were setting it we would be like cool we want to know these four things and they're like awesome but actually this thing's really important and you don't even know about that and I'm not going to tell you because I'm not going to add more reporting on to what I have to do um because of but because of the way we come around it those sorts of things that they think are really important to be understanding and capturing data around they do share that with us how do we report internally on the progress of individual grants we share updates with each other we have a pretty bang and slack channel we love to share very long chat updates about how our partners are going and our partners share a lot with us kind of in the interim so we have those like check-in chats and we'll share about that internally um and sometimes when we have a bunch of them um as I shared how we do that roll up and then we share it back to our partners as a group we'll do that internally first so we have like a similar advisory committee where we'll bring some of those learnings in the first instance and really tackle them um and then if we say when to do like a round of discovery grant partner interviews we would roll that up we would sit with them with our team and then twice annually as a team we come together around all of our data that we have and we do like a big roll-off and reflection on all of that information um impact logs are a cute time I can probably show you what they look like if you'd like in a second um but essentially it's an app with embedded testing with ClearHorizon you can set people up with different work stations and they can have little teams on there you can have it on your phone and you can log in and you can go hey this is an instance of the impact in this part of work you can do who was involved how many people um a little description so you might give it a title and then you might do a summary of notes you can attach things to it um and the most important thing I guess is that within that we use domain and so we have different domains that we then tag our logs against which makes it much easier at the end of the year for me to kind of assess where they go on our theory of change except for when my boss does them because he likes to use all of the domain possible um he'll pull a lot of threads and so then it's like unpicking and finding out which ones are probably most relevant I'll show you like super quickly if I can what it looks like because they're a good time is this working for people am I just showing you my desktop at this point um so this would just be an example of one so this kind of shows us who's involved the feedback we're getting the domain it sits under we do ask whether it's regional or metro um sorry all I can see is screen saver or is my screen saver sorry guys that's a bad time for you all is this better that's better yes fantastic um this is probably not like the best example of an instance of impact that this at least shows you what the back end of this looks like um and so I've checked that this is a shareable one pre coming in by the way so we do give our partners the option of logging whether we can share anything with other partners or with other people that we're speaking with or if they want us to come back and check with them first um this is an internal one from faithful but we can kind of tag domains where it's it we can add notes in we can look at the strength of the contribution um sometimes there's ones that would maybe make a really good story of impact or something that's worth capturing in a chunkier fashion like going and having a chat with a partner about and so we can say if that's worth having a bit of a follow-up on that is generally what it looks like as I said some people are not tech people and so some of our partners are like thank you no we won't be doing that we'll do it in a different way that suits us and our team better um but some people really enjoy being able to just capture them on the go I don't know if I've missed any questions or if we're good now I'm assuming we can take live questions if um anybody wanted to ask a question we've got um about 10 minutes we're more than welcome to jump in please feel free to put me in the hot seat if there's anything that I brushed over or didn't cover or if you just have some burning philanthropy questions we know that it can be a bit of a weird secret sect sometime I've actually got a question Tori I'm curious about whether this approach has changed how you the partners that you choose or how you choose partners hmm um it has definitely changed the process of choosing because we really try to lean into using our theory of change um we didn't want to build it and then just have it stiff and kind of be a thing that hangs off the side and so we really do lean into understanding if we're looking at partners work like where would it be aligning in that theory of change it's not the only thing that we use to assess um because if someone has an idea that's really strong in the preventative mental health space and maybe it's something that we haven't thought of that shouldn't be a reason to not fund them right and so we very much use it to inform that we very much use it to inform um our understanding of what's feasible because we're hearing more from partners about what that looks like in practice wonderful okay there's no more questions in the chat um Mark can I hand it back to you certainly thanks Maria and thank you Tori um thank you for everyone who's attended today and for your questions Tori you've given us a really good insight into how things are changing at the Faithful Foundation and your approach to evaluation I guess it's refreshing to learn you're not seeking to burden people your funding with seeking data just because you can what will be interesting I think is to perhaps ask you in another year's time uh how's it all going and see what change might have happened either with the organization's your funding or with other funders and partners you're working with as you continue this journey so thank you once again for making time to talk to us tonight it's been really valuable and interesting and we look forward to people attending future events our next one's going to be on AI watch this space for more information soon